Delete comment from: Elements Of Power
Really great article! I was wondering, since you were involved in military programs, if you'd have an answer to this question...
One of the statements made by the anti-JSF crowd (Kopp, Wheeler, etc) is that BVR missiles are "useless" and "ineffective" in aerial combat. On the AirPowerAustralia website, Kopp cites a 46% Pk figure for the AIM-120 AMRAAM. However, it appears that, in order to get this figure, Kopp and Goon excluded all successful non-BVR AMRAAM shots, excluded instances where more than one missile was fired at the target, and a successful interception was carried out, and deliberately included instances where pilots fired their missiles well outside of the AMRAAM's NEZ in order to achieve a mission kill, and intentionally not attempting to hit the target. So, would you say that the AMRAAM, and especially the new AIM-120D version, would be capable in an actual combat situation, and that Kopp and Goon are just skewing the data in this situation to "prove" the ineffectiveness of the F-35?
Also, Kopp tends to talk a lot about how the AMRAAM would have its Pk reduced even further by DRFM (Digital Radio Frequency Memory; a kind of repeater jamming). However, I believe I've read something about how, because the new -120D AMRAAM has a two-way datalink, the F-35 pilot could use the DAS to determine which targets are "real" and which are created by repeater jamming (as returns produced by DRFM obviously don't have a thermal signature), and could use the datalink to "tell" the AMRAAM which return is the actual target. Have you heard anything to that effect?
Obviously, a lot of information on the AIM-120 is classified, and air-to-air missiles might not be your area of specialty, but since you work/have worked in military programs and seem pretty knowledgeable about military matters, what is your opinion on the AMRAAM?
Jun 13, 2013, 12:12:55 AM
Posted to The F-35 and the Infamous “Sustained G” Spec Change: Part 3