Air Weapons Article Index : Current 1999 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics
Buying The Meteor Of Tomorrow Today
   Next Article → ATTRITION: How American Troops Cheat Death
January 12, 2011: France has ordered 200 Meteor high speed (ramjet), long-range air-to-air missiles for its Air Force and Navy Rafale fighters. The missiles will not arrive for seven years, because development is not complete. It was only five years ago that the Meteor missile passed, on its second try, a flight test. Meteor is a long range (over 100 kilometers) radar guided missile being developed by a European consortium (Britain, Germany, Italy, Spain, France and Sweden). It's the first such missile to use ramjet technology. This enables the missile to basically fly at the same speed as a rifle bullet (about one kilometer a second, or about Mach 4). Ramjet technology is tricky to handle, which is why no one else has gotten it to work for an air-to-air missile (although the Russians and Chinese are interested). Meteor has been in development for over a decade.

The Meteor is too large (at 3.65 meters/12 feet long and 185 kg/407 pounds) for the internal bay of the F-22, but the F-35 can handle it, as can other U.S. aircraft that carry missiles externally. Several European nations are buying the F-35. Even the U.S. may end up getting Meteor, rather than spending billions to develop an American ramjet missile. The speed advantage of Meteor is considerable, as it makes it more difficult to evade (assuming the target knows it is coming). The range of Meteor is about 50 percent greater than the current top-of-the-line air-to-air missile (the U.S. AMRAAM, at 80 kilometers). American firms are supplying some of the components, and U.S. participation may increase before Meteor enters service.

 

Next Article → ATTRITION: How American Troops Cheat Death
  

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Nasty German Idiot       1/12/2011 12:27:50 PM

For the Luftwaffe:
 
Iris-T SR AAM (short tange)
 
Meteor LR AAM  (medium range)
 
Taurus CM  (long range) 
 
(and various others ^^) 

http://img13.abload.de/img/highres_gld-090191q4p7.jpg" width="800" height="560" /> 
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       1/12/2011 12:44:59 PM
Soooo... rifle bullets go at mach 4 and AMRAAM travels at 80 kilometers something.
 
SP continues to disappoint.
 
Quote    Reply

Heorot       1/12/2011 6:20:29 PM

Soooo... rifle bullets go at mach 4 and AMRAAM travels at 80 kilometers something.

 

SP continues to disappoint.


So do you. Read it again. The 80k is the range, not the speed!
 
Quote    Reply

heraldabc       1/12/2011 6:27:06 PM

Soooo... rifle bullets go at mach 4 and AMRAAM travels at 80 kilometers something.

 

SP continues to disappoint.

Yes they do, but the comment on the US adopting Meteor is the fail. 

H.
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       1/13/2011 3:27:49 PM
 

Yes they do, but the comment on the US adopting Meteor is the fail. 




H.


 
I thought that was strange.
 
Heorot: I just checked up rifle bullet speeds. I didn't know they broke the sound barrier and by that much, but I note average rifle bullets seem to go somewhere about Mach 3, not Mach 4, so its still innacurate.
As for the 80km I was simply complaining about SP not making itself understood.
You seem a bit prejudiced towards me and this second statement, but whatever.
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       1/13/2011 3:33:09 PM
The speed advantage of Meteor is considerable, as it makes it more difficult to evade (assuming the target knows it is coming). The range of Meteor is about 50 percent greater than the current top-of-the-line air-to-air missile (the U.S. AMRAAM, at 80 kilometers).
...
Hmmmm, ok bad reading on my part but also bad writing. A simple space would have clarified a rapid switch of topic in the same line right after a parenthesis.
 
Anyway these things happen, and I think given SPs frequent mistakes and my frequently conservative statements I should be given the benefit of the doubt when making silly mistakes. At any rate you misread my writing too...
 
Quote    Reply

heraldabc    Quick lesson in missiles.   1/13/2011 5:52:21 PM

The speed advantage of Meteor is considerable, as it makes it more difficult to evade (assuming the target knows it is coming). The range of Meteor is about 50 percent greater than the current top-of-the-line air-to-air missile (the U.S. AMRAAM, at 80 kilometers).

Hmmmm, ok bad reading on my part but also bad writing. A simple space would have clarified a rapid switch of topic in the same line right after a parenthesis.

Anyway these things happen, and I think given SPs frequent mistakes and my frequently conservative statements I should be given the benefit of the doubt when making silly mistakes. At any rate you misread my writing too...


A long-ranged guided weapon needs three things to work besides a reliable cruise engine. It needs an external placement mechanism or methodology, (lob or chase) to place it close to its target, a local acquisition mechanism (sensor) that can enable it to detect, acquire, track, and engage (DATE) the target, and an endgame mechanism (impact or proximity burst) to destroy the target. Otherwise its just a brick
 
I had hopes for Meteor. But... as the program has dragged on, there has been setback after setback as the idiots who run that program continue to ignore the accumulated sixty years of American and Russian experience in guided weapons.
 
1. Autonomy in a chaser is impossible until it is in self acquisition range. Update has to work to keep the angle solutions small enough to keep the target object signal within the detectors thresh-hold detection limits (Field of View-FoV). The simpler silent solution is the drop (acquisition) basket or lob/fly-out solution that allows the guided weapon to arrive within pre-calculated calculated miss interval that keeps the target within the sensor FoV. The problem is that the longer the target has time to  move from T sub zero (weapon launch) the more tome it has to widen that T sub zero calculated and predicted position with its T sub merge 1 position (the place where it is when the missile arrives at the acquisition basket) the wider the difference in the predicted angle solution at T sub zero and  the actual T sub merge 1. The best solution is to external update against that maneuvering target and correct the lob or fly-out in transit.
 
2. The problem there is that the telemetry solution adopted was a piece of ASTER derived crap. (SARH still works) 
     
3, The problem was that the sensor was MICA derived. (Two axis proportional lead, if you are going to use that type solution.)  
 
4. Upshot is that the longer the missile travels the larger the interval between initial  target position angle solution and final target position angle solution. At some point, that difference, even with updates the angle solution  becomes too great even to compensate even with effective mid-course guidance to use autonomous sensor DATE at the merge, so there us a range limit. That limit in practical terms is based on the difference in launch platform and target aspects/velocities to one another over time (vectors) of guided weapon progress (another vector) across the changing interval and you suddenly discover that effective range is not the same as flyout. Its MUCH shorter. The critical factor you actually discover is reserve energy for endgame, and then to your shock you discover that the burned out rocket you disparaged in favor of the Marteor jet engine is almost as effective as the jet propelled missile in steer over the same mean effective range in end-game because the reserve energy is not that much different. Someone made a stupid assumption, implemented a design, and did not TEST for real world practical physics. .Boost, coast to conserve fuel, and powered endgame was the correct solution and they screwed it up.              
THAT is why the Meteor has to be reworked, is a decade in delay, and will never make it into the American inventory as currently designed.  
 
As for the variable flow inlet controlled  ram rocket motor being an American problem? 
 
 
Not on your life. Its a European problem. 
 

GLaw       1/14/2011 1:09:44 AM
The article is wrong.  The US Navy had a Ramjet anti aircraft system back in the 1960's.  Range of 200 miles.  Rim-8 Talos.  It was legendary, too expensive, only a couple of ships carried it because it was too huge.  Shot down some very distant targets.  Mach 2.5
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-8_Talos
 
Quote    Reply

Sty0pa       1/14/2011 1:54:22 PM
4. Upshot is that the longer the missile travels the larger the interval between initial  target position angle solution and final target position angle solution. At some point, that difference, even with updates the angle solution  becomes too great even to compensate even with effective mid-course guidance to use autonomous sensor DATE at the merge, so there us a range limit. That limit in practical terms is based on the difference in launch platform and target aspects/velocities to one another over time (vectors) of guided weapon progress (another vector) across the changing interval and you suddenly discover that effective range is not the same as flyout. Its MUCH shorter. The critical factor you actually discover is reserve energy for endgame, and then to your shock you discover that the burned out rocket you disparaged in favor of the Marteor jet engine is almost as effective as the jet propelled missile in steer over the same mean effective range in end-game because the reserve energy is not that much different. Someone made a stupid assumption, implemented a design, and did not TEST for real world practical physics. .Boost, coast to conserve fuel, and powered endgame was the correct solution and they screwed it up.              

This sounds very much like some of the latewar conclusions being drawn by German scientists of the Me163.  Funny how the same solutions keep cropping up, when a little familiarity with history might save everyone a lot of time and money.
"Those who do not know history are doomed to continue paying ridiculous sums to defense contractors to re-invent it."
(with apologies to Santayana)  

 
Quote    Reply

warpig       1/14/2011 10:19:08 PM
GLw, while we obviously did use Talos, it was not an "air-to-air missile."
 
Quote    Reply