How well would a sidewinder track a piston powered plane?
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — The Final Countdown
Hanz-Willhelm — 10 years ago(September 18, 2015 10:18 AM)
The second zero is destroyed by a sidewinder, heat seeking missile. I wonder if there is much difference in how well it would perform tracking a piston powered plane verses the heat of a jet engine. Would the tracking performance be identical or be significantly hindered.
Checkmate!
Deutschland hat die Weltmeisterschaft zum vierten Mal gewonnen! -
CGSailor — 10 years ago(September 19, 2015 07:02 PM)
The AIM-9L (in Production since 1977) would have had no trouble locking onto the heat of a piston engine. It's IR Actively cooled seeker head is capable of locking onto a target by the airframe's skin heat created by friction with the atmosphere, locking onto the heat pumped out by a piston engine would be child's play.
The L Variant of the Sidewinder was a Game Changer, the first "all Aspect" Air to Air missile, meaning they did not have to maneuver into a rear aspect shot position for a look at the enemy's tailpipes. They could fire head on in a meeting engagement (As they did just a couple of years later in the Gulf of Sidra (Libya). Those were also Aim-9Ls And although those were jets shot down, it was not by targeting the jet exhausts, but fired head on.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water! -
shoobe01 — 10 years ago(December 23, 2015 01:59 PM)
In addition, piston aircraft have no worries about emitting heat, so have hot engines in the front and HOT exhausts along the sides, ejecting HOT exhaust gasses to the rear. Probably more hot sources from all angles than a jet.
And in fact, the first IR seeking missiles came out (very limited) in WW2. Research was done then, and it worked adequately even with the vastly worse seeker technology of the time.
Now a better one, almost shown, is the issue of speed. Dogfighting fast to very slow can be a problem. -
CGSailor — 10 years ago(December 31, 2015 08:09 AM)
And in fact, the first IR seeking missiles came out (very limited) in WW2. Research was done then, and it worked adequately even with the vastly worse seeker technology of the time.
Ummm NO.
Germany had come up with a few IR DETECTORS, but they were not SEEKERS, Not guidance systems. Research was still developing when WW2 ended.
The VERY FIRST Infrared guided missile was a US system, started development in 1946 (the year after WW2 ended), had it's first test firings in 1949, and entered active service in 1956 (even after the Korean War, much less WW2)
It was the AIM-4 Falcon.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water! -
dannieboy20906 — 10 years ago(January 06, 2016 04:46 PM)
Hi, CGSailor;
Just picking nits here. I've enjoyed your attempts to educate some people on logic probably much more than you enjoyed it.
Your statement about heat seekers made me curious, so I looked it up. Wikipedia is not without its controversies, but it is a fairly reliable first source. You got the time frame and the name of the first IR missile correct, but the designation was GAR-2, not AIM-2. The nearest missile with a similar name was the AIR-2 Genie rocket (nuclear warhead). When they went to a new naming system the IR Falcon was renamed the AIM-4.
Try to stay calm when educating those reluctant to be educated. However, I can well understand your frustration.
The best diplomat I know is a fully charged phaser bank. -
CGSailor — 10 years ago(January 13, 2016 02:26 PM)
Yes I am well aware of the earlier name designations for the missile.
I deliberately used the later designation that the Missile used for most of it's short service life and by which it was more commonly known by rather than the name few would know or recognize and by which it was only temporarily known. It is however the same missile.
Not a mistake on my part, a deliberate choice.
EDIT: Ah I see, A typo on my part. AIM-2 rather than AIM-4.
Just a typo.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water! -
CGSailor — 9 years ago(September 01, 2016 08:41 PM)
Guided missiles operate by detecting their target (usually by either radar or infrared methods,
That is generally only true of IR guided missiles.
Radar Guided (with a few exceptions) do not detect the targets themselves but rather home of the reflected signal being sent by a Fire Control Radar. Most Radar Guided Missiles are Semi-Active radar homing, not Active Radar homing.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water! -
Urmelita — 9 years ago(September 15, 2016 12:58 PM)
The only "stealth feature" of warplanes in WW2 was exhaust flame suppression. Usually too faint to be seen in daylight, they can give away the position of an aircraft at night at a fairly long distance.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ctluPJb6QOQ/UL0DpdrSwjI/AAAAAAAAAgk/nA1sII6whjc/s1600/_AJB1380-Edit-Edit.jpg
For some earlier fighterplanes there were kits to upgrade them to nightfighters. Later designs had exhaust flame suppression built into the "basic configuration".
But even then, infrared signature wasn't an issue, so I have no doubt a 1980's IR missile wouldn't have any trouble shooting down a WW2 fighter plane, especially piloted by someone not knowing how to beat one.
A WW2 pilot would probably expect a "rocket" fired from another aircraft to fly straight on while he tries to turn out of it's path and be stunned by the missile following him.
