IF i were to design an Air to Air missile, How i should advertise the range ?

[stealthflanker]

Greetings.

I think the title is self explanatory. So i got myself E.Fleeman's Tactical missile design course PPT's. On the design exercise, related to flight performance. I noticed several types of ranges namely :

F-pole : basically the range between target and launch platform where the target is expected to be destroyed
Flight range (tail and head on) : The required range for the missile to fly to meet the launch range requirement
Launch range : The range where the missile can be launched against target.

While in typical missile brochure or even general information website e.g wiki or say designation system. There is only "range" mentioned without any further definition on what it is. Maybe it's launch range but not really sure. Or just "maximum range" like the say PL-15E.

So If i were to design an air to air missile and then having to present it to general public or say decision maker, what range should i mention ? Should i go with Launch range as it give the best value (read big numbers) Or should i give F-pole ? Which i expect some people will argue that it only applies to SARH, or should i mention flight range ? which might be more realistic but modern AAM may have several "selectables" trajectories available or it can be manipulated in flight based on say, targets, aspects etc.

Which among them will say, show me like an "Honest" angel ?

 

[Ronny]

Greetings.

I think the title is self explanatory. So i got myself E.Fleeman's Tactical missile design course PPT's. On the design exercise, related to flight performance. I noticed several types of ranges namely :

F-pole : basically the range between target and launch platform where the target is expected to be destroyed
Flight range (tail and head on) : The required range for the missile to fly to meet the launch range requirement
Launch range : The range where the missile can be launched against target.

While in typical missile brochure or even general information website e.g wiki or say designation system. There is only "range" mentioned without any further definition on what it is. Maybe it's launch range but not really sure. Or just "maximum range" like the say PL-15E.

So If i were to design an air to air missile and then having to present it to general public or say decision maker, what range should i mention ? Should i go with Launch range as it give the best value (read big numbers) Or should i give F-pole ? Which i expect some people will argue that it only applies to SARH, or should i mention flight range ? which might be more realistic but modern AAM may have several "selectables" trajectories available or it can be manipulated in flight based on say, targets, aspects etc.

Which among them will say, show me like an "Honest" angel ?

I think if you want to represent to the decision maker, launch range seem to be most useful and intuitive because as a pilot, the most important thing for you is "when you can start your engagement?".
F-pole is not that useful because most modern air to air missiles nowadays are active and can be guided by third party.
Flight range is not intuitive for the pilot or the decision maker.



But more important is to show the comparative range or comparative speed. That mean regardless of what type of range you want to show, it best to show it with something to compare to. I think Meteor brochure done that very well.

 

[stealthflanker]

F-pole is not that useful because most modern air to air missiles nowadays are active and can be guided by third party.

No. The concept still got carried even today. Like this one document i got from DTIC It still pretty much sound concept. and i wonder tho why it's associated only with SARH (at least from what i see from a site owned by DCS "squadron").

But more important is to show the comparative range or comparative speed. That mean regardless of what type of range you want to show, it best to show it with something to compare to. I think Meteor brochure done that very well.

Maybe it's better. The thing is that there seems to be no real standard at all on what to present tho. So everyone seems to do their own thing.

 

[pathology_doc]

Head-on exaggerates the range, tail chase is the worst case. To split the difference, I would publish the greatest range at which the missile can engage a stationary target, i.e. a helicopter at its hover ceiling, or an aircraft orbiting over a fixed point on the ground, where its average ground speed in still air is close to zero.

Brochures presented to putative customers, assuming those doing the purchasing are fighter pilots who know a few things about attack envelopes, will publish full attack envelopes. If the weapon is purchased, the pilots are going to have to be trained to the weapon limitations, and if you've over-egged the pudding you will be found out at that point.