Some extra points to add to your vid for those interested: The C model amraam has many different "blocks" from -3 to -7 (-8 became the 120D). Of note, the C-5 got a boost only motor. Meaning that in the A/B variants you had a 4 sec boost with a calculated ~4700lbs of thrust with a sustain of ~1200lbs for 4sec. While the C-5 got a boost only with ~3700lbs for 8 seconds. After this the C-7 was made with more range which many believe is due to a more powerful/longer burning motor although numbers on it are not available publicly. Provides a slightly higher total impulse. For the D something else to note is the addition of a two way datalink, which means that not only can everyone with a link-16 enabled jet see the missile but the missile can get midcourse corrections from the link-16 network such as a wingman, another flight, ship, or awacs.
@@jimc1654 But how does the GPS improve guidance? I can understand mid course guidance where the firing aircraft repaints the target, allowing the missile to update it's lead calculations based on the repainted targets speed, distance, and heading. But what does GPS add to the missiles navigation? I'd think all it cares about speed, heading, and distance. Is the GPS for the missile to know it's own speed?
My "friend" worked on missiles for the US Military. The true capabilities of the missiles in our arsenal is unbelievable! What they can do and the systems in there are far ahead of whats published. The smartest people in the world design and update these things and it's suicide to fight any US Aircraft in combat. GOD BLESS OUR FLYBOYS!!!
After having courses on these matters for over a year I didn't think I could still find a lot of useful information on youtube other than just a recap of the basics. This channel proved me wrong, with the previous video (Active RH) and this one being quite complete and containing details I didn't know (like the Anti-radiation homing mode when detecting jamming). Thank you and keep up the good work! It will pay off in the end.
It's probably worth noting, that the AIM-54 also had a very large warhead, which significantly improved it's hit probability in a rather brute-force manner. I would regard the AIM-120 A & B as one type of missile, largely exploring active homing, F&F, home on jam, and GPS. And the AIM-120 C & D as a whole new class of missiles, exploring HOBS, "radical" HOBS, and leveraging data link capability. They all share some parts, but the C, and particularly the D, are monstrously more capable. Claimed hit-prob on the A & B is ~80% (real world probably more like 50%), while the C & D are claimed >90% (real world probably ~80%). But the increased hit-prob & range is secondary to the targeting versatility.
Love this guy, Clear, straight shot, unbiased, no crack ass music in.the background. I'm not sure of his technical data is correct: ie: procceser speed, especially, things may still be classified. But, approximately correct. Still love his efforts.
Excellent video. Wonderful organization and providing time stamps during the intro was a very nice touch! Such a rare gem of knowledge. Love your work!
Some notes: - 2/3 of your missiles missing their target is embarrassing! - producibility -> manufacturability - I'm astounded at how good (fast!) military GPS is compared to civilian stuff And good work. Glad I found your channel.
To be fair, engaging any fighter with air to air weapons is difficult even today. There are several tactics used to cause it to lose its lock, or cause it to expend energy until it can no longer intercept a target. There is little real world experience outside simulations for modern missiles, but I'd bet 50/50 in relatively close range, dropping considerably farther out.
First of all, thank you for creating a truly excellent youtube channel. I've become a Patreon after watching many of your videos over the last few days. I very seldom find anything to take issue with. The only things I would add to this one was that the first Sparrows were not SARH - the were beam-riders. You can tell these missiles by their extremely pointed nose cones and you typically see them in photos of the F3D Skynight, the F7U-3M Cutlass and F3H Demon. Amazingly this AAM-N-2 Sparrow entered limited service as early as 1954. It was retrospectively named the Sparrow I when the active radar Sparrow II was so designated. Obviously the II never went anywhere and the semi-active Sparrow III is the one that was produced in large numbers. Another missile you could have mentioned when describing the home on jam mode of AIM-120 was the Hughes Brazo air-to-air AAM of the early 70s which apparently performed well in tests. I can see why a purely passive anti radiation AAM was a non-starter though, particularly as the same capability was eventually rolled into an active radar missile of similar dimensions .
The Phoenix being not maneuverable enough to engage fighters is a very common misconception. The Phoenix was and still is perfectly capable of maneuvering to intercept fighters. The limiting factor with it however is that because of how heavy it is, its long range use against fighters is limited since it bleeds more kinetic energy maintaining the maneuvers to intercept them. Remember that one of the core jobs the Phoenix was designed for was intercepting supersonic cruise missiles in a frontal aspect (alongside intercepting fighters and bombers). Which requires much more maneuverability than intercepting even fighters, due to fighters rarely going supersonic to prevent their detection (if a supersonic aircraft flies over any hostile forces its pretty much guaranteed that they will be reported to other hostile forces) and to avoid disturbing civilians.
Also, there was nothing in the the Iran-Iraq war to indicate that the Phoenix was a technological dead end, and the US sure didn't think so. The Iranians used the very first variant of the missile, the AIM-54A-Mk47, which not only had variants continue to be developed and produced by the US until the late 90s (including the A-Mk60, C, C+, C+ECCM, and the D variant which was decided that its improvements would just be done to the C+ECCM stock and be folded under that designation after about a year and a half). But the Phoenix had one of, if not, the best launch to kill ratio in the war. Phoenixes in the war achieved 74 victories (including one shot that downed 3 aircraft flying in close proximity to each other) for roughly 92 shots, resulting in a kill ratio of 80% which is higher than even the AMRAAM which has a kill ratio of 63.15%.
High Supersonic aircraft and missiles are almost non maneuvering targets. The targets Phoenix was designed to kill were Long Range Soviet Bombers with speeds up to Mach 2 (Backfire) and High Altitude High Speed Soviet Anti Ship missiles coming in at Mach 5 at 80,000 feet.
Sparrow is a semi-active homing missile not a beam-rider. This is important in that the width of the beam of the illuminating radar does not affect long range guidance accuracy in the way a beam riding system is affected.
I just visited Missile Park in Ventura California by Point Mugu and saw this missile on display in the small park along with the sparrow, Polaris and several other missiles. Nice to know more about it. Good video
Not mentioned was the ability to fire and then maneuver against an incoming attack or attacking a second and even more targets. Letting go of lock to do so can degrade accuracy, though the lack of being dragged back and fourth by evasion maneuvers can make up for that. Also if you lose the lock on, the missile can still aquire the target on its own. A semi-active missile would be lost. Also not mentioned is that the lack of hard lock until final acquisition means no warning of incoming missile.
Subscribe, hit the bell and support me on Patreon ! www.patreon.com/Millennium7 The AMRAAM is the most famous active radar homing, air to air missile. It is considered by many the gold standard of its category, despite the fact that many valid competitors are starting to emerge. In this video we go in depth about its history, its design and its versions. I believe this is one of the most detailed and best informed videos that you can find on the subject. Enjoy! ------- Affiliate Links ------- Viper Pilot: A Memoir of Air Combat.com amzn.to/2G0VVb8.co.uk amzn.to/2OTonhRFighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering.com amzn.to/2uMleai.co.uk amzn.to/2HZElq5Hammer from Above: Marine Air Combat Over Iraq .com amzn.to/2UrvTWA .co.uk amzn.to/2UwGQWF Hornets over Kuwait .com amzn.to/2UlY4XB .co.uk amzn.to/2Kis7Ls -------- Body+Stock LensCanon EOS M50 Mirrorless Camera Kit w/EF-M15-45mm and 4K Video - Black.com amzn.to/2Uf1tHE.co.uk amzn.to/2Uyl8SiBody+StockLens+ZoomCanon EOS M50 Mirrorless Camera Body and EF-M15-45mm + EF-M 55-200mm Lenses and with Dual Pixel CMOS AF and 4K Video - Black.com amzn.to/2UuPV2tZoom Lens OnlyCanon EF-M 55-200 mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Lens for Camera,Black.com amzn.to/2CWiBYg.co.uk amzn.to/2OPC4OR Audio RecorderTascam DR-05 .com amzn.to/2WNYanS .co.uk amzn.to/2K8xuwz LightsNeewer 3x 160 LED Dimmable Light Kit .com amzn.to/2VnYpFV .co.uk amzn.to/2UBvdOg #AMRAAM #Missile #Airtoair ---- Credits ---- Credits MIG-21 Aviation Technology Space Channels ruclips.net/video/M7C6gs3TkG8/видео.html F -14 PHOENIX LAUNCH Aviation Technology Space Channel www.patreon.com/AviationTechnologySpace
In the third season it is already planned to go through the AAMs families and make some comparisons. There are different schools of thought at work and it is worth analyzing the differences. What I am not going to do is videos like "Top 10 AAMs" and find a "best" one. Different weapons respond to different use cases, so there is no best or worst as such, in the void. Each weapon has its own spectrum of use which may or may not overlap with other weapons produced by different schools.
I'll have to go rewatch the AIM54 video, but you are drastically underestimating the capabilities of the predecessor missile to the AIM-120... The AIM-54 is plenty capable of engaging and killing small, maneuvering targets. It's a Mach 5 missile with 21G worth of pull to maneuver to intercept a target. The radar seeker head was also programmable based upon expected target size which changed the time to impact activation time of the missile. The size was input into the AWG-9 which transmitted the activation command based upon what size input was selected at launch. That big 1000lb missile was plenty capable of finding and killing maneuvering fighters. The principle guidance logic of the AIM-120 was directly pulled from the AIM-54... that wouldn't have been a benefit if the missile was only designed to take down bombers.
I have heard the AIM-54 was very susceptible to ground clutter. Fired at long ranges, smaller, more nimble jets could effectively evade the missile by diving and running away, which is actually what happened on at least one occasion with a Navy Tomcat.
@@spackle9999 Since the Phoenix was designed for fleet defense and would usually be fired over the sea in actual combat, I suspect the radar designers may have sacrificed some ability to discriminate ground clutter for range. Not much clutter on the sea surface!
Thanks for the detailed info, presented in easy-to-understand terms and concepts. I really enjoy your sense of humor, too. I just started subscribing last week (so I may have missed it) but what is your name? Where can I find your bio? Thanks, and keep them coming 👍👍👍👍👍
On top of that we have to consider jamming countermeasures. It is really hard to make a AA missile that is more than 50/50 effective, hence most times pairs of them are launched per targer.
Very successful missiles. Longest confirmed kill, was when a Turkish F-16 shot down a L-39 from the Syrian airforce in 2020, at a range of 45 kilometers. Its surface launched cousin, the ESSM, is also very capable.
You know, 30 MHz for an 80s CPU designed for essentially a single use isn't all that bad. I was expecting the speed to be more on the order of the KHz.
I have been watching a few jet docs lately and some of the videos and it’s comment section kept saying AMRAAM and as the man I am, I am a lazy @$$. The latest doc was today, then this showed up haha, thank you RUclips! And great content my good sir, keep it up!
Very good video. The information that you gave on the Phoenix missile was kind of short and my take away is that you did not know much about this missile. I think that there are some of the missiles capabilities that you are unaware of. From 1975 to 1980 I worked on the F14 and my expertise was the fire control system along with additional electronic systems. Believe me when I say there was more to the Phoenix then was ever admitted to publicly. Even if the Phoenix and the F14 are out of service I am still bound by the oath I took to keep what I know secret. So don't bother asking me to help with your research. Good luck. AQ1 Andrew T. Clemmer
Well, we can hardly talk about things that aren't publicly available information, so yeah... I mean, most of us have to go off what militaries will publicly release about a weapon. If any of it is false, incomplete or misleading information then... Well, that, unsurprisingly, leads people to say things about these devices that is incorrect... But if it's still secret, you can't exactly clarify the mistakes, so it becomes something of a moot point.
@@Millennium7HistoryTech LOL I figured so, especially seeing the simple functions...but I have seen example guidance code in books of course so I figured I'd ask because I always welcome new resources on such things...
Could you please make a video about SAMs based on surface launched AAMs - like NASAMS and SPYDER? I would be especially interested in your oppinion about their effective range...
Here is a problem i learned from Pierre Sprey. If the launching plane uses a radar to search and detect targets, opposing aircraft can detect those radar signals and launch anti radiation missiles at the plane using the radar. Does this not make radars a waste of weight? A fighter jet only needs a gun, a good short range IR missile and a long range anti radiation missile. What do you think?
Hi Alex. Pierre Sprey is a controversial figure. He has a few point right, in my opinion, but in this case he is wrong, I believe. Current tactics require to keep the nose cold as much as possible. Either awacs planes are supposed to do the job, or ground based radars or just some of the planes in flight use their radar while everyone else waits. Most modern LPI radars try to distribute the energy on different frequencies to become difficult to intercept and track. Anti radiation can be countered easily by turning off the radar for a few seconds and veering off course. When it is turned on again, the ARM may not be in the position of chasing the target anymore. The radar, even WVR , is essential to give the pilot the situation awareness that, otherwise, wouldn't have and it gives essential cues on when to launch the missiles. However Sprey is right when he says that dogfight and short range engagements will never go away, at least with the foreseeable technologies, because there are so many situations in which the two fighters may end up being close.
@@Millennium7HistoryTech and the latest (if i'm not wrong) doesn't broadcast continously, but just in spotty times, like when the missile is in proximity of the target. Bravo Millenium 7* spieghi molto bene.
Pierre Sprey is an expert in his own opinion. If it were up to him the USAF would be flying F-5s and F-16As with nothing but a gun and a coupe of Sidewinders. Air combat moved on: Sprey never did.
Funny thing about the ASRAAM is that it IS technically classified by the DoD as the AIM-132 ASRAAM. It's an excellent missile, and a credit to our British friends for developing it after (as always) the French bailed and left them holding the bag. The UK, understandably, pretty much told the contractors to begin customizing everything specifically for RAF/RN use cases, and the U.S. used a lot of the ASRAAM research they had conducted to create what ultimately became the AIM-9X. Then the Germans bought the ASRAAM and developed it to become the IRIS-T. So there's actually quite a bit of ASRAAM "DNA" floating around in other missiles out there.
7:39 that looks like 6502 assembly language but I don't recall the BGT opcode... I don't think this would have been the right micro-processor for this missile...
What are does advantage and disadvantage of others air to air weapon systems..?. and about accuracy measurements of Target?and what are does modern-design version of AMRAAN .. respect from Bangsamoro Philippines👍👍✌️✌️🇵🇭😂☑️
why the extreme delay in using solid state componentry? bell labs developed the transistor in 1956; and with darpa and enormous quantities in the military budget of the usaf, it seems odd the delay was so prolonged. 60~70,s. additionally, the use of highly toxic propellants with higher specific impulse, would not have been out of the question during this time, if not now.
US Army Field Tested a Transistorized Nike Hercules SAM guidance system in a Nuclear Environment during Operation Plumbob during 1957 at the Nevada Test Site. Also Trialled was the in service valve driven system. The valve based system worked when a Nuclear Explosion was set up within the systems field of view and the missile would have completed an intercept successfully. The Transistorized one kind of had the solid state components go POP when they were hit by the EMP and thus transistorized equipment was found to be useless on a Nuclear Battlefield. Seeing that the US and NATO war plan between 1956 and 1968 was "Tripwire" which meant that any soviet direct aggression in Europe would result in all out Nuclear War from the start, having weapon system electronics that didn't work in a Nuclear Environment was a bad idea. The change to solid state started in the late 1960's with the introduction of harderend EMP resistant Solid State devices and the fact that NATO's move to a "Flexible Response" War plan meant there would be a conventional war phase first in which the added capabilities of Solid State electronics would be useful.
9:15 The Homo Jammer sounds awesome! I've jammed a few myself over the years. Very enjoyable. They can struggle, but they never evade my missile's seeker head. 💘🤺🥨🥕
avevo letto, se non ricordo male, che l'aim 54 adottava una particolare tattica di attacco: prendeva molta quota e dall'alto utilizzava come kill-skill la velocità di discesa in modalità lookdown-shootdown. Ne sai qualcosa in più? la tattica è verosimile?
Why was there never a Naval surface to air version of the AMRAAM ? - We still se VLS Sea Sparrow missiles on many fairly modern ships. Would an active radar homing missile not be better agains sea skimming targets ?
"Designed specifically for ground-based air defense, the AMRAAM-ER missile will be integrated into the NASAMS launcher to provide increased air defense protection in the medium range air defense market. NASAMS is deployed by seven countries, and is on contract for two more, and has been integrated into the U.S.’ National Capital Region’s air defense system since 2005." according to raython website, there doesn't seem to be much information on naval launch platforms. Then again what the little i know (taking some experience from DCS as its tries its best to model every detail of air to air combat.) radar VS sea skimming targets woln't...really be the best. Dont forget about ground scatter as the missiles own radar could be bouncing off the sea causing false readings. Plus if the plane if flying quite low and sea skimming, it would relatively be easy to "notch" or evade the missile. Though take this all with a grain of salt as i have minimal experience
Thunderbirdlead I am absolutely no radar expert - but would assume - that a doppler radar can distinguish between relatively slow moving waves compared to a fast moving missile - and perhaps the seeker can be argumented with a thermal unit. Just thought an active radar homing missile could offload the radar on the launch platform and offer some OTH capability, if the target dives below the radar horizon.. But them I am clueless on radar details
Soul Sphere Thanks for the info. Looks like the active radar is ‘terminal homing only’ - which obviously can be a big benefit if the missile dives low in the final phase of flight.
The new AIM-120D is actually pretty close, with a range estimated to be close to 100 nautical miles. I guess rocket motors have come a long way since the 1970s.
Another great video on military technology! One recommendation from the heart: Please change the tone and style of the presentation (if possible). It is distracting, being at times totally "lifestyle". Again, thank you for solid, quality analysis, sir!
Nice, they replaced the inertial navigation system, so if you enter a GPS denial zone or during war the GPS satellites get destroyed the missiles become unusable. In any case the back bone of the air defense, the F-35 can flight in adverse weather so maybe is part of a master plan 😜
I am sure your saying a lot of good stuff but English is my second language and I can't understand your accent in English. Keep up the good work I am sure other people will understand and enjoy your video. Thank you and sorry I can't enjoy it
Some extra points to add to your vid for those interested: The C model amraam has many different "blocks" from -3 to -7 (-8 became the 120D). Of note, the C-5 got a boost only motor. Meaning that in the A/B variants you had a 4 sec boost with a calculated ~4700lbs of thrust with a sustain of ~1200lbs for 4sec. While the C-5 got a boost only with ~3700lbs for 8 seconds. After this the C-7 was made with more range which many believe is due to a more powerful/longer burning motor although numbers on it are not available publicly. Provides a slightly higher total impulse. For the D something else to note is the addition of a two way datalink, which means that not only can everyone with a link-16 enabled jet see the missile but the missile can get midcourse corrections from the link-16 network such as a wingman, another flight, ship, or awacs.
Perfectly on point!
How does the GPS enabled D extend range so much? Does it cruise in thin air and then plunge down?
@@taylorc2542 GPS enable better course correction which extend range. So it can be in the thin air for longer time.
@@jimc1654 also some other funky algorithms i guess for better and more efficient guidance.
@@jimc1654 But how does the GPS improve guidance? I can understand mid course guidance where the firing aircraft repaints the target, allowing the missile to update it's lead calculations based on the repainted targets speed, distance, and heading. But what does GPS add to the missiles navigation? I'd think all it cares about speed, heading, and distance. Is the GPS for the missile to know it's own speed?
This channel is criminally underrated. Keep it up!
My "friend" worked on missiles for the US Military. The true capabilities of the missiles in our arsenal is unbelievable! What they can do and the systems in there are far ahead of whats published. The smartest people in the world design and update these things and it's suicide to fight any US Aircraft in combat. GOD BLESS OUR FLYBOYS!!!
After having courses on these matters for over a year I didn't think I could still find a lot of useful information on youtube other than just a recap of the basics. This channel proved me wrong, with the previous video (Active RH) and this one being quite complete and containing details I didn't know (like the Anti-radiation homing mode when detecting jamming). Thank you and keep up the good work! It will pay off in the end.
This was awesome
Thank you Matt. I follow your work too.
Nice seeing you here Matt
Matt!! Nice. And yes, this channel is excellent....
Instablaster...
If it's approved by you it's good enough for me.
It's probably worth noting, that the AIM-54 also had a very large warhead, which significantly improved it's hit probability in a rather brute-force manner. I would regard the AIM-120 A & B as one type of missile, largely exploring active homing, F&F, home on jam, and GPS. And the AIM-120 C & D as a whole new class of missiles, exploring HOBS, "radical" HOBS, and leveraging data link capability. They all share some parts, but the C, and particularly the D, are monstrously more capable. Claimed hit-prob on the A & B is ~80% (real world probably more like 50%), while the C & D are claimed >90% (real world probably ~80%). But the increased hit-prob & range is secondary to the targeting versatility.
Love this guy, Clear, straight shot, unbiased, no crack ass music in.the background. I'm not sure of his technical data is correct: ie: procceser speed, especially, things may still be classified. But, approximately correct. Still love his efforts.
I think he knows exactly what he's talking about.
Wow, this was way more informative than most military hardware channels. Great work!
Excellent video. Wonderful organization and providing time stamps during the intro was a very nice touch! Such a rare gem of knowledge. Love your work!
Thank you very much!
I was unaware of a GPS receiver in the newer versions (120C-8 / 120D, it seems). Thanks for the video!
What's the advantage of GPS increasing range so much?
@@taylorc2542 the missile can roughly track the target way before the target is in range of its own radar seeker head.
Some notes:
- 2/3 of your missiles missing their target is embarrassing!
- producibility -> manufacturability
- I'm astounded at how good (fast!) military GPS is compared to civilian stuff
And good work. Glad I found your channel.
To be fair, engaging any fighter with air to air weapons is difficult even today. There are several tactics used to cause it to lose its lock, or cause it to expend energy until it can no longer intercept a target.
There is little real world experience outside simulations for modern missiles, but I'd bet 50/50 in relatively close range, dropping considerably farther out.
Wow! I don't expect much from military channels on youtube but this one is excellent!
First of all, thank you for creating a truly excellent youtube channel. I've become a Patreon after watching many of your videos over the last few days. I very seldom find anything to take issue with. The only things I would add to this one was that the first Sparrows were not SARH - the were beam-riders. You can tell these missiles by their extremely pointed nose cones and you typically see them in photos of the F3D Skynight, the F7U-3M Cutlass and F3H Demon. Amazingly this AAM-N-2 Sparrow entered limited service as early as 1954. It was retrospectively named the Sparrow I when the active radar Sparrow II was so designated. Obviously the II never went anywhere and the semi-active Sparrow III is the one that was produced in large numbers. Another missile you could have mentioned when describing the home on jam mode of AIM-120 was the Hughes Brazo air-to-air AAM of the early 70s which apparently performed well in tests. I can see why a purely passive anti radiation AAM was a non-starter though, particularly as the same capability was eventually rolled into an active radar missile of similar dimensions .
Really incredible channel. You should have many more subscribers!
The Phoenix being not maneuverable enough to engage fighters is a very common misconception. The Phoenix was and still is perfectly capable of maneuvering to intercept fighters. The limiting factor with it however is that because of how heavy it is, its long range use against fighters is limited since it bleeds more kinetic energy maintaining the maneuvers to intercept them.
Remember that one of the core jobs the Phoenix was designed for was intercepting supersonic cruise missiles in a frontal aspect (alongside intercepting fighters and bombers). Which requires much more maneuverability than intercepting even fighters, due to fighters rarely going supersonic to prevent their detection (if a supersonic aircraft flies over any hostile forces its pretty much guaranteed that they will be reported to other hostile forces) and to avoid disturbing civilians.
Also, there was nothing in the the Iran-Iraq war to indicate that the Phoenix was a technological dead end, and the US sure didn't think so. The Iranians used the very first variant of the missile, the AIM-54A-Mk47, which not only had variants continue to be developed and produced by the US until the late 90s (including the A-Mk60, C, C+, C+ECCM, and the D variant which was decided that its improvements would just be done to the C+ECCM stock and be folded under that designation after about a year and a half). But the Phoenix had one of, if not, the best launch to kill ratio in the war. Phoenixes in the war achieved 74 victories (including one shot that downed 3 aircraft flying in close proximity to each other) for roughly 92 shots, resulting in a kill ratio of 80% which is higher than even the AMRAAM which has a kill ratio of 63.15%.
High Supersonic aircraft and missiles are almost non maneuvering targets. The targets Phoenix was designed to kill were Long Range Soviet Bombers with speeds up to Mach 2 (Backfire) and High Altitude High Speed Soviet Anti Ship missiles coming in at Mach 5 at 80,000 feet.
Sparrow is a semi-active homing missile not a beam-rider. This is important in that the width of the beam of the illuminating radar does not affect long range guidance accuracy in the way a beam riding system is affected.
You have a great knowledge and explain jargons with ease
Thanks!
Definition of producibility. : the character, state, or fact of being producible. So, yes it is a word. Keep up the good work!
I just visited Missile Park in Ventura California by Point Mugu and saw this missile on display in the small park along with the sparrow, Polaris and several other missiles. Nice to know more about it.
Good video
Such excellent and detailed content! So glad I found you. Subscribed.
Not mentioned was the ability to fire and then maneuver against an incoming attack or attacking a second and even more targets. Letting go of lock to do so can degrade accuracy, though the lack of being dragged back and fourth by evasion maneuvers can make up for that. Also if you lose the lock on, the missile can still aquire the target on its own. A semi-active missile would be lost.
Also not mentioned is that the lack of hard lock until final acquisition means no warning of incoming missile.
Subscribe, hit the bell and support me on Patreon ! www.patreon.com/Millennium7
The AMRAAM is the most famous active radar homing, air to air missile. It is considered by many the gold standard of its category, despite the fact that many valid competitors are starting to emerge.
In this video we go in depth about its history, its design and its versions. I believe this is one of the most detailed and best informed videos that you can find on the subject.
Enjoy!
------- Affiliate Links -------
Viper Pilot: A Memoir of Air Combat.com amzn.to/2G0VVb8.co.uk amzn.to/2OTonhRFighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering.com amzn.to/2uMleai.co.uk amzn.to/2HZElq5Hammer from Above: Marine Air Combat Over Iraq .com amzn.to/2UrvTWA
.co.uk amzn.to/2UwGQWF
Hornets over Kuwait
.com amzn.to/2UlY4XB
.co.uk amzn.to/2Kis7Ls
--------
Body+Stock LensCanon EOS M50 Mirrorless Camera Kit w/EF-M15-45mm and 4K Video - Black.com amzn.to/2Uf1tHE.co.uk amzn.to/2Uyl8SiBody+StockLens+ZoomCanon EOS M50 Mirrorless Camera Body and EF-M15-45mm + EF-M 55-200mm Lenses and with Dual Pixel CMOS AF and 4K Video - Black.com amzn.to/2UuPV2tZoom Lens OnlyCanon EF-M 55-200 mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Lens for Camera,Black.com amzn.to/2CWiBYg.co.uk amzn.to/2OPC4OR
Audio RecorderTascam DR-05
.com amzn.to/2WNYanS
.co.uk amzn.to/2K8xuwz
LightsNeewer 3x 160 LED Dimmable Light Kit
.com amzn.to/2VnYpFV
.co.uk amzn.to/2UBvdOg
#AMRAAM #Missile #Airtoair
---- Credits ----
Credits
MIG-21
Aviation Technology Space Channels
ruclips.net/video/M7C6gs3TkG8/видео.html
F -14 PHOENIX LAUNCH Aviation Technology Space Channel www.patreon.com/AviationTechnologySpace
please make a video on AMRAAM competitors such as Meteor, PL15, PL12, R27, R37, R77 and what makes them different
In the third season it is already planned to go through the AAMs families and make some comparisons. There are different schools of thought at work and it is worth analyzing the differences.
What I am not going to do is videos like "Top 10 AAMs" and find a "best" one. Different weapons respond to different use cases, so there is no best or worst as such, in the void. Each weapon has its own spectrum of use which may or may not overlap with other weapons produced by different schools.
I'll have to go rewatch the AIM54 video, but you are drastically underestimating the capabilities of the predecessor missile to the AIM-120... The AIM-54 is plenty capable of engaging and killing small, maneuvering targets. It's a Mach 5 missile with 21G worth of pull to maneuver to intercept a target. The radar seeker head was also programmable based upon expected target size which changed the time to impact activation time of the missile. The size was input into the AWG-9 which transmitted the activation command based upon what size input was selected at launch.
That big 1000lb missile was plenty capable of finding and killing maneuvering fighters. The principle guidance logic of the AIM-120 was directly pulled from the AIM-54... that wouldn't have been a benefit if the missile was only designed to take down bombers.
I have heard the AIM-54 was very susceptible to ground clutter. Fired at long ranges, smaller, more nimble jets could effectively evade the missile by diving and running away, which is actually what happened on at least one occasion with a Navy Tomcat.
@@spackle9999 Since the Phoenix was designed for fleet defense and would usually be fired over the sea in actual combat, I suspect the radar designers may have sacrificed some ability to discriminate ground clutter for range. Not much clutter on the sea surface!
@@bluemarlin8138 good point about detection over the ocean
@@bluemarlin8138 Proceeds to lock on to a trawler
Your english is just fine. Keep up the good work!
the automatic subtitles don't get all of it, neither do I ;)
Thanks for the detailed info, presented in easy-to-understand terms and concepts. I really enjoy your sense of humor, too. I just started subscribing last week (so I may have missed it) but what is your name? Where can I find your bio? Thanks, and keep them coming 👍👍👍👍👍
ruclips.net/video/KZwVmHzfP_0/видео.html
On top of that we have to consider jamming countermeasures.
It is really hard to make a AA missile that is more than 50/50 effective, hence most times pairs of them are launched per targer.
Very successful missiles. Longest confirmed kill, was when a Turkish F-16 shot down a L-39 from the Syrian airforce in 2020, at a range of 45 kilometers.
Its surface launched cousin, the ESSM, is also very capable.
I got to help produce the harness cover for the first version.
Bellissima serie! Grande
İ am watchin your videos again an again. Thank you. You are the king of EW
You know, 30 MHz for an 80s CPU designed for essentially a single use isn't all that bad. I was expecting the speed to be more on the order of the KHz.
Best channel ever !
I have been watching a few jet docs lately and some of the videos and it’s comment section kept saying AMRAAM and as the man I am, I am a lazy @$$. The latest doc was today, then this showed up haha, thank you RUclips! And great content my good sir, keep it up!
Detailed explanation !
Terrific!
Please do not apologise for your pronunciation. Your English is excellent
Outstanding video
Continue about future missiles
Bravo!!!
Good job sir! Keep it up!
Very good video. The information that you gave on the Phoenix missile was kind of short and my take away is that you did not know much about this missile. I think that there are some of the missiles capabilities that you are unaware of. From 1975 to 1980 I worked on the F14 and my expertise was the fire control system along with additional electronic systems. Believe me when I say there was more to the Phoenix then was ever admitted to publicly. Even if the Phoenix and the F14 are out of service I am still bound by the oath I took to keep what I know secret. So don't bother asking me to help with your research. Good luck. AQ1 Andrew T. Clemmer
Quite possibly! Pity you can't talk. Thanks for stopping by!
People have fetish-ized the F-14/Phoenix to no end. It's not in the ballpark of new smart missiles with thottleable motors and data links.
Well, we can hardly talk about things that aren't publicly available information, so yeah...
I mean, most of us have to go off what militaries will publicly release about a weapon.
If any of it is false, incomplete or misleading information then...
Well, that, unsurprisingly, leads people to say things about these devices that is incorrect...
But if it's still secret, you can't exactly clarify the mistakes, so it becomes something of a moot point.
Love the information amazing video but the aim54 was exstreamly accurate during Iran Iraq war and definitely was not a dead end
Just for trivia's sake: The Sparrows prior to the 7F still used vacuum tubes.
Excellent job 👌 Millennium 7*HistoryTech. Please also study the pink panther movies for more kudos
Great video! Thank you!
Appreciate your video and your knowledge about certain topics please don’t add somebody’s bad taste in music thank you 🙏.
Idk if you keep up with comments on old videos lol...but *DUUUUUDE* where did you get that guidance assembly code?
It is just B-Roll, it is not the real code.
@@Millennium7HistoryTech LOL I figured so, especially seeing the simple functions...but I have seen example guidance code in books of course so I figured I'd ask because I always welcome new resources on such things...
Could you please make a video about SAMs based on surface launched AAMs - like NASAMS and SPYDER? I would be especially interested in your oppinion about their effective range...
Very interesting. Just subscribed!
how about a video on how jammers work
Love this channel, you should get paid 100 bucks per session
Here is a problem i learned from Pierre Sprey. If the launching plane uses a radar to search and detect targets, opposing aircraft can detect those radar signals and launch anti radiation missiles at the plane using the radar.
Does this not make radars a waste of weight?
A fighter jet only needs a gun, a good short range IR missile and a long range anti radiation missile.
What do you think?
Hi Alex. Pierre Sprey is a controversial figure. He has a few point right, in my opinion, but in this case he is wrong, I believe.
Current tactics require to keep the nose cold as much as possible. Either awacs planes are supposed to do the job, or ground based radars or just some of the planes in flight use their radar while everyone else waits.
Most modern LPI radars try to distribute the energy on different frequencies to become difficult to intercept and track.
Anti radiation can be countered easily by turning off the radar for a few seconds and veering off course. When it is turned on again, the ARM may not be in the position of chasing the target anymore.
The radar, even WVR , is essential to give the pilot the situation awareness that, otherwise, wouldn't have and it gives essential cues on when to launch the missiles.
However Sprey is right when he says that dogfight and short range engagements will never go away, at least with the foreseeable technologies, because there are so many situations in which the two fighters may end up being close.
@@Millennium7HistoryTech and the latest (if i'm not wrong) doesn't broadcast continously, but just in spotty times, like when the missile is in proximity of the target. Bravo Millenium 7* spieghi molto bene.
Pierre Sprey is an expert in his own opinion. If it were up to him the USAF would be flying F-5s and F-16As with nothing but a gun and a coupe of Sidewinders. Air combat moved on: Sprey never did.
I may be mistaken, but doesn't the aim120D have a home on jam mode. Meaning it will home in on the jamming aircraft as well.
Yes, but it is quite inaccurate.
Plz make a video on both meteor and PL15.
Fantastic!!!
Can you do a video on anti Armor missiles?
Or the Trophy system anti tank missile tech
Please!!
Very Interesting Information!
Very Nice. greeting from Brazil´s deep south. Ubiratan
Get well soon..
Have you look up the new secret aim 260 missile
an eprom or eeprom is considered as firmware, as it is a physical device carrying lines of code.
The gold standard indeed !
You got one of these things lookin at you chances are it aint gonna be a great day
Does Amraam automatically explodes or fall on the ground intact when it misses it's target?
As a guess; I would say it almost certainly self-destructs.
Excellent!
Nice content! Keep it up.
Good lecture.
Good video, has the AIM-120D had any sub-versions Since is entered service ? Also a video on the meteor missile would be interesting.
ruclips.net/video/E5NtQMPeLUY/видео.html
@@Millennium7HistoryTech thank you.
Super video l love it thanks..
Interesting video. Will there be one on the ASRAAM?
Funny thing about the ASRAAM is that it IS technically classified by the DoD as the AIM-132 ASRAAM. It's an excellent missile, and a credit to our British friends for developing it after (as always) the French bailed and left them holding the bag. The UK, understandably, pretty much told the contractors to begin customizing everything specifically for RAF/RN use cases, and the U.S. used a lot of the ASRAAM research they had conducted to create what ultimately became the AIM-9X. Then the Germans bought the ASRAAM and developed it to become the IRIS-T. So there's actually quite a bit of ASRAAM "DNA" floating around in other missiles out there.
The US is developing a AIM-260. I believe IOC was 2022/2023. Any news?
3:34 Now this i did not know at all. F14 could take off with 6 AIM-54 but couldn't land with this payload.
I guess it was impossible to land safely with the 4 belly-mounted AIM-54 (totaling 240kgs of explosive)
Steta sto nisu AIM 54 Phoenix nisu montirali na MIM 104 Patriot.
😂😂😂😂
7:39 that looks like 6502 assembly language but I don't recall the BGT opcode... I don't think this would have been the right micro-processor for this missile...
😀 It was just representative, no way of showing the actual code!
What are does advantage and disadvantage of others air to air weapon systems..?. and about accuracy measurements of Target?and what are does modern-design version of AMRAAN .. respect from Bangsamoro Philippines👍👍✌️✌️🇵🇭😂☑️
why the extreme delay in using solid state componentry? bell labs developed the transistor in 1956; and with darpa and enormous quantities in the military budget of the usaf, it seems odd the delay was so prolonged. 60~70,s. additionally, the use of highly toxic propellants with higher specific impulse, would not have been out of the question during this time, if not now.
US Army Field Tested a Transistorized Nike Hercules SAM guidance system in a Nuclear Environment during Operation Plumbob during 1957 at the Nevada Test Site. Also Trialled was the in service valve driven system. The valve based system worked when a Nuclear Explosion was set up within the systems field of view and the missile would have completed an intercept successfully. The Transistorized one kind of had the solid state components go POP when they were hit by the EMP and thus transistorized equipment was found to be useless on a Nuclear Battlefield. Seeing that the US and NATO war plan between 1956 and 1968 was "Tripwire" which meant that any soviet direct aggression in Europe would result in all out Nuclear War from the start, having weapon system electronics that didn't work in a Nuclear Environment was a bad idea. The change to solid state started in the late 1960's with the introduction of harderend EMP resistant Solid State devices and the fact that NATO's move to a "Flexible Response" War plan meant there would be a conventional war phase first in which the added capabilities of Solid State electronics would be useful.
amraam was a solid state missile from day 1, not sure what you are on about....?
Solid state and digital technology has made huge advances. I imagine A.I. software will be the next game changer. If it isn't already...
Unfortunately higher ups in the defense space do not seem to trust AI enough to fund such projects when current methods are likely good enough
Wow love this channel, so informative!
wasn't the sparrow intended primarily to shoot down bombers?
Very technical. How you get the detailed spec.
All public domain material. Start with Wikipedia and follow the references.
The crown surely goes to meteor.
ADVANCED MEDIUM RANGE AIR TO AIR MISSILE
AIM 120 still knows your location.
9:15 The Homo Jammer sounds awesome!
I've jammed a few myself over the years. Very enjoyable.
They can struggle, but they never evade my missile's seeker head. 💘🤺🥨🥕
The missile knows where it is because it knows where it isn't.
avevo letto, se non ricordo male, che l'aim 54 adottava una particolare tattica di attacco: prendeva molta quota e dall'alto utilizzava come kill-skill la velocità di discesa in modalità lookdown-shootdown. Ne sai qualcosa in più? la tattica è verosimile?
E' corretto. Ormai lo fanno quasi tutti
Why was there never a Naval surface to air version of the AMRAAM ? - We still se VLS Sea Sparrow missiles on many fairly modern ships. Would an active radar homing missile not be better agains sea skimming targets ?
A question I have no answer too. Maybe one of the people who follow US defense more closely has an answer. Anyone?
"Designed specifically for ground-based air defense, the AMRAAM-ER missile will be integrated into the NASAMS launcher to provide increased air defense protection in the medium range air defense market.
NASAMS is deployed by seven countries, and is on contract for two more, and has been integrated into the U.S.’ National Capital Region’s air defense system since 2005."
according to raython website, there doesn't seem to be much information on naval launch platforms. Then again what the little i know (taking some experience from DCS as its tries its best to model every detail of air to air combat.) radar VS sea skimming targets woln't...really be the best. Dont forget about ground scatter as the missiles own radar could be bouncing off the sea causing false readings. Plus if the plane if flying quite low and sea skimming, it would relatively be easy to "notch" or evade the missile.
Though take this all with a grain of salt as i have minimal experience
Thunderbirdlead I am absolutely no radar expert - but would assume - that a doppler radar can distinguish between relatively slow moving waves compared to a fast moving missile - and perhaps the seeker can be argumented with a thermal unit. Just thought an active radar homing missile could offload the radar on the launch platform and offer some OTH capability, if the target dives below the radar horizon.. But them I am clueless on radar details
Soul Sphere Thanks for the info. Looks like the active radar is ‘terminal homing only’ - which obviously can be a big benefit if the missile dives low in the final phase of flight.
The Amram does not have the long range of the Phoenix which is almost an air to ground missile in size.
The new AIM-120D is actually pretty close, with a range estimated to be close to 100 nautical miles. I guess rocket motors have come a long way since the 1970s.
Wait where did you get the information about the CPU and the software source code?
It is common knowledge, it is on wikipedia too. The source code shown is not original code, it is only a prop.
@@Millennium7HistoryTech I'm sorry, I guess I'm blind! Which page?
what is your professional background pls?
The russian R-27 missile,is it thrust vectoring and hypersonic?
The word might be "manufacturability"
...or ‘producibility’
I don't think cannons ever where important after any type of serious heat seaking missile where adapted @2:20
Are you italian? You have a little accent not to be offensive i ma italian too and i am curious
Another great video on military technology! One recommendation from the heart: Please change the tone and style of the presentation (if possible). It is distracting, being at times totally "lifestyle". Again, thank you for solid, quality analysis, sir!
Nice, they replaced the inertial navigation system, so if you enter a GPS denial zone or during war the GPS satellites get destroyed the missiles become unusable. In any case the back bone of the air defense, the F-35 can flight in adverse weather so maybe is part of a master plan 😜
Are these guys military experts?
AMRAAM Missile - The Slammer of the Skies
"Produciblity" is not a word.
"Productivity" is the correct word.
Not really.
Extremely expensive... sounds perfect 🙈😂
I am sure your saying a lot of good stuff but English is my second language and I can't understand your accent in English. Keep up the good work I am sure other people will understand and enjoy your video. Thank you and sorry I can't enjoy it
Sorry about that
Try captions
AIM 120c 🥰🥰😍😍
Good info, but when are we going to shoot down a UFO> Now that would be an air to air shot.
@terry Wayne Hamilton. The Russians tried that and go to well for them. But sure, why not' let's go out styling! Ha.
GPS navigation can be jammed or add poofed.