In your opinion, which is harder to evade? Air to Air missile or SAM?

[Tornado23]

Which do you think is harder to evade from a pikots perspective?

A2a missile for example could be the AIM120C5 AMRAAM

SAM for example could be HQ9P

Both have similar range and speed (105km for the amraam c5 and 100+km for the HQ9P, mach 4 for the c5 and mach 4.2 for the HQ9P). Which is harder to evade?

@Akh1112 @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @iLION12345_1 @Rashid Mahmood @PanzerKiel @SQ8 @The Eagle @HRK

 

[jamesisi]

I believe air to air missile is more deadlier than the Sams maybe I’m wrong.

 

[Akh1112]

Which do you think is harder to evade from a pikots perspective?

A2a missile for example could be the AIM120C5 AMRAAM

SAM for example could be HQ9P

Both have similar range and speed (105km for the amraam c5 and 100+km for the HQ9P, mach 4 for the c5 and mach 4.2 for the HQ9P). Which is harder to evade?

@Akh1112 @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @iLION12345_1 @Rashid Mahmood @PanzerKiel @SQ8 @The Eagle @HRK

you cant really discuss this without factoring in other things.

If we're looking at this kinematically, im still unsure, id guess the AMRAAM at the same ranges could have more KE due to its flight path, though, we also need to look at the type of engagement, honestly, idk, i dont think anyone would be able to tell you either. Maybe someone could run some sort of simulation with basic estimates and then find out the speeds of each missile before impact, which should tell you which one could be deadlier, but there isnt really anything better than that wrt to this question ngl

 

[ummarz]

Good question. Unfortunately there isn't a clear answer. Both have their own use cases, and if employed properly are equally deadly. Your chance of evading a modern anti air missile depends on your energy state (speed and altitude), your distance from the targeting aircraft or SAM battery and your own jets EW capabilities.

It is all about energy, your energy vs the missiles energy. Missiles run their engine only for a short initial duration, after which they continuously lose energy. Jets always have their engine running and can maintain energy much better. If you are far enough and know that the missile is coming, you can almost always defeat it by doing evasive maneuvers. Evasive maneuvers expend the missile energy much faster than they do to your jet. You lower its energy (speed and altitude), lower than yours, you win. But if you are closer (inside the no escape zone), you have almost no chance of escaping no matter what maneuver you do. All you can do is do the best possible maneuver and pray to god and hope for luck to be on your side.

Now there are some exceptions to the above:

If mountains are involved, it may be possible to defeat the missile even in the no escape zone in some situations.
Your EW suite can also help you escape from the no escape zone, but that all depends on how good your EW really is.
You can carry decoys, and have them sling behind you but this is now getting too exotic.

 

[Tornado23]

New scenario

Fighter aircraft - f16 blk 50, 500knts speed, angels 24 alt. Standard a2a combat loadout (3x ext fuel, 6 amraams and 2 sidewinders)

A2a missile - c5 amraam,distance between f16 and enemy jet 70km. Launch alt angels 24

SAM - HQ9P, distance to f16 70km.

No jamming, no EW whatsoever.

AEWAC support for f16 available (e3 sentry)

@Akh1112 @PanzerKiel @Rashid Mahmood @iLION12345_1

 

[Aesterix]

SAM are relatively fixed and have a limited circle of engagement. If SAM position is known , the aircraft can easily go round it.
AAM being fitted on a moving platform I.e the aircraft, cannot be avoided that easily.

 

[ummarz]

New scenario

Fighter aircraft - f16 blk 50, 500knts speed, angels 24 alt. Standard a2a combat loadout (3x ext fuel, 6 amraams and 2 sidewinders)

A2a missile - c5 amraam,distance between f16 and enemy jet 70km. Launch alt angels 24

SAM - HQ9P, distance to f16 70km.

No jamming, no EW whatsoever.

AEWAC support for f16 available (e3 sentry)

@Akh1112 @PanzerKiel @Rashid Mahmood @iLION12345_1

HQ9P

Its faster, engine burns longer, has almost double the range. Even if the c5 is launched at best launch parameters, ie launching aircraft is supersonic, at 70km its just too far out. That said, I have a feeling that even the HQ9P can be defeated at that range if you turn cold, supersonic on the deck.

I guess the difference between the two here would be that you could still remain in the fight and recommit after defeating the AIM120, where as you would be pushed back out much farther while defeating the HQ9P.

I know you said no jamming/ew. But I would like to add my opinion here. Countries operating F-16/AIM 120 would fear the HQ9P since they don't know its capabilities. Where as they would already have EW counters to the AIM120.


Hope this helps

 

[Tornado23]

HQ9P

Its faster, engine burns longer, has almost double the range. Even if the c5 is launched at best launch parameters, ie launching aircraft is supersonic, at 70km its just too far out. That said, I have a feeling that even the HQ9P can be defeated at that range if you turn cold, supersonic on the deck.

I guess the difference between the two here would be that you could still remain in the fight and recommit after defeating the AIM120, where as you would be pushed back out much farther while defeating the HQ9P.

I know you said no jamming/ew. But I would like to add my opinion here. Countries operating F-16/AIM 120 would fear the HQ9P since they don't know its capabilities. Where as they would already have EW counters to the AIM120.


Hope this helps

Nice. Regarding the hq9p, i am using the range given by ispr. That being 100km+

 

[ummarz]

Nice. Regarding the hq9p, i am using the range given by ispr. That being 100km+

Yeah but we all know Pakistan always understates the reality. That "+" could even be another 100 lol. What is your opinion on this scenario?

 

[Tornado23]

Yeah but we all know Pakistan always understates the reality. What is your opinion on this scenario?

Yea i know the range is much larger. Must be a surprise X)))))

Regarding this scenario, id say the air to air missile will be harder to evade in terms of maneuvering as it can pull higher Gs to take down its target, but the hq9p would be more difficult to evade in terms of endurance. As you said, longer burn time means longer endurance. At 70km, f16 would barely be able to escape the 120 c5, otherwise it would be shot down. 70km for the hq9p, is gg.

 

[Super Falcon]

Sam for ure

 

[ummarz]

Yea i know the range is much larger. Must be a surprise X)))))

Regarding this scenario, id say the air to air missile will be harder to evade in terms of maneuvering as it can pull higher Gs to take down its target, but the hq9p would be more difficult to evade in terms of endurance. As you said, longer burn time means longer endurance. At 70km, f16 would barely be able to escape the 120 c5, otherwise it would be shot down. 70km for the hq9p, is gg.

Very well

I wonder if we have any pilots on here who could weigh in on this particular scenario.

 

[SQ8]

One has to start from the ground and work its way up to an altitude and maintain kinematics to ensure a good pk. One has some altitude/speed advantage on its side but has a limited burn time.


finally one is guided by an airborne sensor initially and even with notching has advantages over the curvature of the earth or natural features. The other faces both.

 

[Thorough Pro]

In my opinion, if all other things are equal, A2A is comparatively easier to evade due to the shorter burn time of their motors, narrower radar beam of their mother ship, maneuvering of the mothership at the same time to evade possible counter missile strike thus difficulty in maintaining the lock on the target.

SAM's have comparatively larger engine motors, massive and stationary radars to track the target and provide mid-course guidance to the missile and have wider radar beams with no maneuvering so easy to maintain a constant lock on the target.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Very scenario dependent question, and I think you understood that because you gave a specific scenario in both your questions, the aircraft, the altitude, the missiles in question etc.

So it could be one or the other depending on all sorts of things, especially where the aircraft is.