Iran unveils A2A BVR missile Fakour

[Basel]

1970 AI & radars!

If Iran want then F-14s can be upgraded with Russian radar, engine and avionics, also Su-30 will be able to carry those and guide them to max range.

 

[Raghfarm007]

size comparison:

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

I read that the Pheonix Missile was quite "Lethal" missile and US stopped making it after F14 was retired and opted to go in other direction.

Iranians have played long with Radar and its inner code for quite sometime I would not be suprised if they managed to reverse engineer the radar and enhanced / modernized it. They did have 15-20 years to enhance it

 

[Arminkh]

Most Iranian fighter jets cannot carry or guide this huge long range missile.

Report says it has its own radar. Maybe it doesn't need guidance. Like naval cruise missiles..

To some extend the kinematic performance of such large AAMs can be a real argument.

Medium range missiles such as the R-77, AIM-120, PL-12 have problems at ranges over 60km, the PK sharply decreases afterwards and a maneuvering target can evade quite easily.
A heavy AAM like the Fakkur 90 could keep its high PK against maneuvering targets most likely up to 80km, head-on and even in pursuit.

To put it simply: The IRIAF assets are outdated, in anti-air operation they can only be effective in a single operation mode --> be upgraded with a modern "unified" radar system that can operate the Fakkur-90 to at least 80km lock-on range against fighter size targets. Use external radar data to engage only at long ranges and return to base after the AAMs are spent.
Heavy AAMs have problems against targets pulling high G numbers but if the Fakkur-90 would have reasonable PK against such fighter targets it would be a ideal asset to compensate the shortcomings of the old IRIAF fleet.

Whether a F-5 could carry two and use data-link target information for engagement. Or a F-4 carry two for CAP missions with a upgraded radar, or 4 on a short range interception mission... All quite strange scenarios except for F-14s operating them as AIM-54 replacement. Would be very unconventional but could make some sense. However as the IRIAF is not known to make such radical steps (its not IRGCASF), I'm quite sure we will see the Fakkur 90 only on F-14s.

The speculated scenario however would be much better than a convention upgrade program of a Chinese radar and PL-12 for the F-5, F-4 and MIG-29 fleet. It certainly would make the old fleet more fearsome.

Cant a ground based targeting radar lock on the target while missile is fired from a fighter jet? For foreseeable future, IRAF will be operating within Iran's land based radars. So it is a practical solution.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Report says it has its own radar. Maybe it doesn't need guidance. Like naval cruise missiles..


Cant a ground based targeting radar lock on the target while missile is fired from a fighter jet? For foreseeable future, IRAF will be operating within Iran's land based radars. So it is a practical solution.

AIM-54 have its own radar but only activate at the end when it dive toward the target for the rest of the flight it rely on The AWG-9 to guide it and no it can't use the guidance like AShM the air planes moves a lot faster and the missile need guidance for all the time t fly not to miss the target. also for using ground data for reaching target it probably need some sort of data link that I doubt we can use right now.

 

[OldTwilight]

And why you think this is Phoenix !?

They used Phoenix body but radar , solid fuel engine , flight computer and all of its subsystem are different ....

in fact Fakour radar is based on Shahin or Sayyad missile radar

 

[AmirPatriot]

Report says it has its own radar. Maybe it doesn't need guidance. Like naval cruise missiles..

That's not how it works... This is a 300 km missile remember. They cannot fit a large radar in there. The missile is first guided by the F-14s AWG-9 radar, and once it gets close enough (I think the original AIM-54 had a 12 mile radar range), the terminal radar seeker in the missile switches on and is used to guide the missile.

ASHMs work in a similar manner.

 

[OldTwilight]

That's not how it works... This is a 300 km missile remember. They cannot fit a large radar in there. The missile is first guided by the F-14s AWG-9 radar, and once it gets close enough (I think the original AIM-54 had a 12 mile radar range), the terminal radar seeker in the missile switches on and is used to guide the missile.

ASHMs work in a similar manner.

shouldn't we go for Optical seeker !?

 

[AmirPatriot]

shouldn't we go for Optical seeker !?

But how would you expect to transfer the targeting data from the F-14 to the missile? It wouldn't work. That's why there are no radar guided A2A missiles with optical or infrared guided terminal stages.

 

[Hack-Hook]

And why you think this is Phoenix !?

They used Phoenix body but radar , solid fuel engine , flight computer and all of its subsystem are different ....

in fact Fakour radar is based on Shahin or Sayyad missile radar

just think about what sort of battery we must put inside the missile to be able to power a 200km+ radar

 

[eagle2007]

ALCON,

Some clarifications on how the original AIM-54 worked:
- The missile's midcourse guidance relied on an on-board autopilot system, which in turn received updates from the AWG-9 radar as to the target's current position. This is similar to how semi-actively guided missiles are directed to their targets (such as the AIM-7Es and R-27Rs in the IRIAF's inventories).
- Then, in the last 18km before the target, the active radar seeker engaged the target itself.

To several points brought up:
- Could this missile be fired at a target with the assistance of ground-based radars? Possibly, but depending on launch altitude, the ability of the A2A to "talk" to the ground based radar might present a problem. Also, this would severely limit where you could fire the missile, as there would need to be a compatible radar nearby. Also, terrain presents a major problem if you're relying on ground-based radar for your target tracking.
- Is if feasible the Fakour90 has an active seeker with greater range than the AIM-54A? Certainly. Active-radar seeker tech has improved a great deal since the 1970s. The ARH seekers used by missiles like the AIM-120 and R-77 have ranges greater than the 18km of the AIM-54 and use much smaller antennas. However, we don't have much to go on to even guess what this new missile's seeker range would be.

Also, just to clear up, only Iran's shorter range AshMs (Kosar and Nasr) have ARH systems that allow them to be truly self-guided for their entire flight to target. Their longer range missiles (aka the C-802 based family) use a different and more problematic method of guidance. I could go into more detail but that would be placed in another thread. Needless to say, whether they be A2A or AshM, long range missiles need "help" to find their targets, in the form of some kind of mid-course guidance system.

 

[My-Analogous]

Iran should use these babies in SAM's. It will give Iran a good punch

 

[mohsen]

Iran should use these babies in SAM's. It will give Iran a good punch

we already have the 3rd khordad air defense system which it's specifications (75km in range and 30 km in altitude) are in par with russian BUK M3 which was unveiled few months ago (70km in range and 35 km in altitude) .

http://www.aparat.com/v/DdLJg

 

[haman10]

ALCON,

Some clarifications on how the original AIM-54 worked:
- The missile's midcourse guidance relied on an on-board autopilot system, which in turn received updates from the AWG-9 radar as to the target's current position. This is similar to how semi-actively guided missiles are directed to their targets (such as the AIM-7Es and R-27Rs in the IRIAF's inventories).
- Then, in the last 18km before the target, the active radar seeker engaged the target itself.

To several points brought up:
- Could this missile be fired at a target with the assistance of ground-based radars? Possibly, but depending on launch altitude, the ability of the A2A to "talk" to the ground based radar might present a problem. Also, this would severely limit where you could fire the missile, as there would need to be a compatible radar nearby. Also, terrain presents a major problem if you're relying on ground-based radar for your target tracking.
- Is if feasible the Fakour90 has an active seeker with greater range than the AIM-54A? Certainly. Active-radar seeker tech has improved a great deal since the 1970s. The ARH seekers used by missiles like the AIM-120 and R-77 have ranges greater than the 18km of the AIM-54 and use much smaller antennas. However, we don't have much to go on to even guess what this new missile's seeker range would be.

Also, just to clear up, only Iran's shorter range AshMs (Kosar and Nasr) have ARH systems that allow them to be truly self-guided for their entire flight to target. Their longer range missiles (aka the C-802 based family) use a different and more problematic method of guidance. I could go into more detail but that would be placed in another thread. Needless to say, whether they be A2A or AshM, long range missiles need "help" to find their targets, in the form of some kind of mid-course guidance system.

Damn, just like IMF, your posts are so informative that i've read them all at least 2 times.

Tnx for being here.

 

[eagle2007]

ALCON,

Did some more reading and I suspect the use of ground-based radars to provide mid-course guidance for an A2A is technically more feasible then I initially stated. It would work something like how Track-Via-Missile (TVM) works on many long-range SAMs/ABMs today.

On practicality though, I still rate it pretty low IMHO. The limitations inherent to ground-based radars will be a major limiting factor in use it and I'm not sure how easy it would be to build a mid-course guidance system compatible with both an airborne radar system (the AWG-9 for example) and one or more ground-based ones. It would be like making a SAM capable of receiving inflight mid-course updates from something like an AEW&C bird. Sounds great, but logistically tricky.