SAM Defense Alternative : A Possible Solution?

[Fighter488]

I am presenting a scenario here and want to know the opinions from the PDF members, prticularly those who are more familiar with millitary aviation. I may be wrong, but then if so, please point out the reason.

It is always a problem to have a more accurate SAM particularly of long range type. The technology is too complex and probably costly as well. Plus there are only few who have mastered the technology to some satisfaction. SA-300, SA-400, Pariot, Arrow systems are some notables of this category. Indian and Pakistani efforts on these are still either pre-mature or in its infancy. Countering an air assault from most modern planes, flying at several tens of kilometers above ground and carrying high precision bombs, is a nightmare scenario for any developing country. They, simply do not have the technology to counter such an attack.

Now many of these developing countries are quite at an ease on UAV developments, notable Pakistan, India, Turkey and Iran, to name a few. These UAVs, in absence of satellite guided navigation and controll, have a sever restrictions on thier operating range. The signals to/from these far and distant UAVs are simply lost in space and hence they loose communication from control station. This way they are operated within safe distances wher these UAVs can be in
constant touch with control station, in absence of satellite communication. If we have to incease the range of this communication one way is to increase the height of antenna of the
ground station; this again have some practical limitations of its own. Increasing frequency of communication is an option but again with some limitations.

I was thinking that when a UAVs can be controlled from a ground station, so the UAVs can also be controlled from an 'air born' control station, possibly in the form of another UAV! This controlling UAV may be working close to ground station and like an Airborn reconaissance aircraft, the only difference being that it would be distributing instructions to these cluster of UAVs, that may have gone out-of-range or out of line-of-sight of control tower/ station on the ground. It will also be working as an intermidiate reciever of the information from these cluster of UAVs, and relaying this data to the ground station. The ground station can then be used to use the information from the UAVs, with which is has no direct communication.

So keeping this scenario in mind is it a possible solution? Will it not increase the operating ranges of UAVs? Are UAVs, operated this way would not be quite a lethal options, keeping in mind if they are carrying Air-to-Air-Missiles to confront and intercept any air intrusion from enemy aircraft? These UAVs can be easily replaced and serviced indigenousely. Plus they can be more easily used in hazardous or dangerous missions besause of being un-manned. I think this solution may be cost effective and technoligically less demanding.

What you say about it?

Fighter

 

[amalakas]

How would the Air to Air weapons on the UAVs be guided ?

Fighter planes have very complex and expensive radars on board to aim,lock,fire,and guide said weapons, if you have to equip UAVs with such systems they become rather expensive.

 

[Jigs]

How would the Air to Air weapons on the UAVs be guided ?

Fighter planes have very complex and expensive radars on board to aim,lock,fire,and guide said weapons, if you have to equip UAVs with such systems they become rather expensive.

MQ-9 Reaper has a built in radar and a targeting system that can fire air to air stinger missiles. Also LGBs and Hellfire missiles. It does it all.

 

[Fighter488]

How would the Air to Air weapons on the UAVs be guided ?

Fighter planes have very complex and expensive radars on board to aim,lock,fire,and guide said weapons, if you have to equip UAVs with such systems they become rather expensive.

Don't you think that a UAV in itself is quite a complex peice of equipment? Air-to-Air missile Technology is being developed quite extensively by many countries now a days. Moreover, a UAV flying at quite a high altitude, in itself is more NEARER to the target than a ground based SAM system. It mean a rather shorter range of air-to-air missile should serve the purpose, on board UAV.

An Air-to-Air missile, even used on conventional manned aircraft would be as complex, as one on the UAV. Does developing such a missile for UAV is more complex than developing a system simmiler to SA-300 or SA-400?

 

[Fighter488]

MQ-9 Reaper has a built in radar and a targeting system that can fire air to air stinger missiles. Also LGBs and Hellfire missiles. It does it all.

Then it could be a NICE FIT for such a UAV system, Jigs! Right?

 

[Jigs]

Then it could be a NICE FIT for such a UAV system, Jigs! Right?

I am sure they could. The U.S. fly's them by satellite so the ground station sends the inputs to the sat which then beams it down to the UAV. Giving the MQ-9 a range of just under 6,000km. If a aircraft would do that role like a mothership that would be interesting. Maybe AWACS platforms can have that integrated. For a UAV to control another UAV you would need a really powerful one that could fly really high and take inputs from extremely long distances and then send them very long distances to the UAV in question. The UAV sending the inputs would also need to be receiving inputs from the guy controlling that one. It seems complex but certainly can be done.

 

[AbuSalam]

UAV have airborne range..flight hours..then how can u keep a cluster of UAV..one has to be close to target..then another one relaying all command instructions etc..I think the best option is to mod existing MIG 's and make it fly without a pilot.

 

[AbuSalam]

I am sure they could. The U.S. fly's them by satellite so the ground station sends the inputs to the sat which then beams it down to the UAV. Giving the MQ-9 a range of just under 6,000km. If a aircraft would do that role like a mothership that would be interesting. Maybe AWACS platforms can have that integrated. For a UAV to control another UAV you would need a really powerful one that could fly really high and take inputs from extremely long distances and then send them very long distances to the UAV in question. The UAV sending the inputs would also need to be receiving inputs from the guy controlling that one. It seems complex but certainly can be done.

The more u put powerful RF trasmitters..u need more battery power..means more weight...less time airborne..

 

[Fighter488]

UAV have airborne range..flight hours..then how can u keep a cluster of UAV..one has to be close to target..then another one relaying all command instructions etc..I think the best option is to mod existing MIG 's and make it fly without a pilot.

Same restrictions are with conventional manned aircrafts dear! Cluster of UAVs can be used in shifts and turns, as be the case.
How much would it cost for a MIG to convert to an unmanned aircraft? Any idea? I think it is quite complex, time consuming and costly option, if it is to happen. I doubt it could be done.

 

[Jigs]

The more u put powerful RF trasmitters..u need more battery power..means more weight...less time airborne..

You would need a larger UAV is all. Something like a modified and maybe enlarged global hawk.

 

[Dash]

I was thinking that when a UAVs can be controlled from a ground station, so the UAVs can also be controlled from an 'air born' control station, possibly in the form of another UAV! This controlling UAV may be working like a Airborn reconaissance aircraft, the only difference being that it would be distributing instructions to these cluster of UAVs, that may have gone out-of-range or out of line-of-sight of control tower/ station on the ground. It will also be working as an intermidiate reciever of the information fro these cluster of UAVs, and relaying this data to the grund station. The ground station can then be used to use the information from the UAVs, with which is has no direct communication.

I dont think UAVs transfer co-ordinates or targets btn themselves.
All they can do it transmit data from a range fitted with a camera, it could be a video camera or a Infrared camera.

The UAV to detect a fighter or any sort of thing like that need to have a long range radar, there is a possibility that UAVs are smaller and it can detect a fighter before the later detects it, however this is justa probability.

They can act as recce planes and also fire ground targets and airborne helis through A2A missiles (which still in testing phase for US UCAVs). But giving the location of target to ground station or the airborne station is actually minimal.
Like Jigs said you need to have a very powerful radar, and looking at the size of the UAV this type of radar type is currently not feasible to be fitted to any.

 

[Jigs]

In 2002 a MQ-1 did actually try to shoot down a Iraqi MiG-25 it fired a stinger missile at it but the seeker became distracted and missed. MiG-25 then shot the MQ-1 down.

 

[amalakas]

MQ-9 Reaper has a built in radar and a targeting system that can fire air to air stinger missiles. Also LGBs and Hellfire missiles. It does it all.

It is not the same, far from it.

The stinger missile is a shoulder launched light AA missile. If the targeting system for a stinger can be put on a tube to be carried by a person, then it fits on the uav, but larger systems carry a cost and weight penalty

and it is IR guided. (at least the versions I know)

A radar capable of aiming and firing AA missiles effectively is not a trivial matter.

What kind of missile would the UAV carry ? if it is an AMRAAM type then you need mid course guidance, also the missiles fired from fighter planes such as the F15 take advantage of the high speed of the carrier plane to achieve their ranges, fired from a much slower moving target (UAV), they wouldn't get such a range.

A navigation radar is not the same as a fire control radar

 

[S-A-B-E-R->]

guys about signal transmission we can use air ship or stragnant ballons with signal bouncing capability also an air to air def can be lethal if intigrated with AWCS and cheap ucavs in large no with ir missels and ir sensors can make a deadly wall by swarming the target ...it is possible at least it can hinder the enemys movement in air space until the big fighters arrive...my 2cent

 

[Fighter488]

It is not the same, far from it.

The stinger missile is a shoulder launched light AA missile. If the targeting system for a stinger can be put on a tube to be carried by a person, then it fits on the uav, but larger systems carry a cost and weight penalty

and it is IR guided. (at least the versions I know)

A radar capable of aiming and firing AA missiles effectively is not a trivial matter.

What kind of missile would the UAV carry ? if it is an AMRAAM type then you need mid course guidance, also the missiles fired from fighter planes such as the F15 take advantage of the high speed of the carrier plane to achieve their ranges, fired from a much slower moving target (UAV), they wouldn't get such a range.

A navigation radar is not the same as a fire control radar

Then what is the possible solution? A fast moving, bigger and bulkier UAV or a better AMRAM type missile?