Bank-to-turn techniques are for noncircular airframes, like the American Tomahawk cruise missiles. Remember...A missile IS an aircraft, no matter its variant. An F-16 is a noncircular airframe. The AIM-9 Sidewinder and others are circular airframes so they usually have skid-to-turn FLCS.
All missles use skid-to-turn which is essentially the missle turning without the need to bank; for instance, an aircraft banking 180 degrees then pulling up to acheive a tight turn can be considered a skid-to-turn, minus the bank. AIM-120, R-77, and SD-10 all use this method.
With sufficient structural rigidity, a skid-to-turn (STT) missile can very well pull 20, 30 or even 50g, especially when it employ 'bang-bang' guidance...
Once an aircraft banks 180 degress it can be said that it utilizes the STT technique, so how does this contribute to G-force? my understanding is that high G-forces are contributed to these factors (these are basic simple forms):
The objects velocity, an appropriate example would be when astronauts get spung around, the faster the ecceloration the higher the G-force. This means a missle is likely to pull higher G-forces at higher speeds.
g-force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The term g-force is technically incorrect as it is a measure of acceleration, not force
Now if and when a missle pulls 20, 40, or 50+ G's its structural integrity would be in jeopardy, for instance, a missle utilizing fins also utilizes servos or something similar; this means the fins are not a fixed flight surface, thus they are controled by a servo type mechanism, this means they would be more vulnerable to breaking off under extreem G-force. The question is can a servo type mechanism support fins at 50+ G's without disintegrating from the missle? And can fins servive the violent force without bending out of shape?
Certain aircraft have been know to warp out of shape when pulled beyond their limit.
General design, and or flight surfaces, such as canards, fins, or tvc; for instance, the R-77 utilizes lattice fins for better manuverability at high speed.
Vympel R-77 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The missile's maneuverability relies on the lattice work fins at the rear. The R-77's overall aerodynamic configuration is more efficient at high speed and high angles of attack than the conventional deltas used on the AIM-120 and most other missiles
The above example is a perfect example of a missle pulling a high G load at high speeds due to the fact that it was designed to opperate under those conditions.
Most missle work off of the same principles, so how does one go from a 12 G missle to a 40 or 50 G missle? This is no small margin.
Also, theoretically many things are possible but does that mean it can be done?
The Chinese are saying the SD-10 is a 40 G missle does the US or anyone else have such a missle? If the US built such a missle i would beleive it to be possible. In short,
do such missles actually exist? And can it be varified by an authentic source? This is what i'm trying to find out.
