The Lightning Barak 8

[bloo]

This is getting ridiculous.

Learn to read and then understand what you have read. My reasoning is mentioned right in the first page so there is not need for me to repeat it again. I suggest you go back and read it.

I have and it doesn't look any less infantile the second time I read it.
I have links to back up my retort whereas your claims are nothing short of biased imaginings.

As I said, IAI have already tested Barak-8 against targets mimicking high flying maneuverable jet fighter bombers.
Giving it adequate force to shut out enemy fighters for the IAF.
There is no reason for you to believe otherwise, or were you present during the tests that you have such a varying "expert" opinion?

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

I have and it doesn't look any less infantile the second time I read it.
I have links to back up my retort whereas your claims are nothing short of biased imaginings.

As I said, IAI have already tested Barak-8 against targets mimicking high flying maneuverable jet fighter bombers.
Giving it adequate force to shut out enemy fighters for the IAF.
There is no reason for you to believe otherwise, or were you present during the tests that you have such a varying "expert" opinion?

If you did read my comments, Then you should comment on its SPEED and RANGE and not demolish a stawman about its ability to take down aircraft's within its limited range.

 

[NKVD]

I have and it doesn't look any less infantile the second time I read it.
I have links to back up my retort whereas your claims are nothing short of biased imaginings.

As I said, IAI have already tested Barak-8 against targets mimicking high flying maneuverable jet fighter bombers.
Giving it adequate force to shut out enemy fighters for the IAF.
There is no reason for you to believe otherwise, or were you present during the tests that you have such a varying "expert" opinion?

He has no idea what he saying neither technical expertise on this matter further engagement with him is waste of time.he is another Google fanboy's breed.

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

He has no idea what he saying neither technical expertise on this matter further engagement with him is waste of time.he is another Google fanboy's breed.

LOL...... don't be such a whiny bitch.

If you are a Man, act like one.

Don't go bitching around behind someone's back That is just disgusting and pathetic.

 

[NKVD]

LOL...... don't be such a whiny bitch.

If you are a Man, act like one.

Don't go bitching around behind someone's back That is just disgusting and pathetic.

Ohh Mann You are to stupid to accept you caught off guard by many member's here.

You have no idea about following matter or technical expertise
All your post are just based on amatuer assessment in this case

All your Rants have no ground to hold neither you have any substantial sources to prove your point if you have some counter off our arguments on technical ground some data or analysis or article in following matter then please present it if not The shut the **** UP

Ps: dare to quote me again, when you got substantial data analysis to proove your Rant's

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

Ohh Mann You are to stupid to accept you caught off guard by many member's here.

You have no idea about following matter or technical expertise
All your post are just based on amatuer assessment in this case

All your Rants have no ground to hold neither you have any substantial sources to prove your point if you have some counter off our arguments on technical ground some data or analysis or article in following matter then please present it if not The shut the **** UP

Ps: dare to quote me again, when you got substantial data analysis to proove your Rant's

LOL....... opinions of a whiny bitch means nothing to me or to any sensible people here.

All you comments are running commentary on ME ............ more proof of your whiny bitchy nature.

Does the N in NKVD stand for NAPUNSAK ? Do clarify.

 

[NKVD]

LOL....... opinions of a whiny bitch means nothing to me or to any sensible people here.

All you comments are running commentary on ME ............ more proof of your whiny bitchy nature.

Does the N in NKVD stand for NAPUNSAK ? Do clarify.

@WebMaster
@Oscar

please takecare this filthy troll

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

@WebMaster
@Oscar

please takecare this filthy troll

LOL.... more whining. Grow a pair kiddo.

 

[bloo]

If you did read my comments, Then you should comment on its SPEED and RANGE and not demolish a stawman about its ability to take down aircraft's within its limited range.

Unfortunately you're the one insisting with the strawman argument of yours. If the scientists themselves are saying its a capable SAM platform who are you to say otherwise? All your points about speed and range are nothing more than a tangent.
But since you are insisting I will entertain your "hypothesis".
Lets say a PAF F-16 flying noe crosses the border, and somehow by either flying past multiple ground radars or an aerostat radar gets detected and a Barak-8 is launched.
First thing we should know is that there is no way that an F-16 can outmanuever an 80g missile. It can probably use chaffs or ECM to confuse Barak-8, but in case of detection by AWACS or aerostat radars effectiveness of chaffs in such a network centric environment(C3ISTAR) is more or less diminished, also ECCM.
If the plane is not going back and is within the reach of Barak-8's acceleration, the operators will engage.
In a head on interception, radars both ground and air will more or less quite easily guide the missile to its target.
As for a chase scenario even if Barak-8s max altitude is, (it probably is 50-60% its range) lets say 1/4th its range(17.5km) it can still climb higher than the F-16, its service ceiling being 16km, while its rate of climb is around 250m/s; whereas the Barak-8 is accelerating at over Mach 1-2, faster than the F-16.
It was never about speed it was always about acceleration, coz the F-16 will almost always be engaged within Barak-8s acceleration envelope by the SAM operators.
So the F-16 starting to climb from its noe flight to escape cannot climb as fast as Barak-8 or while turning back losing its speed cannot outrun Barak-8's 70km ranged envelope accelerating at Mach 2.

Its not officially reported as of yet but the IAF's Barak version will probably come with a higher range.
As for any other "countermeasures" that the pilot may employ it is the same for every other SAM systems around the world, the systems will not be less SAM if it somehow misses due to unconventional circumstances. But that was not your point, you were worried about speed and range.

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

Unfortunately you're the one insisting with the strawman argument of yours. If the scientists themselves are saying its a capable SAM platform who are you to say otherwise? All your points about speed and range are nothing more than a tangent.
But since you are insisting I will entertain your "hypothesis".
Lets say a PAF F-16 flying noe crosses the border, and somehow by either flying past multiple ground radars or an aerostat radar gets detected and a Barak-8 is launched.
First thing we should know is that there is no way that an F-16 can outmanuever an 80g missile. It can probably use chaffs or ECM to confuse Barak-8, but in case of detection by AWACS or aerostat radars effectiveness of chaffs in such a network centric environment(C3ISTAR) is more or less diminished, also ECCM.
If the plane is not going back and is within the reach of Barak-8's acceleration, the operators will engage.
In a head on interception, radars both ground and air will more or less quite easily guide the missile to its target.
As for a chase scenario even if Barak-8s max altitude is, (it probably is 50-60% its range) lets say 1/4th its range(17.5km) it can still climb higher than the F-16, its service ceiling being 16km, while its rate of climb is around 250m/s; whereas the Barak-8 is accelerating at over Mach 1-2, faster than the F-16.
It was never about speed it was always about acceleration, coz the F-16 will almost always be engaged within Barak-8s acceleration envelope by the SAM operators.
So the F-16 starting to climb from its noe flight to escape cannot climb as fast as Barak-8 or while turning back losing its speed cannot outrun Barak-8's 70km ranged envelope accelerating at Mach 2.

Its not officially reported as of yet but the IAF's Barak version will probably come with a higher range.
As for any other "countermeasures" that the pilot may employ it is the same for every other SAM systems around the world, the systems will not be less SAM if it somehow misses due to unconventional circumstances. But that was not your point, you were worried about speed and range.

Here is the problem.

1. In chase mode, the kill zone of Barak 8 is a grand 20 KM or less.
2. Its speed in chase mode is said to be mach 2, which means it has an advantage of only mach 1 or 0.8 mach over the enemy fighter.

With stand off missiles, Barak 8 will cannot ever engage the enemy fighters, it can only engage a limited number of bombs.

 

[bloo]

Here is the problem.

1. In chase mode, the kill zone of Barak 8 is a grand 20 KM or less.

Who told you that? Give us a source of your info?
In tail chase the operators will only engage when the fighter is within Barak-8's acceleration envelope.
It only needs a few kilometers run down the fighter. As the fighter cannot accelerate faster than the missile.
As I said its not about the speed but acceleration.
It will never reach Mach-1 as fast as Barak-8 reaches Mach-2.

2. Its speed in chase mode is said to be mach 2, which means it has an advantage of only mach 1 or 0.8 mach over the enemy fighter.

With stand off missiles, Barak 8 will cannot ever engage the enemy fighters, it can only engage a limited number of bombs.

I think you are underestimating just that 1 mach.
Which is still faster than the plane, a proximity charge on the Barak-8 will ensure the fighter is destroyed, it doesn't even need the kinetic kill, provided the fighter is even traveling at Mach-1 continuously, which probably it isn't during noe or it can't if it is carrying multiple standoff missiles..

With standoff missiles, the enemy fighter will have to climb high the advantage of noe flight gets diminished right there and then. Either a fast interceptor will be scrambled to engage it or multiple Baraks and other shorter ranged SAMs(SPYDER's altitude is 9km) will engage it. Since it has already been detected by long ranged ground radars forget aerostats or AWACS.
You are talking as if there will be only 1 Barak per fighter, that never happens, multiple missiles are sent to engage 1 such fighter. And as I said, the max altitude of a Barak is higher than the fighter so your point itself is moot.
It is a head on interception not tail chase, so during standoff missile interception the radars have already detected it and the 70km range is more than enough to take out the target, whose both speed and flight ceiling is reduced due to the heavier glide bombs and/or cruise missiles it is carrying.
However again, the crux of your point more or less is a tangent, during "Air interdiction" the opposing force will more likely has to have air superiority before engaging such acts of precision bombing. Before that, SAMs will always kill the opposing force if air superiority is not achieved.

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

Who told you that? Give us a source of your info?
In tail chase the operators will only engage when the fighter is within Barak-8's acceleration envelope.
It only needs a few kilometers run down the fighter. As the fighter cannot accelerate faster than the missile.
As I said its not about the speed but acceleration.
It will never reach Mach-1 as fast as Barak-8 reaches Mach-2.

Consider this, for Astra with a range of 80 km, in chase mode its range is 20 km. Now this is a missile that goes at mach 4 - 4.5
Why would you even assume that a Barak 8 with a range of 70 km has a chase mode zone of more than 20 km ? That too with a reported speed of Mach 2 ?

I think you are underestimating just that 1 mach.
Which is still faster than the plane, a proximity charge on the Barak-8 will ensure the fighter is destroyed, it doesn't even need the kinetic kill, provided the fighter is even traveling at Mach-1 continuously, which probably it isn't during noe or it can't if it is carrying multiple standoff missiles..

With standoff missiles, the enemy fighter will have to climb high the advantage of noe flight gets diminished right there and then. Either a fast interceptor will be scrambled to engage it or multiple Baraks and other shorter ranged SAMs(SPYDER's altitude is 9km) will engage it. Since it has already been detected by long ranged ground radars forget aerostats or AWACS.
You are talking as if there will be only 1 Barak per fighter, that never happens, multiple missiles are sent to engage 1 such fighter. And as I said, the max altitude of a Barak is higher than the fighter so your point itself is moot.
It is a head on interception not tail chase, so during standoff missile interception the radars have already detected it and the 70km range is more than enough to take out the target, whose both speed and flight ceiling is reduced due to the heavier glide bombs and/or cruise missiles it is carrying.
However again, the crux of your point more or less is a tangent, during "Air interdiction" the opposing force will more likely has to have air superiority before engaging such acts of precision bombing. Before that, SAMs will always kill the opposing force if air superiority is not achieved.

If you are going to go outside the scope of Barak 8 discussion, then there is no point in this. I am not discussing IAF strategy, but how effective Barak 8 is.

Fly nape of the earth, the radar will not even pick up the aircraft till its too late. When not, the aircraft too will detect the radar lock and missile launch long before to take necessary evasive manoeuvres and countermeasures.

Non one has claimed Barak 8 is useless, only its has limited capabilities.

 

[bloo]

Consider this, for Astra with a range of 80 km, in chase mode its range is 20 km. Now this is a missile that goes at mach 4 - 4.5
Why would you even assume that a Barak 8 with a range of 70 km has a chase mode zone of more than 20 km ? That too with a reported speed of Mach 2 ?

Why???? Coz Barak-8 is a SURFACE TO AIR MISSILE not an air to air missile that's why.
An A2A missile has a low powered engine to reduce weight so as to not hamper the T2W ratio of the fighter too much.


What? How could you come to such an uneven reasoning?
If you were true then there would be no SAM in the world worth investing on, hell if you were true SA-2s in the vietnam war would have had no kill at all.
Dude give me a link or keep it to yourself.

I don't know what you do for a living but they are scientists, and IAI has years of experience creating missiles and every other defence equipment, I would believe them over you any day, so yes Mach 2 it is.

If you are going to go outside the scope of Barak 8 discussion, then there is no point in this. I am not discussing IAF strategy, but how effective Barak 8 is.

Fly nape of the earth, the radar will not even pick up the aircraft till its too late. When not, the aircraft too will detect the radar lock and missile launch long before to take necessary evasive manoeuvres and countermeasures.

Non one has claimed Barak 8 is useless, only its has limited capabilities.

Seriously? Again with the strawman argument. YOUR POINT IS MOOT IF YOU DON"T CONSIDER THESE POINTS. This is the scope you should consider, these are not your games where the missile is a standalone system, it is supported by multiple military systems which ensures success.
Fly nape of the earth and fighter will not be be able to conduct your "standoff missions".
As for the "take necessary evasive manoeuvres and countermeasures", I already explained they are useless in a C3ISTAR environment, where SAMs, fighters and multiple radars both ground and air are targeting the fighter.
And maneuver how? When Barak 8 does 80g while the fighter does not even do 20g.
It doesn't matter what the plane's radar detects it will be too late when the missile is actually launched regardless of the countermeasures.

What world are you living in?
You think a fighter can go past multiple ground radars, aerostat radars and SAMs with no resistance.
Please go read about NOE flight properly this time. Noe flight doesn't mean that the fighters are completely invisible to ground radars it just means they are out of range until a certain area. Explain to me, how the planes will go past multiple ground radars covering the border?

Answer me this?
Excluding its speed, both range and altitude of SPYDER missiles is lower by whole lot than that of Barak-8. Why would IAF and 3 other airforces buy those?

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

Why???? Coz Barak-8 is a SURFACE TO AIR MISSILE not an air to air missile that's why.
An A2A missile has a low powered engine to reduce weight so as to not hamper the T2W ratio of the fighter too much.

What? How could you come to such an uneven reasoning?
If you were true then there would be no SAM in the world worth investing on, hell if you were true SA-2s in the vietnam war would have had no kill at all.
Dude give me a link or keep it to yourself.

I don't know what you do for a living but they are scientists, and IAI has years of experience creating missiles and every other defence equipment, I would believe them over you any day, so yes Mach 2 it is.

If the scientists know everything then why do you even bother to debate ? In all probability the dual pulse motor on Astra is the same one used on barak 8.

India does not have any other dual pulse motor project that can be provided for Barak 8.

Seriously? Again with the strawman argument. YOUR POINT IS MOOT IF YOU DON"T CONSIDER THESE POINTS. This is the scope you should consider, these are not your games where the missile is a standalone system, it is supported by multiple military systems which ensures success.
Fly nape of the earth and fighter will not be be able to conduct your "standoff missions".
As for the "take necessary evasive manoeuvres and countermeasures", I already explained they are useless in a C3ISTAR environment, where SAMs, fighters and multiple radars both ground and air are targeting the fighter.
And maneuver how? When Barak 8 does 80g while the fighter does not even do 20g.
It doesn't matter what the plane's radar detects it will be too late when the missile is actually launched regardless of the countermeasures.

What world are you living in?
You think a fighter can go past multiple ground radars, aerostat radars and SAMs with no resistance.
Please go read about NOE flight properly this time. Noe flight doesn't mean that the fighters are completely invisible to ground radars it just means they are out of range until a certain area. Explain to me, how the planes will go past multiple ground radars covering the border?

Answer me this?
Excluding its speed, both range and altitude of SPYDER missiles is lower by whole lot than that of Barak-8. Why would IAF and 3 other airforces buy those?

Manoeuvre does not mean a 9 g somersault, any escape move is a manoeuvre. So correct yourself. You do not need the aircraft primary radar to detect the lock, its radar warning receivers will detect the lock. so correct yourself there too. Finally I am making a limited point about Barak 8 regarding its limitations that limits its utility. I am sure it fits into the Area defence plans of the IAF or they would have bothered to buy it. That is again a strawman you float.

There are defensive measures and then there are offensive plans to counteract those defence measures. That is warfare 101. I do not think I need to explain how the network can be brought down There is more than one way to do it. Books hae been written on it.

I have no idea why you insist on talking about SYPDER missile. That is your pet project and peeve, not mine. I don't see why I should even bother to answer that.

 

[bloo]

If the scientists know everything then why do you even bother to debate ?

Exactly, why did you even start to debate when you are clearly implying that you know more than the scientists who actually made the missile. Take the high road.

In all probability the dual pulse motor on Astra is the same one used on barak 8.

India does not have any other dual pulse motor project that can be provided for Barak 8.

Wow.
Where are you coming up with all this? Please give me one link somewhere, anywhere that can enlighten a plebian like me to your bullshit.

BTW Barak has a two stage rocket motor, while astra single.
SO wrong again you are.

Manoeuvre does not mean a 9 g somersault, any escape move is a manoeuvre. So correct yourself.

Now now you correct yourself, don't quote me to your own assumptions. I already explained about how escaping(tail chase) and manuevering(BFM, ACM) can be both dealt with. Don't break my sentences to your liking just to show how obstinate you are.

As I said when in Barak-8s flight envelope the fighter is neither fast enough to go past Barak-8 and nor does it have any countermeasures to block it, not jammers not chaffs.

You do not need the aircraft primary radar to detect the lock, its radar warning receivers will detect the lock. so correct yourself there too.

Strawman argument again.
This has nothing to do with what I'm saying.
I have nothing to correct.

There are defensive measures and then there are offensive plans to counteract those defence measures. That is warfare 101. I do not think I need to explain how the network can be brought down There is more than one way to do it. Books hae been written on it.

Please enlighten me to your "warfare 101" , name 1 quote from 1 book where the fighter can somehow magically destroy interceptors, dodge past all SAMs, remain undetected by multiple ground radars and aerial radars, and still drop PGMs without air superiority while flying noe?
You just keep implying without actually answering anything that I have propounded.

BTW, NONE OF THIS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH YOUR ORIGINAL POINT SPEED AND RANGE WHICH I ALREADY PROVED MOOT.

I have no idea why you insist on talking about SYPDER missile. That is your pet project and peeve, not mine. I don't see why I should even bother to answer that.

Because you can't answer, Mr. strawman argument. As simple as that.