RBS-70 Bolide Mk-II missiles, sights supplied to Pakistan

[amardeep mishra]

I think the chances of fooling an IIR sensor is higher

@A.P. Richelieu
Instead of blatantly saying things you have no idea about, why don't you prove me wrong? I've worked on some of the algorithms I've mentioned above my friend.
And as for obstructing the beam, one can indeed use "smoke" and other laser jammers.
An IIR guided missile is always better than a beam rider.
And lastly instead you should learn to pay more attention to engineering literature than blogs etc.Kindly read my posts thoroughly.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

@A.P. Richelieu
Instead of blatantly saying things you have no idea about, why don't you prove me wrong? I've worked on some of the algorithms I've mentioned above my friend.
And as for obstructing the beam, one can indeed use "smoke" and other laser jammers.
An IIR guided missile is always better than a beam rider.
And lastly instead you should learn to pay more attention to engineering literature than blogs etc.Kindly read my posts thoroughly.

You think that you can get a smoke screen deployed in the time it takes for the missile to hit the target?

A laser jammer blocks reflections back to a laser pistol used to measure the speed of a car.
A laser beam is unidirectional, and the jammer will have to be located pointing upwards towards the target.

 

[MastanKhan]

Good news because RBS-70 provide protection to 6th Armor division which is part of strike formation at Sialkot.

Why would you disclose that?

 

[SQ8]

@A.P. Richelieu
Instead of blatantly saying things you have no idea about, why don't you prove me wrong? I've worked on some of the algorithms I've mentioned above my friend.
And as for obstructing the beam, one can indeed use "smoke" and other laser jammers.
An IIR guided missile is always better than a beam rider.
And lastly instead you should learn to pay more attention to engineering literature than blogs etc.Kindly read my posts thoroughly.

Please post your theoretical proof, so that the opposing party can do so as well.

 

[amardeep mishra]

Please post your theoretical proof, so that the opposing party can do so as well.

I've already done so, kindly read my previous posts thoroughly. My main point is a missile with fire and forget feather is inherently superior to a missile without it.that's all!

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Please post your theoretical proof, so that the opposing party can do so as well.

I don't think you can prove how "modern" a solution is.
There is certainly research documented on how to defeat IIR seekers with laser,
and smoke can block the line of sight, if it can be deployed in time, but I would like to understand
how a working laser jammer would be designed.

I've already done so, kindly read my previous posts thoroughly. My main point is a missile with fire and forget feather is inherently superior to a missile without it.that's all!

It all depends on the resulting kill probability,
and a fire and forget missile which can be jammed is not neccessarily superior to
a missile which cannot be jammed in practise.

Go ahead and show a working approach.
It is unlikely that you can detect the launchers after redeployment,
so it will be difficult to put smoke where it needs to be and
I hope you agree that it is too late after launch.

 

[SQ8]

I've already done so, kindly read my previous posts thoroughly. My main point is a missile with fire and forget feather is inherently superior to a missile without it.that's all!

They do not refer to Laser tracking but IIR imaging which is again technology on later generations of missiles and certainly not on any MANPAD. Now, please advise as to how a Laser beam riding Manpad is inferior to something utilizing a mix of IR/UV non-imaging seekers?

The following operators would disagree with the bold

• Argentina[5]
• Australia
• Bahrain
• Brazil[6]
• Chile
• Czech Republic[7]
• Finland[8]
• Indonesia
• Iran
• Ireland
• Latvia
• Lithuania[9]
• Mexican Army
• Pakistan
• Singapore
• Sweden
• Thailand
• Tunisia
• United Arab Emirates
• Venezuela

Also include the British StarStreak system in laser guided weapons

 

[amardeep mishra]

It all depends on the resulting kill probability,
and a fire and forget missile which can be jammed is not neccessarily superior to
a missile which cannot be jammed in practise.

Hi dear @A.P. Richelieu
And what do you think determines the hit probability?As I have mentioned time and again,perhaps you repeatedly fail to miss the point,that an IIR guided missile has an active imager that takes the image of the target at a certain rate and then sends them to a computer for something called image correlation. Now a simple software algorithm written in either C,python or MATLAB will easily differentiate between a chaff/flare and the real target. In case you're in doubt you can go ahead and do this experiment all by yourself.Believe me it isnt difficult. What is difficult however,is to implement "centroid tracking" alongwith image correlation.
PS: C would be more natural way to implement your image correlation algorithm in a piece of hardware. However there are couple of boards out there that provide the flexibility of coding in python like intel galileo

Now, please advise as to how a Laser beam riding Manpad is inferior to something utilizing a mix of IR/UV non-imaging seekers?

Hi @Oscar
I am afraid you failed to read the "imaging" infra red seeker part?In case you did,kindly read my post once again.I strictly claimed that an IIR seeker is way superior to any beam rider.Thats all. The "imaging" part is what makes a hell lot of difference!The reason why some coutries still go for beam riding mechanism is simply because of itz lesser complexity vis-a-vis a completely fire and forget system like IIR or an MMW seeker. The job of seeker is to merely provide a reasonable estimate of LOS rate,closure rate etc.However we would additionally want the seeker to be resistant to certain degree of spoofing.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Hi dear @A.P. Richelieu
And what do you think determines the hit probability?As I have mentioned time and again,perhaps you repeatedly fail to miss the point,that an IIR guided missile has an active imager that takes the image of the target at a certain rate and then sends them to a computer for something called image correlation. Now a simple software algorithm written in either C,python or MATLAB will easily differentiate between a chaff/flare and the real target. In case you're in doubt you can go ahead and do this experiment all by yourself.Believe me it isnt difficult. What is difficult however,is to implement "centroid tracking" alongwith image correlation.
PS: C would be more natural way to implement your image correlation algorithm in a piece of hardware. However there are couple of boards out there that provide the flexibility of coding in python like intel galileo

As pointed out, IIR can be blinded by a laser.
You have still to come up with a working idea to jam a beam rider.

 

[amardeep mishra]

As pointed out, IIR can be blinded by a laser.

It isn't that easy, read this-
http://spie.org/newsroom/5614-ir-imaging-seekers-may-be-very-resistant-to-laser-jamming

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

It isn't that easy, read this-
http://spie.org/newsroom/5614-ir-imaging-seekers-may-be-very-resistant-to-laser-jamming

And pray, which MANPAD implement such advanced functionality?

 

[Basel]

Why would you disclose that?

I have not disclosed any thing, what I posted is already aired on News channel of Pakistan that what I talked about here.