Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Air Defense Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: AMRAAM Sams for Australian please.
Aussiegunner    9/5/2003 12:00:23 AM
See the article on AMRAAM SAM's? The system would be perfect for Australia. This is because it is readily deployable in defence of the army in the field, but has a long enough range and an anti-cruise missile capability that make it good enough to defend our facilities at home. Seems like the obvious choice to me.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6   NEXT
Interrested    RE:AMRAAM Sams for Australian please - Interested   9/7/2003 9:51:55 AM
Sky Bow II / Tien Kung II CHinese HQ-9 / FT-2000 based om S-300 but improved Iranian:SAM-250 bit similar to the SA-5 but very much upgraded (range 250 km) I agree with Massive's layered concept, Fighters awacs etc....but I never intended the arrow/amraam combination to be stand alone, none of the systems have a prayer on their own. Al systems can do is fill a niche in the whole battlespace.
 
Quote    Reply

Heorot    RE:AMRAAM Sams for Australian please. - Interrested   9/7/2003 4:16:25 PM
I was thinking more along the line of blast effect. I know that JDAMs are GPS guided, I just used the term seeker as shorthand. A piece of electronics wired into the bomb is still likely to be vulnerable to blast damage as I dont see that part of the JDAM as being heavily armoured like the rest of the bomb.
 
Quote    Reply

Heorot    RE:AMRAAM Sams for Australian please. - Interrested   9/7/2003 4:18:02 PM
If you look at the pictures her, you will see what I mean. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/jdam.htm
 
Quote    Reply

Interrested    RE:AMRAAM Sams for Australian please. - Interrested   9/8/2003 1:35:16 AM
OK, I don't know how well protected the JDAM tail section is, probably not so good as for most uses it's good enough. But my point was not that aussie would be attacked by JDAM's..rather that the techniqe could be used. It would not be hard to give a JDAM like guidance kit protection against HE frags....that you are left with hitting a antenna..a lot more difficult certainly if some redundancy was built in (e.g. more than one gps antenna) What do you reckon?
 
Quote    Reply

Interrested    RE:AMRAAM Sams for Australian please. - Interrested   9/8/2003 1:35:17 AM
OK, I don't know how well protected the JDAM tail section is, probably not so good as for most uses it's good enough. But my point was not that aussie would be attacked by JDAM's..rather that the techniqe could be used. It would not be hard to give a JDAM like guidance kit protection against HE frags....that you are left with hitting a antenna..a lot more difficult certainly if some redundancy was built in (e.g. more than one gps antenna) What do you reckon?
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    RE:AMRAAM Sams for Australian please - Massive   9/8/2003 1:55:08 AM
I would deploy the missiles out front with the fighters behind it - the weapon with the shortest range nearest the enemy. If the coverage is that good from ships, why not make some small ships with modular concept, as you are going to need a lot of patrolboats anyhow for the northern coast and the Indonesian archipelago. If something major came its way - then it would have to head for home in a hurry. AMRAAM agains cruise missiles? Well provided the cruise missiles fly high altitude, which they don't, you'll need many AMRAAM batteries to provide coverage. The "usher" function I would leave to cheapish trainers like the Hawk or a fighter with a look down shoot down radar - like a cheap F-16A.
 
Quote    Reply

Massive    RE:AMRAAM Sams for Australian please - Thomas   9/8/2003 2:21:50 AM
Would that work in Australia? You have a huge amount of space with point targets distributed within that space. Forward deployment of the AMRAAM SAM would potentailly end up in those targets not being appropriately covered. I would have thought that a forward screen of AEW&C supported fighters with the AMRAAM catching anything that snuck through would be a more effective set-up?
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunner    RE:AMRAAM Sams for Australian please    9/8/2003 6:15:00 AM
I agree with Massive, that the AMRAAM's would be used to defend point targets, especially the airfields, against cruise missile attack. The material I have read quite specifically mentions that the AMRAAM is capable of this, and I see no reason not to believe it. Sure, a longer range system like Patriot or Arrow would be better, but I doubt that our government is going to go to the expense of buying one, unless there is a real risk of TBM attack out of Indonesia. For work against manned aircraft and cruise missiles, a layered defence of AWAC's/Over the horizon radars/F-18's/Ammrams and RBS-70 should be completely adequate for our needs. On AMRAAM vs JDAM, I doubt a manned bomber would get close enough to one of our airbases to launch a JDAM, expecially from 70km, which would require a high altitude approach. If this happenned often enough to make a difference, something would have gone extremely wrong with our fighter defences and we would be in deep trouble. You can't keep on firing $400000 AMRAAM's against $20000 guided bombs so we would eventually be overwhelmed. That said, do you really think it is likely that anybody is going to develop a competitor for JDAM any time soon? It would have to rely on a competing GPS network to the US one. Does such a thing exist, and would it survive a war with a major US ally intact?
 
Quote    Reply

Massive    RE:AMRAAM Sams for Australian please    9/8/2003 7:45:57 AM
It would be nice to have both Arrow and AMRAAM. However, I suspect that we will be lucky to end up with either.
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    RE:AMRAAM Sams for Australian please    9/8/2003 7:46:27 AM
For point defence against cruisemissiles I would use guns and stingers. The missiles come low down (possibly) and you won't get much radar range anyhow. If the Norwegeans are using them for point defence, you have to remember that the country is largely vertical, and it is difficult to avoid getting on high ground.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics