AAM-N-10

[KJ_Lesnick]

Which had a better maximum range, the AAM-N-10 or the AIM-54?

[jcf]

Number of Eagles launched: 0

Number of Phoenix launched: probably in the hundreds

You do the math.

[Hobbes]

That may have had more to do with reluctance to use nuclear warheads than range considerations.

[Thiel]

That may have had more to do with reluctance to use nuclear warheads than range considerations.

The whole nuclear fall-out/ chance of starting WWIII does tend to put a damper on things.

[Maverick]

Kendra,

This might be of more help, given that we are talking about a hypothetical subject.

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app1/aam-n-10.html

The information given suggests that a 'normal' interception range would be around 110nm, with an 'aerodynamic' range of 160nm.

HTH,

Mav

[rickshaw]

Maximum ranges for Air-to-air missiles tend to be a bit unreal.  They are usually tested against unmanoeuvring targets which are drones which just fly nice and steady and straight so the missile can intercept them more easily.  In real life, missiles bleed energy very quickly whenever they have to manoeuvre and so their range falls off rather quickly.   Most of the ones claiming greater than 100 nm would have a hard time reaching that range in real life if the target detected them.  All that would be needed would be for the target to turn away and accelerate and the missile will fail to intercept.

[ChernayaAkula]

I'd love to see the aircraft you want to use to out-accelerate a Phoenix! Especially when you consider what types of targets these missiles were designed to engage.
I'd also guess that the people designing the missiles or writing the tactics know about the differences between head-on and tail-chase engagements. That ain't exactly, if you excuse the pun, rocket science and is probably why you only see ballpark figures.

[PR19_Kit]

As I read it the Phoenix climbed to around 100000 ft first, and then closed in to 10 nms or so from it's target, at Mach 5(!) before starting it's terminal, active guided, dive.

In those conditions the terms 'head-on' and 'tail-chase' are hardly relevent, the darn thing's going DOWNwards! I figure the time from the terminal guidance coming on-line to impact would be around 15 secs, hardly time for the crew to react to the missile's existance, let alone accelerate.

[rickshaw]

Problem is once the sustainer ceases firing, the missile is coasting.  Once it starts to manoeuvre it bleeds away energy and hence velocity very quickly and starts to slow.   In the time, even at Mach 5 it takes for the missile to reach 100+ nm, the target only has to start manoeuvring itself, turn away and the range suddenly starts increasing rather than decreasing.  The missile's motor has ceased firing and so it can't make up the difference.    The target only has to detect the initial radar lock on to know that a launch is likely and so it starts manoeuvring then, not when the missile's own radar turns on.    Once the missile fails to intercept, it just turns back towards it's own target (the Carrier battle group).  I have read references which place the AIM-54's effective range at half its claimed maximum range as a consequence.

[Old Wombat]

Gotta agree with Brian, can't remember the reference titles but I have read where the effective combat range of the AIM-54 was only about 60-65nm.

Given that there is only a 10nm difference in the max. range of the 2 weapons (100nm vs 110nm) I would suggest that there wouldn't be a significant effective range difference - except if the AAM-N-10 was using a nuclear warhead (as this was not its primary warhead - a "large high-explosive charge" was to be the main warhead type), in which case, maybe, if you were lucky you'd get an effective range against a massed bomber formation of about 75-80nm.

[ChernayaAkula]

<...> The target only has to detect the initial radar lock on to know that a launch is likely and so it starts manoeuvring then,<....>

Tactics should make up for that. Tomcat crews probably knew precisely at what ranges they could attack such-and-such target flying at  such-and-such speeds. So they didn't launch the Phoenix at 100 miles against a Tu-16, but at 80. Even that should give the Phoenix ample time to catch the Badger.
Also, doing a 180 in a bomber at attack speeds also takes time and bleeds off airspeed. Airspeed that will have to be picked up again. Even a dashing Tu-22M will take some time to get up to speed. Once it is at speed, any hard manoeuvring is out of the question.

Some Iraqi Foxbats may have had luck outrunning a Phoenix, but that's something I'd only try once. By the second time, the Tomcat crew will hold-off firing a bit longer, allowing the missile to get into range. And a Mach 2.5+ Foxbat also isn't that manoeuvrable.

[rickshaw]

<...> The target only has to detect the initial radar lock on to know that a launch is likely and so it starts manoeuvring then,<....>

Tactics should make up for that. Tomcat crews probably knew precisely at what ranges they could attack such-and-such target flying at  such-and-such speeds. So they didn't launch the Phoenix at 100 miles against a Tu-16, but at 80. Even that should give the Phoenix ample time to catch the Badger.
Also, doing a 180 in a bomber at attack speeds also takes time and bleeds off airspeed. Airspeed that will have to be picked up again. Even a dashing Tu-22M will take some time to get up to speed. Once it is at speed, any hard manoeuvring is out of the question.

Some Iraqi Foxbats may have had luck outrunning a Phoenix, but that's something I'd only try once. By the second time, the Tomcat crew will hold-off firing a bit longer, allowing the missile to get into range. And a Mach 2.5+ Foxbat also isn't that manoeuvrable.

So, effectively you're agreeing with me that the effective range is substantially shorter than the maximum?

Basically the extremely long range interceptions during trials were publicity stunts, nothing more.

I'd actually be much more interested in the snap-down and snap-up ranges for a missile.  That would determine how much altitude difference between the firer and target there could be and hence how good a missile is at snap-shooting, which IMO is a great deal more useful than trying to take out a target over-the-horizon.  I understand that the Super-530 was and still remains the best missile in the Western armoury at that trick (50,000 feet difference IIRC from Jane's).