nelson_p@apollo.com (Peter Nelson) (04/21/89)
From: Peter Nelson <nelson_p@apollo.com> >>>Suprise! In Vietnam, Over Israel, and everywhere else that guided missiles ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>>have been used in combat, they have had actual hit percentages in the range >>>of 10% to 25%. The lower number reflects the performance of our intermediate >>>generation sparrows. The 33% kill rate for sparrow over libya should be a > ******* > [stuff deleted] >> >> What are the details for these figures? What missiles and what periods >> of time are they based on? I thought the Royal Navy claimed a 'hit >> rate' for AIM9L (Sidewinders) of >80% in the Falklands war. And ************* > Apples to Oranges. Sparrows are Radar Guided, Sidewinders are > Infra-Red seekers. Sparrows supposedly have a longer range and are > easier to lock on. Sidewinders are damn deadly. NOT apples to oranges. I am well aware that the two missiles use different guidance technology. But I was referring to the posters statements about 'guided missiles'. As you say, Sidewinders are 'damn deadly'. Moreover they are cheap and widely employed which probably means they represent a large percentage of the AAM's fired by western nations, which would tend to give them a lot of weight in the averages. So if the overall hit rate for guided missiles is 10% to 25% and Sidewinders are 80% then that suggests that the other missiles are pretty poor performers. Maybe radar guidance isn't such a good idea. How does the military test these birds? I saw an ad for a Lockheed drone where they bragged that it could hit 625 MPH. Big deal. I hope the Air Force also uses supersonic targets, high angle-of-attack targets, targets taking *intelligent* evasive action and targets using reasonable ECM. But I don't know. Does anyone know anything about this? I am not optimistic. In the Navy's test of the Phalanx they conveniently mounted it close to the water line so it was aimed up away from wave clutter and only fired at subsonic targets. Real Phalanxes are mounted up high and have to look down at the sea skimmers and try to pick them out of the clutter. Moreover, supersonic sea-skimming anti-ship missiles are already being tested (deployed?). Mission success, people's lives, and maybe even national security depend on complex weapon systems working properly in combat. That means the tests have to be as realistic as possible. Anyone who purposefully fudges a test to make it 'easy' should be treated as a traitor and punished accordingly. --Peter