Aircraft self-protection systems

T

Toblerone

Banned Member
Why don't we see self-protection systems on aircraft, similar to the Trophy system and other such systems that some modern tanks deploy?

Meaning, using all-around coverage to detect incoming threats and fire shrapnel at them. If it can be done to protect tanks from incoming missiles, then why not aircraft, which are the pinnacle of military technology?

Launching flares to confuse IR threats and jamming to confuse radar threats is way too passive and ineffective. I don't think modern missiles are really susceptible to that, if you're tracked and a missile is launched in relatively favourable conditions, you're screwed.
 
R

Rimasta

Member
Toblerone said:
Why don't we see self-protection systems on aircraft, similar to the Trophy system and other such systems that some modern tanks deploy?

Meaning, using all-around coverage to detect incoming threats and fire shrapnel at them. If it can be done to protect tanks from incoming missiles, then why not aircraft, which are the pinnacle of military technology?

Launching flares to confuse IR threats and jamming to confuse radar threats is way too passive and ineffective. I don't think modern missiles are really susceptible to that, if you're tracked and a missile is launched in relatively favourable conditions, you're screwed.
Click to expand...
I've actually heard the US military is looking into defensive lasers on aircraft hopefully being fielded before the 2030's. The reason being that the SAM and AAM threat has only grown in severity and sophistication so an added layer to aircraft defenses is being sought. I haven't heard details but it is being worked on.
 
S

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Toblerone said:
Why don't we see self-protection systems on aircraft, similar to the Trophy system and other such systems that some modern tanks deploy?

Meaning, using all-around coverage to detect incoming threats and fire shrapnel at them. If it can be done to protect tanks from incoming missiles, then why not aircraft, which are the pinnacle of military technology?

Launching flares to confuse IR threats and jamming to confuse radar threats is way too passive and ineffective. I don't think modern missiles are really susceptible to that, if you're tracked and a missile is launched in relatively favourable conditions, you're screwed.
Click to expand...
Weight. Soft kill systems work fine, hard kill systems for an aircraft would involve having to have some sort of launch system capable of engaging targets in a 360 degree bubble around the aircraft and aircraft have a far smaller payload fraction than a tank.
 
C

colay1

Member
The AF is exploring the possibility of intercepting A2A missiles under the MSDM initiative.


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/a...s-small-self-defence-weapon-for-fight-409219/
Lockheed reveals small self-defence weapon for fighters

19 FEBRUARY, 2015 BY: STEPHEN TRIMBLE WASHINGTON DC
The US Air Force is considering a Lockheed Martin proposal to adapt technology used for a ground-based missile defense system to protect fighters under attack in the air.

The Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) has invited proposals for a miniature self-defense munition concept study, seeking to develop a concept for a weapon to be dispensed from a fighter jet, hone in on an incoming missile and destroy it with a direct hit.

By replacing chaff, flares and directional infrared lasers, the so-called miniature self defence munition (MSDM) could revolutionise the concept of defensive countermeasures for tactical aircraft, says Frank St. John, vice-president of tactical missiles and combat manoeuvre systems at Lockheed’s Missile and Fire Control division.

“To kinetically engage as a countermeasure something that’s fired at you is an attractive possibility,” St. John says, “rather than just confuse or jam something that’s been fired at you.”
 
T

Toblerone

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
Can't they create a self protection pod that has short-range detection capability and can fire shrapnel in the area of the bottom hemisphere of the plane to protect against ground SAM, MANPADs or missiles from aircraft on the same altitude or lower then our plane?

Give Rafael 10 billion, they will make it happen with a weight of 300kg. :D

I would definitely go after such a systemfor fighter aircraft, even if I had to sacrifice the internal gun to make room/weight. For bomber aircraft there is plenty of weight/room available.

EDIT: Just saw the previous post,interesting that they mention homing in the incoming threat. Are they developing a counter missile? I would prefer a shotgun blast at close range. KISS.
 
oldsig127

oldsig127

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Toblerone said:
EDIT: Just saw the previous post,interesting that they mention homing in the incoming threat. Are they developing a counter missile? I would prefer a shotgun blast at close range. KISS.
Click to expand...
In which direction? "Shotguns" to cover a sphere would weigh an aircraft down like a B-17 covered in turrets to make the guns flexible (in the sense of being able to train and elevate).

Or assume that the enemy only (sportingly) fires from below or the rear quarter?

Not as easy as it might seem.

oldsig
 
Ranger25

Ranger25

Active Member
Staff member
Toblerone said:
It doesn't have to offer 360 protection. Anyway, if it's successfully implemented in tanks, AFVs and Humvees, I suppose it can be adapted to big airplanes like the A-10, the Super Hornets, the SU-35 and all strategic bombers.

http://www.aviatia.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Lrafale-vs-su-35.jpg
Click to expand...
Th US has lasers on nearly all rotary wing and most fixed wing system designed to blind incoming IR seekers. As listed above, DARPA has sent an RFP to industry for a more active system involving "mini missiles" for air to air interdiction of incoming Targets

Most can be gleaned on simple google searches.


Aviation week and flight Global both have multiple articles discussions this
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Toblerone said:
It doesn't have to offer 360 protection. Anyway, if it's successfully implemented in tanks, AFVs and Humvees, I suppose it can be adapted to big airplanes like the A-10, the Super Hornets, the SU-35 and all strategic bombers.

http://www.aviatia.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Lrafale-vs-su-35.jpg
Click to expand...
The Trophy system as deployed on MBTs weighs about one ton. This is the version that fires bursts of pellets. For larger SAMs, the addtion of mini anti-missile missiles might be necessary and this would add even more weight. For fighters, this is a pretty big weight penalty.

Trophy anti-missile system installed on Israeli tanks
 
C

colay1

Member
An aircrsft is fragile compared to an armored vehicle. You would want the interception to be as far away as possible and not constrain you from performing evasive maneuvers. A fire-and-forget munition provides these benefits
 
Last edited:
S

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
I doubt it'd catch on in formation flying either. Tanks have to manage Trophy with friendly infantry nearby but popping one of those things off with a wingman anywhere nearby, well, I think Martin Baker might have a run on ties that week.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top