RAM coating on Anti-ship missiles
- Thread starter rabs
- Start date
Even if it were completely effective (completely preventing radar detection), it would last exactly until it enters the target's EO/IR sensor horizon.
A system like RAM (in IR-homing-all-the-way mode) would be able to counter it, once it enters missile range afterwards. All common CIWS systems include a FLIR or other EO/IR sensor suite too of course.
A system like RAM (in IR-homing-all-the-way mode) would be able to counter it, once it enters missile range afterwards. All common CIWS systems include a FLIR or other EO/IR sensor suite too of course.
RAM coating will only help in the side and up detection. If the missile is heading towards the ship, it will present its front profile. Usually that will be dominated by the radome, which is going to be radar absorbent and frequency selective. The two qualities are needed for the seeker to operate, less interference, more signal gain, more signal to noise ratio, more resistance to stray emissions. But it also reduces the RCS.
Now for the second part, the thermal emission, the plume behind the missile is going to have a cross section larger than the physical cross section of the missile. From a forward view, this heat will form a corona around the missile's cross section form. This is what the IR sensors will pick up. To counter this, you have to reshape the exhaust nozzle in order to shape the plume and reduce this thermal cross section, like trying to make this plume as thin as possible.
Now for the second part, the thermal emission, the plume behind the missile is going to have a cross section larger than the physical cross section of the missile. From a forward view, this heat will form a corona around the missile's cross section form. This is what the IR sensors will pick up. To counter this, you have to reshape the exhaust nozzle in order to shape the plume and reduce this thermal cross section, like trying to make this plume as thin as possible.
The body of the missile will also show up pretty well on IR sensors, though smaller than the plume.
To be fair, it could also use a non-conventional navigation method that does not need a radar dome or IR seeker window. Inertial navigation, GPS, and such.
Something along the lines of the planned AGM-28C, or the AGM-131/131A (both with INS and radar-absorbant material). Though of course no one would waste that trying to hit a moving target at standoff range.
Khairul Alam
New Member
Does any missile currently claim to come with RAM?
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #7
I think I need to re phrase my question. I understand that eventually the missile would be picked up on IR sensors and engaged with CIWS, but would not RAM coating considerably degrade a ships ability to engage the missile at longer rangers, making salvo attacks considerably more effective.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Well, as we are talking supersonics the question is how easy the ionisation from the missile is to pick up by radar. To put the question in other words: Does RAM on a supersonic missile serve a purpose?
Of course. It will prevent detection and/or fire control radar aquision. Just like F-117/F-22 case, but to somewhat greater extent due to much smaller size, much simpler shape, and (sometimes) much lower altitude.
Basically, whats why i dont believe in F-117/F-22 invulnerability. Such big things with such complex shape MUST reflect in order of magnitude more. And it is more or less accepted fact what 80x styled FC radars could already pick up stealth cruise missiles.
Khairul Alam
New Member
Refer to this thread. Its a treasure trove! Hail Grand Danois!! 
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5621
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5621
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Ah, but the low altitude works against the supersonic cruise missile. Density of atmosphere at low level vs the high altitude means a significantly (exponentially) increased signature from ionisation. Stealth fighters work in a different environment than the supersonic cruise missile. Low level helps out vs radar horison and takes advantage of clutter, but if the asset dedicated to picking up the cruise missile is a E-2C/D or an AESA carrying Hornet, then we will have to take a look at the RCS of the plasma cloud.
LOS FC radars are usually close to the target they track...
Yes, from one side they indeed increase the signature. From the other side reflection from water is also greatly increased which makes stable tracking and fuse detonation much harder. Plus, of course, large ionisation tail might work like decoy.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Hence the movement towards multimode seekers. (?)
The original question was if it was a practical idea to put RAM on supersonics. Outside of shaping, RCS reducing measures like RAM seems to hit diminishing returns quite early.
I believe any AAW system (area or point defense) should be able to cope with incoming targets using RF/EO/EW (as discussed amply above). The key issue is reacton time from detection to kill. A supersonic ASM already has the advantage of reducing reaction time of the defensive AAW system, so I do not see RAM as a factor in the case of a supersonic ASM.
There may be a case for RAM in subsonic ASMs since they are relatively slower, thereby producing less exhaust plume and body heat. They also tend to be sea skimmers.
There may be a case for RAM in subsonic ASMs since they are relatively slower, thereby producing less exhaust plume and body heat. They also tend to be sea skimmers.
The original unmanned ferrets (which significantly influenced the future development of modern cruise missiles) used RAM mats (and they were literally "mats". Latter models used RAM paint as the tech evolved.
Close-range defence dont work very well against supersonic AShM's performing end-game evasion. On the hand, at 7-8 km range no RAM can save AShM's from effective radar tracking.
But RAM can greatly increase AShM's survivability in long-range approach phase. Enemy AWACS, interceptors and AA missiles will have much harder time to shot down such AShM.
Please describe how your AShM will perform "engame evasion".
"at 7-8 km range no RAM can save AShM's from effective radar tracking."
Your second second comment contradicts the first. Perhaps you can describe how you see the engagement/non-engagement scenario.
AWACS, Interceptors and AA missiles will have a harder time to shoot down AShMs since that is not what they are tasked to do. That job is left to the surface shooters (CG/DDG/FFG).
Last edited: