Do flares and chaff even work anymore? Surely in this current year even the dumbest AI installed on a missile would be all like "LMAO, nice try faggot"?
>>62543007>even the dumbest AI installed on a missile would be all like "LMAO, nice try faggot"?Why haven't they done that then?
>>62543007A lot of the missiles out there aren't exactly the newest models, but the improvements in guidance systems are driving a move towards Directional Infrared Counter Measures (DIRCM) systems.
>>62543007>FlaresIt depends greatly on the seeker. Generally the older the seeker is the more likely it'll go for the flare.>ChaffUsed to put a false return between (you) and the enemy radar (which could be in the missile, plane, or both). There's a whole laundry list of ways to circumvent it and they all generally are just ways to look around the chaff or reacquire after the radar can see the target again. All these methodologies wouldn't be needed if chaff didn't work to start with.
>>62543007Chaff can still give radar-guided missiles problems, by essentially "jamming" your radars (on the launch platform and/or the missile itself) with a large return from its own radio waves. The fact that it's non-maneuvering means that a missile with good software is less likely to mistakenly lock onto it, but there's still an effect.Flares... are different. They still work against IR missiles with "traditional" hot spot seekers, but IIR/staring IR/FLIR-style seekers aren't really going to be fooled by a blob of white pixels that isn't in the shape of a jet; at least, not if the image recognition software is any good. That's where DIRCM becomes important, because it's powerful enough to jam the seeker and make the whole "screen" turn white.One thing that I'm not sure about is the towed decoys that the USAF was so happy with a while back. I don't know if they work against IIR at all; they may be purely for use against radars.
>>62543063what if there's a whole flock of hypersonic anti-ship missiles inbound?
>>62543063Are these installed on a pod or is the plan to install it in the fuselage somewhere?
>>62543007The newer types of flares are neat because they're tailored to be similar to the wavelengths a hot jet engine emits rather than just relying on being the hottest, brightest signature the missile sees.
>>62543151
>>62543147Those systems are meant for helicopters>>62543151Afaik, they're mounted on the fuselage.
>>62543147Then it would probably be useless because AFAIK Hypersonic ASM's aren't IR guided. You use an entirely different methodology to defeat them: jam their guidance signals, maneuver evasively, and intercept with your own missiles or SHORAD as the last resort.
>>62543007AI doesn't solve the problem of soft kill systems, just makes their job harder. AI can help distinguish noise from signal. But to the extent the sensors feed it useless data, AI can't do much.
>>62543063Which are already obsolete. IRIS-T (and probably a lot of other IIR missiles) are completely immune to modern DIRCM, unless the chinks or vatnigs have suddenly made a 50 year jump in laser tech.
>>62543155>newer types of flaresThat's mid-late cold-war tech, not new. Besides, modern (1990s) missiles doesn't care about flares at all anymore, they lock onto the shape of the aircraft, so unless your flare distorts the shape of the aircraft, it won't do shit.
>>62543007Chaff works for a few seconds, western flares are incredible advanced and they can at least degrade the sensor sensivity, they're being replaced by electronic CM.
>>62543007yes they work. why would you think they don't?you don't need a complete spoof of a missile seeker to make it miss it's intended target. often times speeds and kinetic energy demands are such even having a missile momentarily alter heading towards a decoy before reacquiring the actual target is enough to force it outside of it's lethal zone. there's plenty of real world examples of SAMs and air to air missiles coming extremely close to their target but they're just outside the range the fuze deems it should go off.
These things aren't just about tricking the missile. Chaff is there to outright block radar, and flares can be blindingly bright to IR cameras. Being blind is going to hurt the missiles accuracy no matter how smart its control logic is.
>>62543078>>62543334>(paraphrasing) new missiles don't give a shit about flares I know it has an imaging seeker but does anyone know why the -9x fired by a superbug at a su22 over syria a while ago bit on flares?
>>62543734I think preflaring still works, especially if you're shitting out tons of them and the missile decides to lock onto them instead of the real target from the get-go. https://youtu.be/ew5_0zJYC3w
>>62543734Pilot never mentioned anything about flares:>By then the Su-22 was in striking distance of friendly forces and it began to dive, releasing its weapons in the process, before making a climb out after the attack. Based on the rules of engagement that were briefed to the naval aviators, Mob locked the Su-22 up from behind with an AIM-9X Sidewinder and fired.>The missile zipped off the Hornet’s wing rail trailing smoke but quickly disappeared. It wasn’t clear why the missile failed to track the Su-22 or where it had gone. Mob quickly selected an AIM-120 AMRAAM and fired once again. He noted how long it took for the missile to fire off the Super Hornet’s “cheek” station located along the outer edges of its air intakes.Might have been a statistical dud 9X.
>>62543007>Do flares and chaff even work anymore?They increase the signal to noise ratio. Modern radars can tell how far away something is and how fast it is moving through the doppler effect, but by pointing the chaff dispensing aircraft's radar at it, you can make it effectively impossible to calculate distance with the doppler effect. Modern countermeasures against heat seeking systems can similarly defeat the tricks that have been developed to defeat the previous generation of countermeasures. >Surely in this current year even the dumbest AI installed on a missile would be all like "LMAO, nice try faggot"?it will always prove to be easier to generate noise than it will be to accurately identify the correct target in a noisy environment quickly enough for that information to still be useful.
>>62543147You have the old script sar, you should've said hypersonic anti-ship ballistic missile
Chaf can't stop a surveillance aircraft.
>>62543147You avoid those by shooting down while maneuvering, it's actually pretty easy because they're hot targets with zero maneuverability.
>>62543007>missile equipped with modern AIAre you fucking insane m8, it would constantly redirect itself to the closest African country and kill countless civilians. Missiles don't have AI for a reason jfc they are tools and we tell them what to do from start to finish.
>>62547055i gotchu pham
>>62547069LMAO. I've heard those described as "a fireworks display for doomed sailors". That's when they're even operational.
>>62543334just drop paper airplanes out the back
>>62543007There are still a lot of older missiles in service that go for flares and we tend to use a lot of flares at once. As for chaff you tend to put that between yourself and the missile/attacker. It'll fuck of the radar enough that it's impossible to get a lock on through it.
>>62543147They suffer even more from chaff than normal. Wake plasma fucks with radar so hypersonic missiles are already dealling with a shitty radar picture. Chaff fucks it up even more to the point the missile is basically blind.
>>62543197NTA but I'm kinda surprised nobody is using IR to validate radar contacts.
>>62547484what if they're receiving targeting information from a satellite/drone/plane?
>>62545130https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2azWZ4QcrPAIn the video you can see the su22 flares
>>62543007there's a little bit of lag because the seeker needs to survive decades in storage, to fly on a pylon in very cold high altitude and direct sunlight and artic, tropical wet or desert climate. it also needs to get that lock at +30kmbut yes, you're right. computing is basically free and AI isn't even needed.
>>62547447didn't one of them recently intercept a missile inbound to a US ship after it somehow got past other defenses? they clearly work
>>62543197>AFAIK Hypersonic ASM'sopinion discarded. hypersonics are useful only because they're fast. they're otherwise unremarkable.
>>62551030>>62547447https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-destroyer-intercepted-missile-launched-by-houthi-rebels-in-red-sea/ar-BB1hA6EX?ocid=BingNewsVerpso yeah calling CIWS a "fireworks display for doomed sailors" is a fucking retard take. This isn't the Vatnigger Navy where they're full of empty vodka bottles.
>>62543007You are correct. But the image recognition tech that even your chinkphone has nowadays haven't filtered to missiles. Once that happens, it's a whole new ball game. Instead of flares, planes might have holographic projections to confuse image sensors. Or wide beam lasers to blind them.
>>62543007pretty much, even pre-"AI" from my 1980s Jr college comp-graphics would be easy to write a program that discounts anything outside of known aircraft's flight envelope.in grammar school on rainy days one of the games was 'race track' where you draw a race track on graph paper and your Kar would be able increase/decrease speed by one square in X,Y per move. That literally all you'd need to defeat flares and chaff.
>>62547489I imagine the reasons go cost/material>manufacturing time>extra points of failure>actual engineering problems. Its one of those things nobody actual considers doing until something breaks the current methods and their workarounds for interference.>>62548871Plasma fucks with communications even worse. Once you start going that fast you deaf, blind, and dumb to the outside world. You use hypersonics to hit stationary targets before the enemy can properly respond or in the final terminal stage once your target can't move fast enough to dodge. That's why ballistic hypersonics suck against ships they go hypersonic too early and can't track the ship well as its moving. Unless you use the soviet approach of just making it a nuke then it doesn't matter if you don't get a direct hit.
>>62543063Why don't you just use the tape that makes you shine brighter then the sun and plaster that all over the rooftops?
>>62543197>AFAIK Hypersonic ASM's aren't IR guidedthere are no hypersanic ashms that aren't ballistic so you're not wrong, just for a different reason
