Questions and Ideas

victor1985 wrote:Question: can a missile guide herself from the sun? Like old sailors?

With celestial navigation, missiles, aircraft, submarines, ... use stars for navigation purposes. The Russian R-29 SLICBM/SLBM is an example of a missile that has celestial navigation capability.

The celestial navigation system on many Russian missiles can also operate in conjunction with "artificial stars", i.e., satellites with, for example, laser reflectors.

I've never tinked to a sattelite as an artificial star. What is best is how can be that jammed? Cause i dont think how. Also a vertical and horizontal compass can be used.

victor1985 wrote:I've never tinked to a sattelite as an artificial star.

That's the reason I put the term in quotation marks; "artificial star" is not a standard term.

By the way, using satellites with laser reflectors for navigation involves the active mode of the navigation system.

victor1985 wrote:Question: can a missile guide herself from the sun? Like old sailors?

Actually I just remembered that cosmonaut Valerij Kubasov developed a navigation method, as part his candidate of science degree dissertation at MAI, that involved rocket engine burns maximally referenced with respect to the direction to the sun to change the trajectory of an spacecraft from an existing trajectory to the desired one.

I have forgotten the details, but at least a subset of burns would have been with the spacecraft directly and continuously pointing in the direction of the sun or directly pointing away from the direction to the sun.

The idea was to sacrifice some efficiency but to achieve simplicity and reliability in extreme situations like in an emergency re-entry during a situation involving lots of instrument failure.


Spacecrafts have also extensively used navigation systems involving automatic and manual tracking of the sun as a reference.

I have reading some wikipedia articles about ARH and semi active radar homing. But as i suspected is easy to take countermeasures. All you need to do is guess the frecvency that a missile work for data link and homing. Ofcourse change of frecvency is an issue but no so big if you manage signal receivers. A question: how is best atack or defend when is comes about EW and ECW?

Would be a ideea to connect a sistem like nebo to civilian electric distribution sistem. Or at least at high tension lines that power up factories.

Also a mobile wind turbine or water turbine would be a ideea.

victor1985 wrote:Would be a ideea to connect a sistem like nebo to civilian electric distribution sistem. Or at least at high tension lines that power up factories.

Where you have prepaired firing/radar positions you have electric distribution system in place and elswhere you have to use generators.

Civilian power stations and electrical grids will be among the many things an attacker will target...

Not if the distribution is underground. At least some special lines for the radar sistem. Also bombing entire distribution of curent means a lot of ammo. Power plants can be well defended by special nebo troops already conected to line when war starts. Also will be best that to be a offensive variant in wich you have all tools to adapt the nebo to enemy power sistem.

Radar batteries operate better with their own power generation systems... it is just more reliable an safer... and less vulnerable to sabotage.

I talk about a complementary sistem added to the existing one just for increase distance and long time operations in same position.

Maximum unambiguous range can be improved whit multiple radars? I have something in mind but i cant exprime right now. If the two radars emiting each a wave one after other would be better? The upcoming waves would be two per one emitting. So the delay of emiting would be greater but acurate receiving.

victor1985 wrote:Maximum unambiguous range can be improved whit multiple radars? I have something in mind but i cant exprime right now. If the two radars emiting each a wave one after other would be better? The upcoming waves would be two per one emitting. So the delay of emiting would be greater but acurate receiving.

This is why radars have multiple PRF. So it can do jittering or switching PRF to reduce doppler or range ambiguities.

Stealthflanker wrote:

This is why radars have multiple PRF. So it can do jittering or switching PRF to reduce doppler or range ambiguities.

PRFs are considered for cases where one or more range measurement errors occur. It is assumed that target ranges are quantized into integer range gate numbers. However, if your intention is to increase the value of the unambiguous range, it is necessary to increase the PRT, this means you have to reduce the PRF.

I read continuosly on a site about radar. For example i finded out that you can find a target not only by measuring the trip of radio waves and divided by 2 by also comparing signal streght which returns from a target. For example if a target has returned a signal from the maximum strenght of front lobe and compare this result whit the next one and whit the directivity of antena you got enemy position.

GarryB wrote:Radar batteries operate better with their own power generation systems... it is just more reliable an safer... and less vulnerable to sabotage.

What about a "charge while moving mechanism" in wich the wheels when when brake and speed up charge the battery of radar? Or a solar panel complementary sistem that charge while moving and station? A dedicates truck whit solar panels could charge. Or better the returning electromagnetic waves from target to be converted into electrical energy for battery.

Can flashes from photo cameras be a solution for night vision of planes that fly high? Also a wired surface to air missile whit a wire of 10 km may be done? Would bypass any EW

That green stuff is groovy, but at the end of the day each vehicle has an engine and can be fitted with a very efficient small gas turbine generator that will continue to work even when it is cloudy or when the unit is stationary...

No.. camera flashes would be too far away to effect the NV technology of a high flying aircraft... if the aircraft is using thermal imagers they wont even see the light.

Using normal cameras the flashes could be confused with muzzle flashes and attract unwanted attention...

A wire guided missile would be too slow to fire up at aircraft... a simple command guided missile like Pantsir-S1 would be ideal.

Or what about a sistem in which a small turbine is plug on the water sistem of cities or villages? The movement of water would be made by location own pumps.

GarryB wrote:That green stuff is groovy, but at the end of the day each vehicle has an engine and can be fitted with a very efficient small gas turbine generator that will continue to work even when it is cloudy or when the unit is stationary...

What if the solar panels have also some tiny plates of metal that reflect light to fotovoltaic panels? Well to be honest how much power a radar needs and how much normal electrical sistem of a single house can provide? And how much a radar could provide? I think also that all is about movement of electrons that means a heavy generator would move slow so then have few small generators that move faster....

Well is not about hitting a aircraft. First whit the flash.... The flash would see low fling aircrafts and missiles that fly close but arent yet seen.
About the wiree missile: is suppose to be for close targets also a wire is not so heavy...beeing free at the end of launcher means missile can fly fast whitout being interrupt by wire. For same cause wind would not be a problem. And ofcourse EW no matter

victor1985 wrote:Can flashes from photo cameras be a solution for night vision of planes that fly high?

There are various light sources, e.g., lasers that are used in jamming and supressing various optical sensors.

victor1985 wrote:Also a wired surface to air missile whit a wire of 10 km may be done? Would bypass any EW

Actually there is a wire-guided missile used by the Osa surface-to-air missile system for the exact reason that you suggested.

I have forgotten its designation and can't find an image of it now, but it somewhat looks like the version of the Saman-M target drone shown below. It's noteworthy features are the following.

1- To make wire guidance feasible, it is subsonic.

2- To make it subsonic it has a warhead that is about three time as massive as the warhead of the system's normal missiles (from memory); it has a shorter rocket motor; and it has a rounded nosecone (more efficient at subsonic speeds).


A variant of the Saman-M target drone:

Yes but a supersonic missile has problems to steer. A subsonic one will easilly correct his flightpath so can easilly intercept the supersonic missile. That means a subsonic wired missile has some chances against a faster enemy rocket. Thinking that the steer of wired one is made by wire so thus faster would have a better trajectory and so a better intercept rate. Also if no EW can be against wired one means only a wrong calculation when the missile was maked can be. But that is hard to believe. So the probabillity of interception of such a missile is high. And what you do whit a f22 for example if none of missile lauched hit the target? Well nothing.....