Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Changed line(s) 151,152 (click to see context) from:
As with air-to-air, guns have been a consistent method of ground attack since the dawn of military aviation. Pilots of early fighter aircraft quickly realized that the machine guns they had installed for air-to-air work [[StandardHolllywoodStrafingProcedure could also be used to strafe]] "soft" ground targets, like infantry, (horse) cavalry, buildings, and light vehicles. As specialized ground attack aircraft were developed, so were heavier guns focused on destroying harder ground targets that would be difficult to otherwise hit with a bomb, like tanks and small fortifications. Some aircraft took this concept to extremes, with in some cases dozens of guns of various calibers decorating their noses and wings. The epitome of this trend is perhaps the enormous GAU-8 "Avenger" 30mm rotary cannon famously mounted on the US Air Force's A-10 Warthog, which was designed to enable to the A-10 to efficiently destroy Soviet armored columns in the event of World War III, and has made it very popular amongst the ground troops it supports.
to:
As with air-to-air, guns have been a consistent method of ground attack since the dawn of military aviation. Pilots of early fighter aircraft quickly realized that the machine guns they had installed for air-to-air work [[StandardHolllywoodStrafingProcedure [[StandardHollywoodStrafingProcedure could also be used to strafe]] "soft" ground targets, like infantry, (horse) cavalry, buildings, and light vehicles. As specialized ground attack aircraft were developed, so were heavier guns focused on destroying harder ground targets that would be difficult to otherwise hit with a bomb, like tanks and small fortifications. Some aircraft took this concept to extremes, with in some cases dozens of guns of various calibers decorating their noses and wings. The epitome of this trend is perhaps the enormous GAU-8 "Avenger" 30mm rotary cannon famously mounted on the US Air Force's A-10 Warthog, which was designed to enable to the A-10 to efficiently destroy Soviet armored columns in the event of World War III, and has made it very popular amongst the ground troops it supports.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Added example(s), Crosswicking, General clarification on work content
Added DiffLines:
!!Guns
As with air-to-air, guns have been a consistent method of ground attack since the dawn of military aviation. Pilots of early fighter aircraft quickly realized that the machine guns they had installed for air-to-air work [[StandardHolllywoodStrafingProcedure could also be used to strafe]] "soft" ground targets, like infantry, (horse) cavalry, buildings, and light vehicles. As specialized ground attack aircraft were developed, so were heavier guns focused on destroying harder ground targets that would be difficult to otherwise hit with a bomb, like tanks and small fortifications. Some aircraft took this concept to extremes, with in some cases dozens of guns of various calibers decorating their noses and wings. The epitome of this trend is perhaps the enormous GAU-8 "Avenger" 30mm rotary cannon famously mounted on the US Air Force's A-10 Warthog, which was designed to enable to the A-10 to efficiently destroy Soviet armored columns in the event of World War III, and has made it very popular amongst the ground troops it supports.
Although guns can be quite accurate in the hands of a skilled pilot, the biggest issues with guns as a modern air-to-surface weapon are shallow magazines, low penetrative power, and short range:
* Although ammo is cheaper and lighter than bombs or missiles, it still takes up weight and space inside (or hanging off of) an airplane. As modern guns have tended towards extremely high rates of fire to try to ensure a hit in high-speed air-to-air combat, it is very likley the pilot will run out of ammo after only a few bursts. The argument can be made that a precision guided weapon, with a larger warhead and higher probability of kill is a better use of the space and weight.
* Even the mighty GAU-8 is likely to have difficulty with modern tank armor, compared to the 1970's tanks it was designed to destroy, and reinforced concrete bunkers are unlikely to be penetrated. Modern missiles using tandem armor-penetrating warheads, or bunker-busting missiles and bombs, may be more reliable and worth the increased cost.
* But the biggest reason guns are disfavored these days is the short range. Simply put, the pilot must get very close to the target to engage it, and in any sort of contested environment, this exposes the aircraft to every sort of ground- or air-based anti-aircraft weapon imaginable. For a force that can count on near-total air supremacy, like US counter-insurgency forces enjoyed during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, guns may still be viable ground attack weapons: see the AC-130 series of "flying artillery bases" for an extreme example, or the use of various chain guns on attack helicopters. But the moment the opponent has any sort of effective ground-based air defense or fighter cover, it becomes basically impossible to safely get close enough to the target to shoot a gun at it. The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine provides a vivid demonstration of this effect; both sides possess a strong enough air defense to make flying anywhere near the front line at anything higher than treetop altitude basically a complicated form of suicide, and gun runs are impossible to set up. Both sides have resorted to the use of missiles, glide bombs, and even unguided rockets fired on a ballistic trajectory to supplement the fire support provided by artillery and drones.
All that being said, since most fighter and attack aircraft still mount a gun for one reason or another, pilots still train with them and will take the opportunity for a strafing run if it presents itself.
----
As with air-to-air, guns have been a consistent method of ground attack since the dawn of military aviation. Pilots of early fighter aircraft quickly realized that the machine guns they had installed for air-to-air work [[StandardHolllywoodStrafingProcedure could also be used to strafe]] "soft" ground targets, like infantry, (horse) cavalry, buildings, and light vehicles. As specialized ground attack aircraft were developed, so were heavier guns focused on destroying harder ground targets that would be difficult to otherwise hit with a bomb, like tanks and small fortifications. Some aircraft took this concept to extremes, with in some cases dozens of guns of various calibers decorating their noses and wings. The epitome of this trend is perhaps the enormous GAU-8 "Avenger" 30mm rotary cannon famously mounted on the US Air Force's A-10 Warthog, which was designed to enable to the A-10 to efficiently destroy Soviet armored columns in the event of World War III, and has made it very popular amongst the ground troops it supports.
Although guns can be quite accurate in the hands of a skilled pilot, the biggest issues with guns as a modern air-to-surface weapon are shallow magazines, low penetrative power, and short range:
* Although ammo is cheaper and lighter than bombs or missiles, it still takes up weight and space inside (or hanging off of) an airplane. As modern guns have tended towards extremely high rates of fire to try to ensure a hit in high-speed air-to-air combat, it is very likley the pilot will run out of ammo after only a few bursts. The argument can be made that a precision guided weapon, with a larger warhead and higher probability of kill is a better use of the space and weight.
* Even the mighty GAU-8 is likely to have difficulty with modern tank armor, compared to the 1970's tanks it was designed to destroy, and reinforced concrete bunkers are unlikely to be penetrated. Modern missiles using tandem armor-penetrating warheads, or bunker-busting missiles and bombs, may be more reliable and worth the increased cost.
* But the biggest reason guns are disfavored these days is the short range. Simply put, the pilot must get very close to the target to engage it, and in any sort of contested environment, this exposes the aircraft to every sort of ground- or air-based anti-aircraft weapon imaginable. For a force that can count on near-total air supremacy, like US counter-insurgency forces enjoyed during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, guns may still be viable ground attack weapons: see the AC-130 series of "flying artillery bases" for an extreme example, or the use of various chain guns on attack helicopters. But the moment the opponent has any sort of effective ground-based air defense or fighter cover, it becomes basically impossible to safely get close enough to the target to shoot a gun at it. The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine provides a vivid demonstration of this effect; both sides possess a strong enough air defense to make flying anywhere near the front line at anything higher than treetop altitude basically a complicated form of suicide, and gun runs are impossible to set up. Both sides have resorted to the use of missiles, glide bombs, and even unguided rockets fired on a ballistic trajectory to supplement the fire support provided by artillery and drones.
All that being said, since most fighter and attack aircraft still mount a gun for one reason or another, pilots still train with them and will take the opportunity for a strafing run if it presents itself.
----
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 39 (click to see context) from:
They are standard on all fighters today and many a strike aircraft. They come in five TechnologyLevels:
to:
They are standard on all fighters today and many a strike aircraft. They come in five TechnologyLevels:
Changed line(s) 92 (click to see context) from:
Radar-based missiles are defended against using ''chaff'', a cloud of small metallic particles that creates a much stronger yet much more confusing radar return than the airplane itself. This is very commonly used in combination with turning to put the launcher to the direct right (3 o'clock) or left (9 o'clock) of the plane, and (if lock cannot be broken) turning hard towards the missile at the last available moment. Flying laterally helps reduce returns from radars that depend on the doppler effect of the plane moving forward or away from the radar, and also requires that the missile "lead" the plane to account for the fast lateral movement. Turning hard at the end requires that the (now low on fuel) missile quickly cancel that lead and fly at the plane head-on, and it must do so in the very brief window before it passes behind the target plane and becomes useless.
to:
Radar-based missiles are can be defended against using ''chaff'', a few methods:
* ''Chaff'', a cloud of small metallic particles that creates a much stronger yet much more confusing radar return than the airplaneitself. This itself.
* Certain manuevers can be used to try to avoid a missile. Chaff is very commonly used in combination with turning to put the launcher to the direct right (3 o'clock) or left (9 o'clock) of the plane, and (if lock cannot be broken) turning hard towards the missile at the last available moment. Flying laterally helps reduce returns from radars that depend on the doppler effect of the plane moving forward or away from the radar, and also requires that the missile "lead" the plane to account for the fast lateral movement. Turning hard at the end requires that the (now low on fuel) missile quickly cancel that lead and fly at the plane head-on, and it must do so in the very brief window before it passes behind the target plane and becomesuseless.useless.
* Active radar decoys, which are essentially missiles that don't seek out aircraft but instead receive, replicate, and emit the signals from enemy radars to create the impression of an aircraft where it isn't one. Beyond being able to tailor its signals to counter the specific threat, these also have the advantage being useful "left of launch", meaning they can be fired prior to entering a threat area and hopefully cause the enemy to waste ordnance, reveal their positions, or even miss the launching aircraft entirely. They are of course much more expensive than chaff.
* Jamming by broadcasting strong signals that interfere with a radar-homing missile's seeker can also be used to avoid them. This can also be used "left of launch", though it does tend to let the enemy know ''something'' is coming, even if it's not clear exactly what.
* ''Chaff'', a cloud of small metallic particles that creates a much stronger yet much more confusing radar return than the airplane
* Certain manuevers can be used to try to avoid a missile. Chaff is very commonly used in combination with turning to put the launcher to the direct right (3 o'clock) or left (9 o'clock) of the plane, and (if lock cannot be broken) turning hard towards the missile at the last available moment. Flying laterally helps reduce returns from radars that depend on the doppler effect of the plane moving forward or away from the radar, and also requires that the missile "lead" the plane to account for the fast lateral movement. Turning hard at the end requires that the (now low on fuel) missile quickly cancel that lead and fly at the plane head-on, and it must do so in the very brief window before it passes behind the target plane and becomes
* Active radar decoys, which are essentially missiles that don't seek out aircraft but instead receive, replicate, and emit the signals from enemy radars to create the impression of an aircraft where it isn't one. Beyond being able to tailor its signals to counter the specific threat, these also have the advantage being useful "left of launch", meaning they can be fired prior to entering a threat area and hopefully cause the enemy to waste ordnance, reveal their positions, or even miss the launching aircraft entirely. They are of course much more expensive than chaff.
* Jamming by broadcasting strong signals that interfere with a radar-homing missile's seeker can also be used to avoid them. This can also be used "left of launch", though it does tend to let the enemy know ''something'' is coming, even if it's not clear exactly what.
Changed line(s) 185,186 (click to see context) from:
As discussed, there are a few different common guidance schemes for smart bombs:
to:
As discussed, there are a few different common guidance schemes for smart bombs:
bombs and air-to-surface missiles:
Changed line(s) 189,190 (click to see context) from:
Laser-guided bombs work by detecting the reflection of a laser beam that's shining on the target's location, very similarly to the way a semi-active homing air-to-air missile functions. The bomb has a set of fins that adjust its course until it hits. These are very precise and have been used to great effect in several wars since the 1980s, but they do come with the drawback of both requiring an aircraft to remain in the area to keep the target illuminated by the laser, and giving away that aircraft's presence and position to an enemy with the right equipment to detect the laser.
to:
Laser-guided bombs and missiles work by detecting the reflection of a laser beam that's shining on the target's location, very similarly to the way a semi-active homing air-to-air missile functions. The bomb weapon has a set of fins that adjust its course until it hits. These are very precise and have been used to great effect in several wars since the 1980s, but they do come with the drawback of both requiring an aircraft to remain in the area to keep the target illuminated by the laser, and giving away that aircraft's presence and position to an enemy with the right equipment to detect the laser.
Changed line(s) 197,198 (click to see context) from:
This is a passive homing system where the operator uses the bomb's own television camera to lock onto a particular shape in the missile's field of view, which it attempts to hit once launched. It's targeted like a command-guided system but is "fire and forget". Early electro-optical seekers developed during UsefulNotes/TheVietnamWar had a black-and-white TV camera and used an analog contrast seeker to detect the outlines of shapes to lock on to, while current-generation ones use digital image recognition software to home in on their target. The downside (at least for earlier models) is that the guidance system can be easily confused if the target is partially obscured, unevenly lit up, painted in a weird pattern or just shows up from a funny angle, which was why it was mostly supplanted by...
to:
This is a passive homing system where the operator uses the bomb's weapon's own television camera to lock onto a particular shape in the missile's field of view, which it attempts to hit once launched. It's targeted like a command-guided system but is "fire and forget". Early electro-optical seekers developed during UsefulNotes/TheVietnamWar had a black-and-white TV camera and used an analog contrast seeker to detect the outlines of shapes to lock on to, while current-generation ones use digital image recognition software to home in on their target. The downside (at least for earlier models) is that the guidance system can be easily confused if the target is partially obscured, unevenly lit up, painted in a weird pattern or just shows up from a funny angle, which was why it was mostly supplanted by...
Changed line(s) 205,206 (click to see context) from:
The origin of the [[MemeticMutation "The missile knows where it is" meme]]. A weapon is programmed with it's current location and the location of its target relative to the launch point, and then released. A gyroscope and accelerometers then detect which direction and how fast the weapon is going, and correct its course if it is not heading towards the target. This obviously only works against fixed targets, but is fairly reliable as long as the weapons's starting position is accurate. Most commonly used in cruise missiles that must travel a long distance.
to:
The origin of the [[MemeticMutation "The missile knows where it is" meme]]. A weapon is programmed with it's current location and the location of its target relative to the launch point, and then released. A gyroscope and accelerometers then detect which direction and how fast the weapon is going, and correct its course if it is not heading towards the target. This obviously only works against fixed targets, but is fairly reliable as long as the weapons's starting position is accurate. Most commonly used in cruise missiles that must travel a long distance.distance, or as a backup to another guidance method.
Changed line(s) 246,247 (click to see context) from:
!!Missiles
to:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 125,126 (click to see context) from:
These missiles have their own radar seekers on board to carry out the final intercept, allowing them to be launched from long distances and left to do their job (leading to them being termed as "fire and forget" missiles). With some aircraft, one plane (or an AWACS) can light up the aircraft and guide missiles from multiple aircraft in before the missiles go active. They took so long to develop because miniaturizing a radar to the point that the whole thing could fit in a missile, along with the computer system needed for guidance, was simply not possible until the [=1980s=] or so. This sort of guidance system is also very common on anti-ship missiles.
to:
These missiles have their own radar seekers on board to carry out the final intercept, allowing them to be launched from long distances and left to do their job (leading to them being termed as "fire and forget" missiles). With some aircraft, one plane (or an AWACS) can light up the aircraft and guide missiles from multiple aircraft in before the missiles go active. They took so long to develop because miniaturizing a radar to the point that the whole thing could fit in a missile, along with the computer system needed for guidance, guidance could fit in a missile small enough to be practically carried on a fighter was simply not possible until the [=1980s=] or so. This sort of guidance system is also very common on anti-ship missiles.
missiles, and was available much earlier due to anti-ship missiles tending to be much larger.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 16 (click to see context) from:
At one point the US military (specifically, Secretary of Defense Robert [=McNamara=]) deemed guns outdated and built a series of jet interceptors (F-4 Phantoms) armed with only missiles, using AIM-9 Sidewinder and AIM-7 Sparrow guided missiles as their primary air-to-air armament, based largely on promises from the contractors that the then-new radar-guided air-to-air missiles under development would display unprecedented lethality and utility. However, they soon they took heavy losses in Vietnam to cannon-equipped [=MiG=]-19's and -21's. Unfortunately missile technology was simply not up to the task yet--In particular, early AIM-7 radar-guided missiles were unreliable. Furthermore they were been designed to be used beyond visual range--and indeed its guidance system required several miles of flight to pick up a stable reliable target lock--but in Vietnam the politically mandated rules of engagement required visual identification of every target, making the AIM-7 worse than useless, it was not only useless but also dead weight. Thus they returned to adding Vulcan cannons as a backup weapon bolted on under the wings in "gun pods," and the F-4E variant that entered service in 1968 had the Vulcan cannon built in, with 1100 rounds of 20mm in its feed hoppers. It should be noted though, that with updated rules of engagement and improvements in missile guidance systems, no fighter based gun pod has ever been fired in anger at an aerial target... potentially validating the idea of their obsolescence. Guns are still built into most modern fighter designs due to a mixture of nobody wanting to be the one to find out whether or not they are obsolete in aerial combat, and the fact that a 20mm[=/=]30mm autocannons remain useful when it comes to [[DeathFromAbove ground attack]] against opponents without reliable air defense.
to:
At one point the US military (specifically, Secretary of Defense Robert [=McNamara=]) deemed guns outdated and built a series of jet interceptors (F-4 Phantoms) armed with only missiles, using AIM-9 Sidewinder and AIM-7 Sparrow guided missiles as their primary air-to-air armament, based largely on promises from the contractors that the then-new radar-guided air-to-air missiles under development would display unprecedented lethality and utility. However, they soon they took heavy losses in Vietnam to cannon-equipped [=MiG=]-19's and -21's. Unfortunately missile technology was simply not up to the task yet--In particular, early AIM-7 radar-guided missiles were unreliable. Furthermore they were had been designed to be used beyond visual range--and indeed its guidance system required several miles of flight to pick up a stable reliable target lock--but in Vietnam the politically mandated politically-mandated rules of engagement required visual identification of every target, making rendering the AIM-7 worse than useless, it was not only useless all but also dead weight.useless. Thus they returned to adding Vulcan cannons as a backup weapon bolted on under the wings in "gun pods," and the F-4E variant that entered service in 1968 had the Vulcan cannon built in, with 1100 rounds of 20mm in its feed hoppers. It should be noted though, that with updated rules of engagement and improvements in missile guidance systems, no fighter based fighter-based gun pod has ever been fired in anger at an aerial target...target ever since... potentially validating the idea of their obsolescence. Guns are still built into most modern fighter designs due to a mixture of nobody wanting to be the one first to find out whether or not they are obsolete in aerial combat, and the fact that a 20mm[=/=]30mm autocannons remain useful when it comes to [[DeathFromAbove ground attack]] against opponents without reliable air defense.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 16 (click to see context) from:
At one point the US military (specifically, Secretary of Defense Robert [=McNamara=]) deemed guns outdated and built a series of jet interceptors (F-4 Phantoms) armed with only missiles, using AIM-9 Sidewinder and AIM-7 Sparrow guided missiles as their primary air-to-air armament, based largely on promises from the contractors that the then-new radar-guided air-to-air missiles under development would display unprecedented lethality and utility. After they took heavy losses in Vietnam to cannon-equipped [=MiG=]-19's and -21's, however (this due in large part to early AIM-7 radar-guided missiles being unreliable, and furthermore having been designed to be used beyond visual range--and indeed its guidance system required several miles of flight to pick up a stable reliable target lock--but in Vietnam the politically mandated rules of engagement required visual identification of every target, making the AIM-7 worse than useless, it was not only useless but also dead weight), they returned to adding Vulcan cannons as a backup weapon bolted on under the wings in "gun pods," and the F-4E variant that entered service in 1968 had the Vulcan cannon built in, with 1100 rounds of 20mm in its feed hoppers.[[note]]It should be noted though, that with updated rules of engagement and improvements in missile guidance systems, no fighter based gun pod has ever been fired. Thus potentially validating the idea of their obsolescence. They are still kept, due to a mixture of nobody wanting to be the one to find out whether or not they are obsolete in aerial combat, and the fact that a 20mm[=/=]30mm autocannons will never be obsolete when it comes to [[DeathFromAbove ground attack]].[[/note]]
to:
At one point the US military (specifically, Secretary of Defense Robert [=McNamara=]) deemed guns outdated and built a series of jet interceptors (F-4 Phantoms) armed with only missiles, using AIM-9 Sidewinder and AIM-7 Sparrow guided missiles as their primary air-to-air armament, based largely on promises from the contractors that the then-new radar-guided air-to-air missiles under development would display unprecedented lethality and utility. After However, they soon they took heavy losses in Vietnam to cannon-equipped [=MiG=]-19's and -21's, however (this due in large part -21's. Unfortunately missile technology was simply not up to the task yet--In particular, early AIM-7 radar-guided missiles being unreliable, and furthermore having were unreliable. Furthermore they were been designed to be used beyond visual range--and indeed its guidance system required several miles of flight to pick up a stable reliable target lock--but in Vietnam the politically mandated rules of engagement required visual identification of every target, making the AIM-7 worse than useless, it was not only useless but also dead weight), weight. Thus they returned to adding Vulcan cannons as a backup weapon bolted on under the wings in "gun pods," and the F-4E variant that entered service in 1968 had the Vulcan cannon built in, with 1100 rounds of 20mm in its feed hoppers.[[note]]It hoppers. It should be noted though, that with updated rules of engagement and improvements in missile guidance systems, no fighter based gun pod has ever been fired. Thus fired in anger at an aerial target... potentially validating the idea of their obsolescence. They Guns are still kept, built into most modern fighter designs due to a mixture of nobody wanting to be the one to find out whether or not they are obsolete in aerial combat, and the fact that a 20mm[=/=]30mm autocannons will never be obsolete remain useful when it comes to [[DeathFromAbove ground attack]].[[/note]]attack]] against opponents without reliable air defense.
Changed line(s) 33,34 (click to see context) from:
These weapons are short-range (as in, within visual range - less then 20, sometimes less than 10 kilometers), but they make up for this by being fire-and-forget (no additional guidance or action from the attacker), and, for a time, by being ''undetectable'' by the target — short of them (or their wingman) looking out the window and seeing an inbound missile — since they passively rely on the target's heat emissions rather than actively emitting radar.
to:
These weapons are short-range (as in, within visual range - less then 20, sometimes less than 10 kilometers), but they due to the seeker, using infrared light, being unable to see much further than a human. They make up for this by being fire-and-forget (no additional guidance or action from the attacker), and, for a time, by being ''undetectable'' by the target — short of them (or their wingman) looking out the window and seeing an inbound missile — since they passively rely on the target's heat emissions rather than actively emitting radar.
radar. Their short range thus means their designs are generally optimized as "dogfighting" missiles.
Changed line(s) 96,97 (click to see context) from:
These missiles ride a radar-beam towards a target. The beam is controlled by the launching aircraft, which must keep the beam on the target for the entire flight of the missile. As most aircraft will not obligingly fly straight and level once they realize they are being targeted, and the launching aircraft is also likely to be maneuvering wildly to avoid counterattack, this is a very unreliable system and these missiles were soon surpassed. On air-to-air weapons, These are mid-1950s technology.
to:
These missiles ride "ride" a radar-beam towards a target. The beam is controlled by the launching aircraft, which must keep the beam on the target for the entire flight of the missile. All the missile "knows" is how strong the beam's signal is where it currently is, and which direction it is stronger; it steers itself that direction. As most aircraft will not obligingly fly straight and level once they realize they are being targeted, and the launching aircraft is also likely to be maneuvering wildly to avoid counterattack, this is a very unreliable system and these missiles were soon surpassed. On air-to-air weapons, These are mid-1950s technology.
Changed line(s) 104,105 (click to see context) from:
These missiles home on a radar reflections from a target aircraft that is being "painted" with the radar system of the jet fighter that launched the missile (tactics were developed for one aircraft to illuminate the target while another fired the missile, but it is uncertain whether this was ever tried in actual combat, and this general category of guidance system is now obsolescent). This does of course require the firing aircraft to retain a lock on it, which is by no means easy if the target aircraft is maneuvering. This generation of radar-guided missiles was the first to have circuitry included that made them smart enough to home in on a radar jammer. These were introduced around 1960 and have been obsolescent since the advent of reliable active radar homing missiles in the mid-1980s.
to:
These missiles home on a radar reflections from a target aircraft that is being "painted" with the radar system of the jet fighter that launched the missile (tactics were developed for one aircraft to illuminate the target while another fired the missile, but it is uncertain whether this was ever tried in actual combat, and this general category of guidance system is now obsolescent). While similar to a beam-riding system, in this case the missile does actually "know" where the target is, as long as the launching aircraft keeps it "illuminated", and steers itself to hit it. This does of course still require the firing aircraft to retain a lock on it, ensure the target is illuminated by its radar, which is by no means easy if the target aircraft is maneuvering. This generation of radar-guided missiles was the first to have circuitry included that made them smart enough to home in on a radar jammer. These were introduced around 1960 and have been obsolescent since the advent of reliable active radar homing missiles in the mid-1980s.
Changed line(s) 125,126 (click to see context) from:
These missiles have their own radar seekers on board to carry out the final intercept, allowing them to be launched from long distances and left to do their job (leading to them being termed as "fire and forget" missiles). With some aircraft, one plane (or an AWACS) can light up the aircraft and guide missiles from multiple aircraft in before the missiles go active. This sort of guidance system is also very common on anti-ship missiles.
to:
These missiles have their own radar seekers on board to carry out the final intercept, allowing them to be launched from long distances and left to do their job (leading to them being termed as "fire and forget" missiles). With some aircraft, one plane (or an AWACS) can light up the aircraft and guide missiles from multiple aircraft in before the missiles go active. They took so long to develop because miniaturizing a radar to the point that the whole thing could fit in a missile, along with the computer system needed for guidance, was simply not possible until the [=1980s=] or so. This sort of guidance system is also very common on anti-ship missiles.
Changed line(s) 151,152 (click to see context) from:
The former limits it to high-performance (and low payload) aircraft; the latter tends to be hit and miss and miss and miss and hit and miss, which can get messy if you only have a single thing to destroy. On the other hand this can be a useful tactic if you have a known location for a large enemy unit on the ground; in Korea the US used B29 bombers to carpet-bomb Chinese units massing for human wave assaults, and since Vietnam has used the term "ARC LIGHT" to describe this use of heavy bombers to carpet-bomb the very bejesus out of enemy units on the ground, the term having originated with the semi-secret project to study the feasibility of using B52 bombers, designed originally to carry nuclear payloads, to haul many many tons of conventional "iron bombs," instead (30+ tons with some modifications).
to:
The former limits it to high-performance (and low payload) aircraft; the latter tends to be hit and miss and miss and miss and hit and miss, which can get messy if you only have a single thing to destroy. On the other hand this can be a useful tactic if you have a known location for a large enemy unit on the ground; in Korea the US used B29 B-29 bombers to carpet-bomb Chinese units massing for human wave assaults, and since Vietnam has used the term "ARC LIGHT" to describe this use of heavy bombers to carpet-bomb the very bejesus out of enemy units on the ground, the term having originated with the semi-secret project to study the feasibility of using B52 B-52 bombers, designed originally to carry nuclear payloads, to haul many many tons of conventional "iron bombs," instead (30+ tons with some modifications).
Changed line(s) 161,162 (click to see context) from:
There are also [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General-purpose_bomb#Retarded_versions "retarded bombs."]] No, this isn't a comparison to smart bombs. These have some kind of parachute or balloon system built in to slow their fall, to allow the attack aircraft dropping them more time to get away; these are for very, very close, very, very low level work, for missions done at such low altitudes that the blast and shrapnel of the bomb would endanger the aircraft dropping it. They first appeared around 1970, in the form of the "Snake Eye" system, a set of fins that could be bolted onto an existing bomb that would open up like an umbrella as it was released by the aircraft.
to:
There are also [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General-purpose_bomb#Retarded_versions "retarded bombs."]] No, this isn't a comparison to smart bombs. These have some kind of parachute parachute, balloon, or balloon airbrake system built in to slow their fall, to allow the attack aircraft dropping them more time to get away; these are for very, very close, very, very low level work, for missions done at such low altitudes that the blast and shrapnel of the bomb would endanger the aircraft dropping it. They first appeared around 1970, in the form of the "Snake Eye" system, a set of fins that could be bolted onto an existing bomb that would open up like an umbrella as it was released by the aircraft.
Changed line(s) 169 (click to see context) from:
A specific variant is napalm, a mixture of an incendiary substance and a gelling agent, which causes it to stick to targets. Napalm bombs are inexpensive containers of nastiness that an aircraft drops on target, lacking any particular guidance system other than the skill of the pilot, is napalm, basically gasoline or jet fuel mixed with a chemical gelling or thickening agent, put in a container with a fuzing mechanism designed to ignite it on impact as the contents splash out. Cheap, effective, and politically controversial, it was created during the Second World War and has been in very common use ever since.
to:
A specific variant is napalm, a mixture of an incendiary substance and a gelling agent, which causes it to stick to targets. Napalm bombs are inexpensive containers of nastiness that an aircraft drops on target, lacking any particular guidance system other than the skill of the pilot, is napalm, Napalm, basically gasoline or jet fuel mixed with a chemical gelling or thickening agent, is put in a container with a fuzing mechanism designed to ignite it on impact as the contents splash out. Cheap, effective, and politically controversial, it was created during the Second World War and has was been in very common use ever since.throughout the late [=20th=] century.
Like many indiscriminate, area-effect weapons, the use of dedicated incendiary weapons has fallen out of favor with the mass proliferation of precision-guided weapons. The ability to precisely target only what you want to destroy is both more economical--fewer weapons need to be used to achieve a particular result--and more morally and politically acceptable.
Like many indiscriminate, area-effect weapons, the use of dedicated incendiary weapons has fallen out of favor with the mass proliferation of precision-guided weapons. The ability to precisely target only what you want to destroy is both more economical--fewer weapons need to be used to achieve a particular result--and more morally and politically acceptable.
Changed line(s) 176,179 (click to see context) from:
!!Smart bombs
Everyone became an expert on this from coverage of the first UsefulNotes/GulfWar in the United States. It's OlderThanTheyThink; folks seriously started looking into guided munitions after the UsefulNotes/SpanishCivilWar and the Germans used radio-guided glide-bombs with some success in UsefulNotes/WorldWarII. This is basically the idea of somehow getting the bomb itself to adjust where and how it falls based on what the aircraft is doing. Typical targets for "smart bombs" may include anything from the foundation of a bridge to a single individual armored vehicle to an enemy command post building.///
Everyone became an expert on this from coverage of the first UsefulNotes/GulfWar in the United States. It's OlderThanTheyThink; folks seriously started looking into guided munitions after the UsefulNotes/SpanishCivilWar and the Germans used radio-guided glide-bombs with some success in UsefulNotes/WorldWarII. This is basically the idea of somehow getting the bomb itself to adjust where and how it falls based on what the aircraft is doing. Typical targets for "smart bombs" may include anything from the foundation of a bridge to a single individual armored vehicle to an enemy command post building.///
to:
!!Precision Guided Weapons
Everyone became an expert on
!!!Inertial Guidance
The origin of the [[MemeticMutation "The missile knows where it is" meme]]. A weapon is programmed with it's current location and the location of its target relative to the launch point, and then released. A gyroscope and accelerometers then detect which direction and how fast the weapon is going, and correct its course if it is not heading towards the target. This obviously only works against fixed targets, but is fairly reliable as long as the weapons's starting position is accurate. Most commonly used in cruise missiles that must travel a long distance.
!!!Digital Scene Matching
This guidance scheme uses a camera or radar to scan the surrounding terrain, and then compares what it sees with a literal map with a path to the target on it. If what it sees is not what it expects to at that moment, it alters course until the view again matches the view from from the pre-programmed path. This is often used to correct errors in an inertial guidance system, updating the system with a corrected position to plan its further movements. Obviously this depends heavily on having accurate and detailed information about the target area, and only works against fixed targets, so it is again mainly used in long-range cruise missiles.
The origin of the [[MemeticMutation "The missile knows where it is" meme]]. A weapon is programmed with it's current location and the location of its target relative to the launch point, and then released. A gyroscope and accelerometers then detect which direction and how fast the weapon is going, and correct its course if it is not heading towards the target. This obviously only works against fixed targets, but is fairly reliable as long as the weapons's starting position is accurate. Most commonly used in cruise missiles that must travel a long distance.
!!!Digital Scene Matching
This guidance scheme uses a camera or radar to scan the surrounding terrain, and then compares what it sees with a literal map with a path to the target on it. If what it sees is not what it expects to at that moment, it alters course until the view again matches the view from from the pre-programmed path. This is often used to correct errors in an inertial guidance system, updating the system with a corrected position to plan its further movements. Obviously this depends heavily on having accurate and detailed information about the target area, and only works against fixed targets, so it is again mainly used in long-range cruise missiles.
Changed line(s) 199 (click to see context) from:
A new wrinkle from the Yanks is ''satellite''-guided bombing, which comes in surprisingly inexpensive bolt-on kits for iron bombs[[note]]This works because the Mk. 80 series of bombs comes disassembled into the warhead, fins, and nose, which are attached on the runway. Swap out the normal nose and fins for a GPS or laser guidance system and guidance fins, and voila, smart bomb![[/note]]. As long as they have the right target location, it gets hit[[note]]You ''can'' hit a moving target with one of these, if you know the target's precise position, course, and speed, ''and'' you have a way to send the bomb an updated target location after it's been released. Doing so in time to matter is pretty difficult, however.[[/note]] (Sadly, this is still subject to human error--the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was hit by one of these due to an out-of-date map. The bomb did its job, but garbage in, carnage out.) GPS guidance is slightly less accurate than laser guidance, but the tailkits are cheaper than laser-seekers and the plane does not need to keep a laser pointed at the target.
to:
Changed line(s) 217 (click to see context) from:
In 2008, the Convention on Cluster Munitions was signed in Dublin, banning signatories from using them, although many major states -- notably the United States, Russia, and China -- aren't signatories.
to:
In 2008, the Convention on Cluster Munitions was signed in Dublin, banning signatories from using them, although many major states -- notably the United States, Russia, and China -- aren't signatories. As with incendiaries and fuel-air weapons, they are less favored today, even among those states who have not signed the treaty, because precision-guided weapons can often do the job just as well or better without the moral hazard of duds and indiscriminate destruction, and may even cost less if fewer weapons need to be expended for the same number of targets.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 20,21 (click to see context) from:
These unguided weapons explode either when they hit something or when they've flown a certain distance. One of the most impressive of these is the Genie, a tactical nuclear rocket designed for shooting down bomber ''squadrons,'' though it is uncertain whether Soviet bombers approaching US airspace would have obliged by flying in conveniently vulnerable tight formations. [[note]]Then again, when you consider that tight formations was the de facto bomber formation in WW2, it was worth a try.[[/note]]
to:
These unguided weapons explode either when they hit something or when they've flown a certain distance. One of the most impressive of these is the Genie, a tactical nuclear rocket designed for shooting down bomber ''squadrons,'' though it is uncertain whether Soviet bombers approaching US airspace would have obliged by flying in conveniently vulnerable tight formations. [[note]]Then again, when you consider that tight formations was the de facto bomber formation in WW2, [=WW2=], it was worth a try.[[/note]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Add details
Changed line(s) 1,2 (click to see context) from:
Things that can be launched or fired from aircraft, whether it's a balloon, airship, fighter, bomber, or helicopter. Also includes equipment to make an aircraft more effective or countermeasures to air-to-air weapons and equipment to make an aircraft more effective. Note that this article does ''not'' include ground-launched or ground-fired anti-air armaments.
to:
Things that can be launched or , fired or dropped from aircraft, whether it's a balloon, airship, fighter, bomber, or helicopter. Also includes equipment to make an aircraft more effective or countermeasures to air-to-air weapons and equipment to make an aircraft more effective. Note that this article does ''not'' include ground-launched or ground-fired anti-air armaments.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Fix
Changed line(s) 1,2 (click to see context) from:
Things that can be launched or fired from aircraft, whether it's a balloon, airship, fighter, bomber, or helicopter. Also includes equipment to make an aircraft more effective or countermeasures to air-to-air weapons and equipment to make an aircraft more effective or. Note that this article does ''not'' include ground-launched or ground-fired anti-air armaments.
to:
Things that can be launched or fired from aircraft, whether it's a balloon, airship, fighter, bomber, or helicopter. Also includes equipment to make an aircraft more effective or countermeasures to air-to-air weapons and equipment to make an aircraft more effective or.effective. Note that this article does ''not'' include ground-launched or ground-fired anti-air armaments.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Fix
Changed line(s) 10,11 (click to see context) from:
The first form of anti-air combat, along with cans attached to wires (to foul an enemy's propeller), was small arms and then light machine guns. It started when scout planes, the only type used before the Great War in a combat role, would bring pistols or small rifles in case they met an enemy scout plane. Then some pilots started fitting light machine guns to their planes, and it escalated from there. Given that WW I-era planes had big wooden propellers mounted in front of the cockpit, firing through the propeller at first posed an obstacle, because if you forest your light machine gun (LMG), you'd put bulletholes in your propeller. Then a GadgeteerGenius from TheEngineer corps figured out a timing chain that linked the LMG mechanism to the engine, and fired only between strokes of the propeller.
to:
The first form of anti-air combat, along with cans attached to wires (to foul an enemy's propeller), was small arms and then light machine guns. It started when scout planes, the only type used before the Great War in a combat role, would bring pistols or small rifles in case they met an enemy scout plane. Then some pilots started fitting light machine guns to their planes, and it escalated from there. Given that WW I-era planes had big wooden propellers mounted in front of the cockpit, firing through the propeller at first posed an obstacle, because if you forest fired your light machine gun (LMG), you'd put bulletholes in your propeller. Then a GadgeteerGenius from TheEngineer corps figured out a timing chain that linked the LMG mechanism to the engine, and fired only between strokes of the propeller.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Fix
Changed line(s) 10,11 (click to see context) from:
The first form of anti-air combat, along with cans attached to wires (to foul an enemy's propeller). was small arms and then light machine guns. It started when scout planes, the only type used before the Great War in a combat role, would bring pistols or small rifles in case they met an enemy scout plane. Then some pilots started fitting light machine guns to their planes, and it escalated from there. Given that WW I-era planes had big wooden propellers mounted in front of the cockpit, firing through the propeller at first posed an obstacle, because if you forest your light machine gun (LMG), you'd put bulletholes in your propeller. Then a GadgeteerGenius from TheEngineer corps figured out a timing chain that linked the LMG mechanism to the engine, and fired only between strokes of the propeller.
to:
The first form of anti-air combat, along with cans attached to wires (to foul an enemy's propeller). propeller), was small arms and then light machine guns. It started when scout planes, the only type used before the Great War in a combat role, would bring pistols or small rifles in case they met an enemy scout plane. Then some pilots started fitting light machine guns to their planes, and it escalated from there. Given that WW I-era planes had big wooden propellers mounted in front of the cockpit, firing through the propeller at first posed an obstacle, because if you forest your light machine gun (LMG), you'd put bulletholes in your propeller. Then a GadgeteerGenius from TheEngineer corps figured out a timing chain that linked the LMG mechanism to the engine, and fired only between strokes of the propeller.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Fix
Changed line(s) 1,2 (click to see context) from:
Things that can be launched from aircraft, whether it's a balloon, airship, fighter,bomber, or helicopter. Also includes equipment to make an aircraft more effective or countermeasures to air-to-air weapons. Note that this article does not include ground-launched or ground-fired anti-air armaments.
to:
Things that can be launched or fired from aircraft, whether it's a balloon, airship, fighter,bomber, fighter, bomber, or helicopter. Also includes equipment to make an aircraft more effective or countermeasures to air-to-air weapons. weapons and equipment to make an aircraft more effective or. Note that this article does not ''not'' include ground-launched or ground-fired anti-air armaments.
