• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Missile velocities

TheEngineer

SOC-14 1K
Hi !

Could anybody here provide information about some stats of real-world air-to-air missiles and the basic principles of to-target navigation?

I still working on my Space Combat Simulator and would like to add an optional, more detailed mode of missile handling.

Regards,

Mert
 
Ship-to-ship missiles are impractical across thousands of km engagement distances. Nice thermally bright target, long transit time. Lasers or particle beams are the only way to go. Try modeling real velocites and you'll see.

Traveller turret lasers are the equivalent of 40mm deck guns. Missiles of similar scale (such as 20/21 century AA missiles) aren't much use against large targets, only small craft.

Unless the missiles are supposed to be fusion powered (ya, right) they only have chemical power for a minute or so of thrust at 2 gee. It would have to be fire, drift for long time, then maneuver to target if it is still in range.

Mass drivers (including sand casters) can't achieve the huge velocities required to close the distance in a timely fashion (ie, hit the target). At 10km/s (ya, right) it would take many minutes to reach where the opponent was when you fired, but he isn't there now.
 
I think you are justified in your criticism of the standard Traveller 50kg turret missile Straybow.
Unless they are equiped with some sort of micro-fusion power plant and super thrusters then there is no way for these things to generate the thrust required to achieve the performance required for such long range engagements against such fast moving targets.
IMHO Traveller missiles should be re-thought along the lines of T2300 anti-ship missiles and THS AKVs, i.e. vehicle/v.small craft sized in the 1 to 5 dt range, remote or robotic controlled, armed with a variety of sub-munitions. They could be recoverable or kamikazeed depending on tactical needs.
 
Hi,

zhanks for the information so far.
I never realized, that missiles are only 50kg.
There is hardly space for any warhead...

But I will calc thru what g-rates and durations would be possible with a tiny thing like that...assuming conventionell propulsion.

Regards,

Mert
 
Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
I think you are justified in your criticism of the standard Traveller 50kg turret missile Straybow.
50kg :confused:

Assuming an average density of water for these (for reference only), the missle is only .05 a cubic meter. The standard space ship to ship missles that I know of (T4) are 7 cubic meters, which would aplicable to spce combat.
 
Missiles special supplement and T20 tells us that ship to ship missiles are 50kg. The T4 and TNE missiles may be larger, which is what I'm suggesting. Even a 1dt missile stands more of a chance of being an effective sci-fi weapon than the magic missile of CT ;)
file_23.gif
 
The web sites listed by Uncle Bob are a good source of numbers and info if you have an idea what they are talking about, but some of the concepts are not real well explained. I have worked with these for 20 years, so I will try to simplify for you.

Basic principles of to-target navigation for Air to Air intercept missiles was the question. I will start with basic missile principles.
All missiles are composed of basic parts:
Seeker, the part that looks for the target.
Guidance computer, the part that controls the missile to the target.
Target detector, the part that tells the warhead to detonate.
Warhead, the part that goes boom!!!
Safety devices, They keep the missile motor and warhead from firing at inappropriate times.
Motor, the part that pushes the missile.
Fins, the part that acts on the air to change direction. They are also called wings, fins, canards or stabilizers.

Different missile types have different names or bits and pieces added, but the above list is the basics.

The seeker can be looking for radar or IR reflections. Radar guidance signals are transmtted from ground, ship or any aircraft in the general direction of the target on a coded frequency the missile seeker is programed to look for. IR guidance seekers are looking for hot jet exhaust in low tech systems or difference from background temperature in higher tech systems. Either one will send a signal to the guidance computer of where the target is in relation to the centerline of the missile. low tech sistems will just look for what quadrant the target is in, higher tech systems tell more exactly what direction the target is.
The guidance computer takes the data from the seeker and computes how to guide the missile to the target. It will steer on an intercept course leading the target to impact the target.
The target detectors simple task is to detonate the warhead when the missile is close enough to kill the target. Most missiles have an impact detector in case of a direct hit or a radar based proximity detector for a near miss.
The warhead is designed to focus the blast in a plane perpendicular the the missile centerline for Air to air missiles, or have a shape charge for air to ground missiles to defeat armor. As blast effects are really a poor kill device, most warheads are designed with fragmentation in mind. The frag will greatly increase the kill range from inches to yards. Blast really only works if the warhead is in physical contact with the target. The frag takes the energy of the warhead just like a bullet takes the energy from a powder charge in a rifle. The frag impact the target, causes critical damage, target nolonger is capable of flying and meets the ground at excessive speeds.
SAfety devices come in many variations. They are all meant to keep the missile safe for the people using it. They keep the rocket motor from firing until the launching pilot actually fires it. They keep the warhead from explosing until the mssile has launched, clear of the launching aircraft, and in proximity to a target. The motor safety devices usually are a circuit interupt or shorting device to stop electrical signals from igniting the motor. The warhead safety devices have several parts, electrical and mechanical. The electrical parts are similar to the motor safety devices, to keep electrical signals from firing the warhead. The mechanical devices will detect the acceleration of a launch to allow the missile to get out of close proximity of the launching aircraft.
The motor in all air to air missiles are a solid fuel rigid formed low explosive. Translation - the missile is pushed forward for a very short time by the hot gasses from the burning of the rocket motor. When they talk of dual thrust, that means that on initial launch, during the boost phase, the takes off like a bat out of hell for about a second, then cruises for a few more seconds under sustained thrust. The thrust in boost phase is 20 to 30 Gees or more, depending on exact missile. sustained phase thrust drops to 1/3 or less of boost phase. In the movies where you see the missile fall out of the sky as soon as the motor burns out is pure hollywood. At that point, the missile will coast for several minutes, until the battery is exhausted. The missile will travel many miles this way.
The control fins are used to steer the missile. The wings are stationary and the fins or canards move. They are hydraulically or pnuematically powered, depending on missile type. The fins are mounted in pivots that recieve signals from the guidance computer, telling them which direction to turn the missile.

In use, the pilot finds his opponent by radar.
He turns his aircraft to point toward the target.
He selects a missile to track the target.
The missile will lock on when the seeker has identified the target and the guidance computer calculates it can reach the target.
At that point, the pilot will hear the lockon tone that means he can fire the missile and expect to kill the target.
He will trigger the missile.
The safety device will send a signal to the rocket motor causing an igniter to flash through the motor firing.
The missile battery will activate, powering the missile electronics.
When the motor generates enough thrust, it will break a holding pin, allowing it to leave the launching rail.
Teh umbilital cable conneting the missile electronics to the aircraft will break.
The warhead safety device will depress from the G forces, allowing a timer to run arming the warhead when the missile is clear of the launching aircraft.
The seeker will tell the gudance computer where the target is.
The guidance computer signals the fins what direction to ster the missile so it will intercept the target.
The target detector will look for anything large enough in close proximity, sending a signal to the warhead safety device when a target is detected.
The warhead safety device will send a signal to the warhead detonators causing the warhead to detonate.
The expanding gasses of the warhead will impart high velocity to the fragmentation warhead casing, sending them out in a pattern to hit the target.
The frag hits the target, tearing holes in many critical systems rendering the target unable to continue flying.
The target hits the ground in a way to defy all the kings men from putting it back togather again.

Missiles for use in space would have to be made differently, as the fins would have no air to bite to turn the missile.
The latest solid fuel air to air missiles are starting to use directed thrust, but that works only as long as the motor is burning, then they rely on fins for turning.
Light mass would still be very desirable. Less mass means more Gee per thrust, higher velocity, longer range so more efficient.
As most ships would have a skin resistant to micro meteors, normal frag warheads would be ineffective, so a shape charge would be needed.
The only effective near miss warhead would be a nuke.
Space to space missiles would have to change, but not as much as you might think.
 
60 Kg seem small, but.. who needs a warhead?

A missile boosting a 6 G for one ten minute turn is going 60 * 60 * 10 = 36 Km/second
50 Kg/2* (36,000)^2 = 23.4 Gj, or about 7 metric tons of TNT. That's one heck of a splash.

BTW, I assume ship missiles use a maneuver drive powered by a limited duration powerplant (Stable high-density plasma? Nucleonic isotope conversion? Super conductor? Super dense homeopolar generator? If I guess which new research willl obsolete my architecture.)
 
What I really like about the Honorverse is its use of stand-off nuclear-pumped gamma/X-ray laser missile warheads. The minimal yield nuke's EMP and high energy photons and particles set up a lasing resonance in ~1m long lead rods bundled at some optimal separation from the pit. The rods emit high intensity, coherent gamma ray or X-ray beams from both ends nanoseconds before the shock wave reaches them.

This way a missile doesn't have to reach the target at all; it can even be vectored at odd angles instead of directly in. The whole warhead is on gimbels and the aiming computer can zero in with reasonable precision to a range of a several hundred km. Only the ignition charge required to compress the pit to criticality disturbs the aim, and with a half dozen or more beams they can use the randomization to increase hit probability.

This is the same technology proposed for SDI's orbital ABM screen, so we're talking about something within 20/21 cen. technology. With gravity generators the pit compression might be achieved without a shock wave that disturbs aim, allowing a significant increase in stand-off range.

These are capital ship missiles the size of 2-stage ICBMs, about 70 tons mass. In the Honorverse they are grav-powered to ~1000+ gees, but in Traveller they would be Gauss-launched fusion rockets.
 
Close, Straybow, but a couple of caveats,

The massive EMP usually associated with nuclear weapons is caused by ionizing the atmosphere. The EMP of a nuclear explosion in vaccuum is not really dangerous beyond a couple of hundred kilometers.

And the nuclear pumped X-ray laser was first mentioned in connection with SDI, but it was never an integral part of SDI. The core of SDI was near IR chemical lasers, although PBW and railguns were considered. I recently saw an analysis that suggested that the whole concept was technically impossible anyway.
 
Hi !

Thanks vegascat for this great comprehensive explanations !


Hope You did not present classified stuff here and going to be arrested for beeing a traitor.

What would You think about possible rocket performance in space, without disturbing effects of air friction and gravity ?
Would you think its possible to put together a working 50 kg space to space missile ?

@Uncle Bob:
Then trying to get along with E-kin rockets I experienced, that they loose so much ability to make flight corrections at those hyper-velocities, that they were not able to hit the target anymore.
Well, that was in my simulation software....

@Straybow
Isnt this missile type a danger for friendly ships in range, too ?

Regards,

Mert
 
Vegascat, thank you for a very good explanation of how modern air to air missile systems work
. Should come in handy for adding flavour the next time a defenceless merchant is waiting to be hit, I can describe what's happening moment by moment ;)
file_23.gif

Any idea what the maximum range of an AtA missile would be and how long it could maintain a 6G acceleration?
 
As I understand it, the longest-range air-to-air missile ever developed was the US Navy's Phoenix (AIM-54) missile, which was said to have a range in excess of 100 nautical miles. It managed this by being a very big missile (it weighed just over half a ton) giving it a big motor and so very high speed (about 1600 meters per second) and it had the most sophisticated (and expensive) guidance system of its day.

It used all this to fly a long-range attack profile where the missile did not head directly towards the target (keeping its seeker pointed at the target at all times as most other missiles must do) but instead took a ballistic trajectory to the target (flying like an artillery shell) to get more range and then when it tipped over at the top of the arc it would look down with its own active radar seeker (aided by updates from the launching aircraft's fire control system), find its target, and dive on it from above.

I don't know what acceleration it had or for how long. Probably it still didn't have very long under power. I remember hearing about some missiles that have ramjet engines and so should have longer powered endurance but I don't know anything about them.
 
Hi,

I did a coffee break with my old physics book


The use of conventional chemical propulsion system will limit reaction material speed to theoretically 10000 m/s.
As we need a maximum thrust of 3000 N (50kg*60m/s2) the amount of reaction mass flow needed could be calculated by:

dm/dt = 3000 N / 10000 m/s = 0.3 kg/s

Even with neglegting mass decrease of the missile we might not accelerate long


What we definitly need is e.g. a vastly higher exhaust velocity.
Well, AG does not work, thrusters are to big...
perhaps we could get this by a fusion propulsion system, somehow managing a controlled fusion reaction in order to propel reaction mass to higher values.

I played around with 100000 m/s, reducing the mass loos to 0,03 kg leaving at least 14 kg for anything which makes "boom".
(Hmmm, does it make sense to use anything special making boom, when already working with a fusion reaction...?)
Over the tumb this might work for at least one MT combat round, providing a afterburner reserve for final target attack.
The amount of fusion fuel (deuterium) needed to release a sufficient amount of energy to kick reaction mass is nearly neglegtable (around 5*10E-6 kg).

Just an idea.

Regards,

Mert
 
So a highly efficient mini-fusion rocket may be the propulsion system? Only trouble are the versions of Traveller that have minimum fusion reactor sizes. I think it should be doable using the MT rules for fusion rockets, and FFS of course.
How about antimatter "catalysed" fusion rockets from THS?
 
it takes a maneuver 6 missile fifty-three minutes to traverse one light second - straight in, no deceleration. that's a long time for counter-battery fire and target evasion. one wonders if missiles can be relevant.
 
Back
Top