Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)

Jura said:

Brumby ... are you teasing me?

Click to expand...

Modern image seekers are able to discriminate between flares and the target due to its in built IRCCM that discriminate between the target and the flares based on their relative motion, spectral signature and intensity rise-time. The NSM IR imaging seeker is dual band in both MWIR and LWIR. The fusing of the image allows it to discriminate from counter measures such as flares.

Jura said:

I'll rephrase "how close the missile has to get to make it possible for the seeker to lock on?"
from Yesterday at 8:57 PM
:
what would be a typical predetermined distance from the expected target position, at which the NSM seeker is activated to acquire the target and to lock on it?

(it's about 10 km (ten kilometers) for an Exocet -- of course ARH)

Click to expand...

The NSM has an effective range of >185 kms. The targeting guidance is off board just like any long range strike weapons. The image seeker is to discriminate for target selection. You are mixing apples and oranges in your comparison. ARH as with the Exocet comes with it all the problems associated with such type of terminal homing. It is a give away of its incoming as it is active; and it is susceptible to decoy because it is seeking. In contrast, IR imaging is passive and counter measures are less effective against an unknown incoming. ,

Brumby said:

Modern image seekers are able to discriminate between flares and the target due to its in built IRCCM that discriminate between the target and the flares based on their relative motion, spectral signature and intensity rise-time. The NSM IR imaging seeker is dual band in both MWIR and LWIR. The fusing of the image allows it to discriminate from counter measures such as flares.

View attachment 54426

View attachment 54427

Click to expand...

LOL good to see you're at least in sales talk now, and you stopped embarrassing yourself with "You can't spoof IR imaging." etc. Today at 2:48 AM

but Brumby what's this smoke screen:

Brumby said:

The NSM has an effective range of >185 kms. The targeting guidance is off board just like any long range strike weapons. The image seeker is to discriminate for target selection. You are mixing apples and oranges in your comparison. ARH as with the Exocet comes with it all the problems associated with such type of terminal homing. It is a give away of its incoming as it is active; and it is susceptible to decoy because it is seeking. In contrast, IR imaging is passive and counter measures are less effective against an unknown incoming. ,

Click to expand...

I asked Yesterday at 8:57 PM

Jura said:

how close the missile has to get to make it possible for the seeker to lock on?

Click to expand...

then reiterated Today at 7:25 AM

Jura said:

what would be a typical predetermined distance from the expected target position, at which the NSM seeker is activated to acquire the target and to lock on it?

Click to expand...

so my last try now:

in the terminal stage of an attack,

the missile's seeker has to "find" (I now use this simple word instead of "acquire") its target

-- by like pinging if there's a radar in the seeker, or using its heat seeker in case of the NSM --

and then the missile has to "keep flying until it hits" (I now use this simple expression instead of "lock on", and I encourage nitpickers to nitpick);

the above begins at some distance from the target (later the missile would maneuver vigorously to hopefully avoid counterfire bullets and/or missiles, and again I encourage nitpickers to nitpick);

in a typical scenario, what is this distance for the NSM?

distance = {number} [unit]

please

Jura said:

but Brumby what's this smoke screen:

I asked Yesterday at 8:57 PM

then reiterated Today at 7:25 AM

so my last try now:

in the terminal stage of an attack,

the missile's seeker has to "find" (I now use this simple word instead of "acquire") its target

-- by like pinging if there's a radar in the seeker, or using its heat seeker in case of the NSM --

and then the missile has to "keep flying until it hits" (I now use this simple expression instead of "lock on", and I encourage nitpickers to nitpick);

the above begins at some distance from the target (later the missile would maneuver vigorously to hopefully avoid counterfire bullets and/or missiles, and again I encourage nitpickers to nitpick);

in a typical scenario, what is this distance for the NSM?

distance = {number} [unit]

please

Click to expand...

Do let me know when you find out. Good luck on that.

Jura said:

LOL good to see you're at least in sales talk now, and you stopped embarrassing yourself with "You can't spoof IR imaging." etc. Today at 2:48 AM

Click to expand...

Bro,
I stand by what I said that you cannot spoof an IR image. You obviously don't know the technical difference between RF and IR. Spoofing is against RF signals. You can only blind an IR image and that is what flares are meant to accomplish by increasing the intensity of the IR background. However it is not effective against dual band imaging and that is what the NSM has.

The problem is you cannot engage in a technical debate beyond resorting to ridicule because you have nothing else to offer - sad.
.

The opponent can always use smoke

vincent said:

The opponent can always use smoke

Click to expand...

LWIR wavelength can see through smoke. Any form of counter measure against dual band IR will have to use some form of obscurant that has high extinction coefficient properties.

A sea skimming NSM may be detected (or not) in the terminal 10 kms distance or less which offers probably at most 3 mins window for any terminal counter measures. It is also during this phase the NSM is designed to perform high G evasive maneuvers against terminal defenses. The actual answer to its effectiveness we will never know until it is actually used in a conflict.

It is a highly capable ASM or else the USN would not adopt a foreign product.

vincent said:

The opponent can always use smoke

Click to expand...

oh I think some "spurious heat source" might work, LOL

Thursday at 7:52 AM

Jura said:

a tragicomic part of the press release (took it from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

)
:
“Today was a terrific accomplishment for USS Gabrielle Giffords crew and the Navy’s LCS class,” said Cmdr. Matthew Lehmann, the ship’s commanding officer. “I am very proud of all the teamwork that led to the successful launch of the NSM.”

lobbying a missile = "a terrific accomplishment" really? but yeah, for the LCS program it's kind of true

Click to expand...

and Rogoway joined the fuss with
This Image Of A Naval Strike Missile Launch Shows A Key Tenet Of Stealth Design

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!