It's really enjoyable watchingg your videos. Here is why: 1. Your intelligent commentary. 2. You explain what you know well and don't get into pointless guess work. 3. I obviously your sense of humour. 4. You are intelligent and you are right it''s not easy to find content like yours on RU-vid. Finally, it would be fantastic to hear your opinion on Russian hardware such as Su57, Su35, Mig35 etc. Thank you sincerely for dissiminating knowledge in your unique way.
Came here to say the same thing! Plus, you have just the right level of technical depth and math - I appreciate that you're willing to go a little deeper and into more detail than most, but you do a wonderful job keeping it understandable and to the point. Thank you so much.
The lack of guesswork is an important point. Half the tech videos out there have a title about something interesting, and the person turns out to just be guessing what the tech might be.
Subbed a while back but can't say it enough, you bring a whole new level to miltech/ military aviation discussion videos!!! Please keep the content coming!!!!!
Thank you for your videos. What a treat it is. I love all of these about your videos: - sense of humor - frankness - simple scientific language - lack of number 1,2,3 craps - pace of speech - accent Thank you!
I've been binging your channel for a few days and have to say that the quality of commentary on your channel is superb. You make no unbased claims and have a lot of information I just don't see on other youtube channels covering military technology.
I've never subscribed to a channel so fast. The first video I saw was Active Radar Homing and it was EVERYTHING I'd ever hoped for in content, presentation, and conciseness. Truly a legendary channel. It is so extremely rare to discover such talent. Keep up the amazing work mate :)
The more a person knows the simpler they can explain it ! Excellent video , sensible guestimations and assumptions based on, I would assume a lot of knowledge and experience 👍
Best information video of Meteor on the net by far. Simple yet without missing important information. Well structured, methodical and easy to follow. Nice job . Thanks for the share
Great video, your programs are very informative. Do you have any programs on Russian fighters and /or missiles? There is a lot of videos stating what Russian combat aircraft are not, I would like to hear information aircraft. Thank for your videos Sebastien.
Well, depends. For anti-aircraft, it could work. Obviously needs more fuel and a stronger rocket motor to propel it to speed. For missile defense, it is not useful. Ballistic missiles operate where the engine of the Meteor would not work due to lack of oxygen.
ZeOverman are we talking about the anti aircraft version or the BMD? In either case you need a booster - Meteor needs about Mach 2.5 for the ramjet to work. You also need to push it out. For BMD Meteor would be ill advised. No oxygen at that altitudes.
@@Sedna063 the idea of the meteor is that the gas generator acts like a booster itself until it hits the operating speed of the ram, so it shouldn't need a booster. ALso ironically if you're talking about BMD, the Meteor's propulsion system would be a very good first stage for a second rocket-powered payload, since it has to transit through the atmosphere first. This means that for a given total weight of the missile more weight can be dedicated to the maneuvering interceptor rather than the 1st stage propulsion
@@dsdy1205 It has a solid fuel rocket booster to bring it to Mach 2 in the first place. It would make a more complex design though - we need a missile that can be launched from a low altitude up to a very high one. For most of the time of flight you will spend it outside the atmosphere.
Excellent video: very informative and well developed, adding up to a clear description of the missile and its capabilities. Thanks. Keep up the good work.
Thank you for a unbiased objective view on a subject I'm very interested in. I feel we are in an era akin to the 1930s where the technological advances are so rapid that today's cutting edge is tomorrows obsolete scrap.
Hi! I am a big fan of your series! You often ask for questions... So here I have one for you: Why has the majority of all AAM's a white or light grey colour with white parts? They normally don't match the colour of the jets, totally braking the camo of them. Why are they not middle/dark grey like the fighters which carry them? Thank you & keep on the good work! 🤙💯👋
Very nice video! You are one of the few public commentators that I've seen touch on the pitch and yaw constraints imposed by Meteor's air intakes. My understanding is that the designers worked around that by using roll-to-turn maneuvering during cruise, when the TDR is producing thrust. Meteor then shuts the engine down and uses skid-to-turn maneuvering for the endgame. Another penalty that you didn't mention is that the TDR has a more limited altitude range, i.e. the missile can't exploit lofting to minimize drag to the same degree as rocket-powered AAMs. My understanding is that Phoenix and AMRAAM can be lofted as high as ~40km, while I suspect that the TDR is limited to 20-25 km. The 3x Isp advantage of the TDR more than makes up for this, however. Obviously flying at lower altitude also allows more midcourse maneuverability to counter target maneuvers. A final penalty is the additional inlet drag for Meteor, especially when the TDR is throttled down for coast. I'm looking forward to seeing the new "Japanese Meteor" with the AAM-4's AESA seeker. That should be quite an imposing missile.
I recently found this channel recently and bouy this is amazing, how do you even get these details, anyways looking forward for more content. Love from INDIA.
Nowadays the targeting data is provided by a stealth fighter in the vicinity of the enemy, the firepower is provided by other planes in the rear lines. A very long range missile is ideal for that.
I've known all this for years. But even then, when it's said out loud, it astonishes every time. "Missiles are like paper planes. Once thrown, which takes 2 or 3 seconds, they fly and fall like a paper plane." "The RAF demanded that they have a missile that flew like an aircraft." "With a jet engine and a no escape zone of no less than 70km" And you think about it and realise how game changing this will be. Anybody know the NEZ of the AIM 120D?
The next technology we will see in missiles will be the throttleable electric rocket. Current fuels for erockets are not air breathing, being designed for space use, but they throttle by changing the amount of current being conducted through the fuel/oxidiser. Stop the power, rocket stops. Start the power, rocket starts again. Doesn't even burn without electricity, it's immune to fire & shock. Once they invent an air breathing version it can start from zero relative speed, shut off it's engine for mid course coasting as many times as it likes. You can just add length to add range. It'll be scary stuff.
I was ironically writing. The main issue is turnover time with how often the manufacturers are merging and changing names and split off. And then you mentioned it as the large issue for real...
Regarding your final comment, I'm certain that I read in an article that Meteor has a re-attack capability. As long as it still has fuel, it can swing around and attempt to reacquire the target. For the targeted aircraft, it will have just lost a lot of energy manoeuvring to avoid the missile so even if it does manage to avoid it, the second time it will be a sitting duck. Also you may well be right that at certain aerodynamic geometries (for want of a better term), the airflow is severely reduced, but it would only be pulling such manoeuvres in the endgame and so it has already generated all of its E-M energy, it can afford to be without direct propulsion power for the final few seconds.
@@Millennium7HistoryTech See here: saab.com/air/weapon-systems/air-to-air-missile-systems/meteor/ Quote: "A two-way datalink enables the launch aircraft to provide mid-course target updates or retargeting if required, including data from off-board third parties. The datalink is capable of transmitting missile information such as functional and kinematic status, information about multiple targets, and notification of target acquisition by the seeker." The potential problem of the airflow to the missiles engine in certain maneuvers is mitigated by the asymetrical layout of the two intakes. in addition, the missile is capable of rolling, if airflow to the engine is hampered by certain maneuvers. Also note, that "Meteor" is not equal to "Meteor". There are several variants with different seekers. Most countries use an active Ku-band seeker, whereas the German Luftwaffe opted for their own Ka/X-Band from BGT, which is more likely to get a lock on stealth targets, can lock on enemy radar and is less prone to active jamming. It is more expensive thou. Currently, the Meteor consortium is considering a new seeker done by Mitsubishi Electric, but I have no details on its capabilities.
@@virtualinfinity6280 When it says Re-Acquire capabilities this means not that it can swing around and go for another hit, but rather that if radar lock is broken during the datalink guided phase (before pitbulling), such as if the aircraft is forced to manuever defensively, that when the aircraft regains lock on the target it will be able to guide that missile onto target still as opposed to it no longer being guideable. The AMRAAM has this capability as well.
considering the datalink claims the usaf make for f35~f22, would it not be concievable for awac`s or satellite comms to be able to track and guide the meteor to a firing solution with enormous accuracy? thereby widening the no escape zone? this missile and your wisdom, knowledge are inspiring.
Of course, when you allow a third party to control the missile, you'll need to 1) make sure you have a reliable data link, and 2) make damn sure that the third party is on your side.
@@jfan4reva it probobly works by thenplane and misile echannging krypto key just prior to launch. The radio of the missile is also pointed back, so it cant be overpowered from the front.. If the missile controll is sent to a other unit the plane will send the key over via a point radio link that would not be possible to intercept from the front. Ir will also be possible for it to be carried by slave drone fighters, like the neuron. This is specially so important for gripen thst have limited load capacity. While it can target 20 enemy fighters it can only carry 4 missiles of this type. Two slave drones would increase this dramatircally
If they are smart, and they probably are, they will allow this missile to be launched by older fighters (Greek F-4s) and controlled by F-35s, That would get you more available weapons in a large battle area and allow the stealth aircraft to remain stealthy.
Saab is a partner to and the Meteor based on a Swedish projekt from 1977 the project restated 1995. It was designed for the data-link real time sharing of radar sensor etc. on the J35 and JA37. on our arplane museum you can find an atrap of the missile dont remeber the name of it but i guess it starts with Rb for Robot
Operators as of 2022 Brazil - Brazilian Air Force France - French Air Force and French Navy Germany - German Air Force Greece - Hellenic Air Force India - Indian Air Force Italy - Italian Air Force Qatar - Qatar Air Force Spain - Spanish Air Force Sweden - Swedish Air Force United Kingdom - Royal Air Force
He explains that at the very long range of the rocket it would be hard to stay accurate at such a great distance but I have also heard military saying that if they have another vehicle or sensor of any kind that can link up with the weapon it can take control in mid flight. Like a LAN for military sensors, so if it is launched from a jet that is very far away, and another sensor ( say a satellite or drone ) is placed at a closer position to the target it will take control to make the hit.
You are welcome. It is aerodynamic. The control assembly is at the rear of the air intake fairing. If you have any question you can put it here tinyurl.com/y4g528lt, here I explain how it is working ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-nTL1sx4vRXY.html
High pricetag is not even such a big issue for a missile like this. Jet planes cost 50-100 millions dollars and an airforce which has .eg Gripens armed with Meteors, would have such an advantage over airforce that has Gripens armed with .eg AMRAAMs that the costs are well justified.
ohh the price will also go down when the accountants make a flyaway cost that jist includes the airframe and engine, but no warhead or electronics... it will be 1/3rd the cost and plenty of idiots will beleive it and quote the "flyaway" cost 🙄😁🤣🤣
Hi there! Question: It appears that the Meteor-enabling of European F-35s has not taken place "soon" as you suggested. It now appears that this MIGHT only happen with the release of the Block 4 F-35s, and even that is not certain! It looks like Meteor's future is ensured for at least another decade or more! Are there any indications of performance enhancing upgrades in the future for Meteor? Thanks for the informative video. Any chance of an item-by-item comparison video with the latest AMRAAM?
Based on what I know about organoborane chemistry the propellant definitely needs to be stored cold and in absence of air. So the missile needs a cold gas tank. Borane fuels are usually liquid but they might have done something fancy with it to make it solid.
The Meteor Missile is best. Meteor vs AIM-120D for Example. The Meteor is Faster at Mach 4.5 to the AIM-120D Mach 4, the Meteor is More Agile then the AIM-120D, the Range of the AIM-120D ia maxed at 160km the Meteor has a Range of 150km for Fast Agile Targets and 300+km for other targets, the No Escape Zone of the AIM-120D is only 20km on the Meteor is 60km 3x times bigger, plus the Meteor is Harder to Jam and Trick.
LOL What? Most of what you said is not true. There's nothing available so far that proves the METEOR as being more agile than the AMRAAM. In fact, the AMRAAM clearly seems to be the more agile of the two due to it's lighter mass and extra pair of fins. Range? Absolute max range is classified for both missiles AFAIK. Yes, in terms of endgame pursuit persistence the METEOR is clearly better, not doubt about that. However, a lot of air-to-air engagements don't happen at really long ranges. And especially, when talking about head on engagements, the AIM-120D energy capability is more than enough and the METEOR advantage is irrelevant. As for the NEZ, the METEOR is said to have 3x bigger NEZ than the AIM-120B, NOT the AIM-120D. Finally, regarding ECCM, there's nothing available that shows the METEOR having better ECCM capabilities than the AMRAAM. The METEOR is radar guided, has an INS and a two way data link. The AIM-120D is radar guided, has an INS, and a two way data link as well, but it also has GPS, which is something the METEOR doesn't have. And if we focus on the radars inside... Both missiles have the same diameter. That means the radar antenna inside has the same or almost the same size in both missiles. That means, the radars in both missiles should have about the same range, power and ECCM capability. In addition to all of this, it's important to note that the AMRAAM has a Home On Jam mode.
I read great comments by many and the guy deserves them for the explanations, logical analysis and organization of the lecture. But, that's the problem right there. Do we come to RU-vid for lectures? Why not present the same information by narrating what is presented, such as the excellent graphics and other info? Why not use videos of the missile in action and more photos, while he describes what he shows? Great knowledge, so let's upgrade the presentation, can we? Thanks.
Because finding videos and photos in the Public Domain, Creative Commons or copyrighted but available through media kits is difficult (particularly for anything non USA) . Self made graphics is more doable, but it increases a lot the production times, so it is used sparingly.
Meteor and other modern long range missiles are changing the balance. Smaller fighters with small radar antennas and small weapons loads are becoming less viable compared to medium and large fighters with larger antennas and weapons loads. An extreme long range missile needs an extreme long range radar to support it to its full capabiliites. Smaller radar antennas have much more limited effective range compared to larger radar antennas with the same technology. You can upgrade a small radar to the latest technology but a larger radar of the same technology will always have higher performance potential. Also, at extreme range if a fighter has many weapons to spare it can fire some at maximum range to put the adversary on the defensive instead of waiting until closing closer to a more effective range for the missile. Stealth aircraft are a special case where they can approach closer but they also have limited weapons load and still have similar needs for supporting radar of sufficient size to get full use out of future missiles at long range.
Not necessarily. A lot of aircraft are now network capable, basically they can share data with each other over some substantial distances. This means that you can work with 2 aircraft, one acts as a pure radar station and shares the location of some targets with an other aircraft which act as launch platform for long range weapons pretty far way. This was already demonstrated with the Rafale, when one Rafale shoot down a target which was radar locked by another.
Q1: Hi, can a reasonable sized booster be applied to a ramjet missile such as Meteor missile? Q2: why don't AAM use boosters? I would think for legacy fighters, adding a 1 meter booster to existing AAM'S would greatly increase their range, energy..etc
Propulsion system sounds like a cross between a Ram-jet and a Rocket and a Torpedo drive . Technically I guess it IS a Ram-jet really . Very interesting . Just Subbed because you don't conjecture . Present what you know and what can be Reasonably extrapolated .
It can even get it's data from an E-7 Wedgetail, so basically an AWACS with AESA radar. The refresh rate an EASA radar can achieve even in search while track should be high enough for the Metor to get close enough to a target before activating it's own radar. Which also means, the target aircraft will never get a lockon or missile launch warning up to the point the the meteor switches its radar on.
One other thing... what do you make of the asymmetric control surfaces on the Meteor? The two dorsal control surfaces are shorter than the two ventral surfaces (which have to protrude through the air intake... I genuinely wonder how they manage that, does the hinge exposed to all the hot incoming air!?). Do you think this would create many control problems? Or the fact that they have fly-by-wire by the time of Meteor mean that, even if it is unstable, that is not a problem with the right software?
The two ventral fins do not go through the air duct. In the back section of the intake cowling is housed the fin actuator system and some electronics, connected with the data link. I don't believe that the missile is unstable, actually.
When a pilot is warned that a missile is after him, he hits a button to launch anti-missile devices out the back of the plane. Once they leave the plane, they deploy foldable wings and control surfaces. They do not initially employ propulsion, so they immediately start losing speed as they leave the plane. They fall behind their parent craft to a safe distance, but are self guided to remain in its wake for many seconds without propulsion. An attacking missile has to get around them to hit their target. The gliders track the attacking missile, and change course to intercept it. They fire their rocket motors if needed to get near the missile. They don't explode and send out random flak, they deploy a disc shaped metal screen that the attacking missile runs into. The screen doesn't destroy the missile, the drag from the screen makes it impossible for the missile to stay on course.
@@Karl-Benny Scram jets have no moving parts, they need mach 3 in order to compress incoming air mixture tight enough to create the heat needed to burn the fuel. So in most cases any vehicle that can achieve faster than mach 3 will need a regular jet engine to get it going fast enough for scram jet to work properly.
AMRAAM if it looses the datalink before self guiding will lockon to any target it can find. Wonder what Meteor does ..... I smile thinking of BVR max range shots with Meteor and the pilot having to wait so long for the result. And what BVR will look like when the enemy get same technology. Poor enemies until then. ;)
Well it doesn’t really matter for the European theater the meteor is still superior to any Russian missile. And in combination with f-35´s it’s basically not a comparison. And the problem with losing lock is existent for all missiles. But the Meteor is probably one of the fastest missiles out there, so the wait time won’t be all too long
Boron? So does this missile essentially use zip fuel for a propellant? Also zip fuels typically leave a smoke plume, any idea what the smoke plumes on this thing looks like?
would it not be more likely that perishable fuel would be stored separately and loaded just prior to mission? i refer of course to the fluid fuel. presuming the solid propellant to be fairly stable?
I suspect that only the British F-35B will get the Meteor. (The Brits wouldn't want the F-35 without it, as a matter of course) But I think the Americans will include AMRAAMS and Sidewinders to all other F-35 users, and make sure the delivered F-35s aren't prepared for the Meteor (and the IRIS-T).
i wonder why there are not more of such weapons... also dont think price should be all that much higher since it has the same electronics as other missiles. only propulsion is more expensive but even than probably cant be much different. shelf life - maybe that can be more problematic.
I wish to see hard kill measures in aircrafts which are designed to trigger proximity fuses in missiles when they are homing on the jet. Is it possible to develop such a system? I have some basic understanding of this but dont know how to proceed. Please can you suggest something on this.
The ramjet propulsion was developed and is produced by Bayern-Chemie (as part of MBDA Germany) in Germany. bayern-chemie.com/projects/ de.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBDA_Deutschland
@@Millennium7HistoryTech I got that. What I meant was, does it fit INSIDE the bay? I ask because they had to cut the fins of the AIM120 to fit the weapons bay of the F-22.
@@fandangobrandango7864 Cats are not a waste! 🐈😿😾 Especially on an aircraft carrier! Who are the crew gonna play with, and give scratches and pets and rubs to, huh? It’s lonely out there on the ocean. I think cats are a vital part of staying mentally healthy and having a fun companion (who’s also sometimes just a jerk for no reason whatsoever). …oh you meant catapults? 🙀
7:20 Targeting from 300 kms is not difficult with an AWACS backing up. Imagine the AWACS finding the enemy from afar without locking it. Then a fighter toss the missile with maximum speed from 100s of kms away towards the target, and missile guiding itself without locking the target until the very end only by the AWACS data. In the last moments, missile radar is activated and locked, and voila. Turkey shot down a Russian fighter in Syria with that tactics.
Dali se raketa Meteor nakon ispaljivanja sa aviona krece prema vecim visinama da bi preslo veliku udaljenost 300 km sa manjim brzinama oko 1000 km/h jer je planeta Zemlja okrugla dok u zavrsnom dijelu raketa Meteor se obrusava sa velikom brzinama do cilja/mete!?Dali su mete/ciljevi veliki transportni avioni poput Airbusa ili Boinga!?
Interesting question. Flight trajectory optimization is a complex subject and it might be worth a separate video. The trajectory is either optimized for range, time or for high final energy. In any case you can safely ignore the Earth curvature.
