Ideal PLA Ground Based Air Defence (SAM etc)??????

Mu Shu Tortilla

New Member
ramjets rely on atmospheric conditions to obtain optimal velocity, in which random air pockets of thin and dense clustered air can alter the ramjet from low low to high speed, so its launch to target is atmospheric condition dependant. while rockets retain constant velocity, without atmpospheric parameters hampering its velocity and range. its purely relied on its combustion and volume of fuel.


These are solid fuel ramjets, also called ducted rockets. The combustion chamber is grained with a solid fuel propellant that burns in the supersonic airflow of the ramjet. The article on the USAF project is not entirely correct in that the US Navy flies a solid fuel ramjet target drone, the GQM-163A. None of the issues you mention are valid, ramjets, even old ones like Talos, were not affected by atmospherics. Your contention of thin and dense air clustered together like so much tapioca is simply not true. I spent too many hours flying in the Navy to let that line slide without a challenge. Air density is dependent on the millibar curve present, temperature, humidity and altitude, but is uniform in an air mass. There are no sudden variations.
Crobato, the reason both the Navy and Air Force keep experimenting with these is their combination of high speed and great range makes them superior to conventional rocket propelled missiles. Phoenix was a Mach 5 missile with a 100nm plus range, but it was huge and heavy. Although a Tomcat could launch with six Phoenix, it could never attempt a landing with this load out. Pilots never launched with that load unless they could expend at least two in a training exercise, they were far too expensive to jettison to make landing weight. Those missiles also greatly restricted the Tomcat's turning performance.
One of the attractions of ACIMD/AIM-152 AAAM was that it was roughly the size and weight of a Sparrow yet had superior range and speed to Phoenix. It would have gone into production had the Air Force bought off on it for the F-22. A prototype is even on display at the Museum of Naval Ordinance at China Lake with the details of this program. It was a successful missile killed by budget considerations. Now it seems the Air Force is pursuing their own specialized ducted rocket ram jet missile for the F-22. Those videos of that MA-31 coming off the rail of that F/A-18 off Point Mugu should put paid to any notion that ducted rocket ramjets do not accelerate like a conventional rocket. Dude, we fire these things all the time.
 

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
They are not experimenting on these, and for a long time now, on the issue of SAMs. How many times do I keep telling you that the flight requirements of a SAM and an AAM is not the same.

Now why does it suck for a SAM? Because the amount of the rocket propellant stored in the chamber is dictated by the design of the ramjet engine. This is not tailored per se with any vertical lifting requirement that a SAM must entail, and for that requires much more propellant and power. All these missiles that you have been mentioning are either ground attack missiles or AAMs that are more or less, air launched and tend to have more horizontal flight profiles than a SAM. When you're talking about speed, ramjets have better sustained velocity over rockets, while rockets have superior peak velocity over ramjets. You figure out why rockets are used to put things into orbit.

Some textbook information on ramjets.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Ramjets generally give little or no thrust below about half the speed of sound, and they are inefficient (less than 600 seconds) until the airspeed exceeds 1000 km/h (600 mph) due to low compression ratios. Even above the minimum speed a wide flight envelope (range of flight conditions), such as low to high speeds and low to high altitudes, can force significant design compromises, and they tend to work best optimised for one designed speed and altitude (point designs). However, ramjets generally outperform gas turbine based jet engine designs and work best at supersonic speeds (Mach 2-4)[11]. Although inefficient at slower speeds they are more fuel-efficient than rockets over their entire useful working range up to at least Mach 5.5.

The performance of conventional ramjets falls off above Mach 6 due to dissociation and pressure loss caused by shock as the incoming air is slowed to subsonic velocities for combustion. In addition, the combustion chamber's inlet temperature increases to very high values, approaching the dissociation limit at some limiting Mach number. In the scramjet, or supersonic combustion ramjet, the ram air is not slowed to subsonic speeds for combustion and as a result, shocks are not encountered and pressure loss is avoided.[12]

Textbook info on ducted rockets.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


It might be envisaged that such an increase in performance would be widely deployed, but various issues frequently preclude this. The intakes of high-speed engines are difficult to design, and they can't simply be located anywhere on the airframe whilst getting reasonable performance – in general the entire airframe needs to be built around the intake design. Another problem is that the air eventually runs out, so the amount of additional thrust is limited by how fast the rocket climbs. Finally, the air ducting weighs about 5 to 10x more than an equivalent rocket that gives the same thrust. This slows the vehicle quite a bit towards the end of the burn. Thus in practice, use of an air-augmented design will normally reduce the overall performance of a rocket due to the extra weight.

Furthermore the definition of a ducted rocket:

"These are a slight variation on the ramjet where the supersonic exhaust from a rocket combustion process is used to compress and react with the incoming air in the main combustion chamber. This has the advantage of giving thrust even at zero speed.

In a solid fuel integrated rocket ramjet (SFIRR) the solid fuel is cast along the outer wall of the ramcombustor. In this case fuel injection is through ablation of the propellant by the hot compressed air from the intake(s). An aft mixer may be used to improve combustion efficiency. SFIRRs are preferred over LFRJs for some applications because of the simplicity of the fuel supply but only when the throttling requirements are minimal i.e. when variations in altitude or Mach number are limited.

In a ducted rocket a solid fuel gas generator produces a hot fuel-rich gas which is burnt in the ramcombustor with the compressed air supplied by the intake(s). The flow of gas improves the mixing of the fuel and air and increases total pressure recovery. In a Throttleable Ducted Rocket (TDR), also known as a Variable Flow Ducted Rocket (VFDR), a valve allows the gas generator exhaust to be throttled allowing control of the thrust. Unlike an LFRJ solid propellant ramjets cannot flameout. The ducted rocket sits somewhere between the simplicity of the SFRJ and the unlimited throttleability of the LFRJ."

I'm sorry to say, the MA-31 and its ilk, e.g. Kh-31 family, the 3M-90 Sunburn, and all the similarly looking ramjets, do not belong to this category of being called a ducted rocket. The ramjets that are mentioned put rocket propellant in the combustion chamber to act as an integral rocket booster, so you don't have to physically put a first stage rocket booster on the end. Once the rocket propellant on the combustion chamber is burned out, the ramjet function takes over.
 
Last edited:

Mu Shu Tortilla

New Member
Number one, TARASM was a ship launched surface to air ducted rocket ramjet. The medium range version had an 85nm range, and the long range version had a range of 160 nm. These missiles flew in testing. Surface to air. Apparently a boost grain is indeed sufficient to lift a ducted rocket ramjet from the surface to Mach 3.8 to Mach 4, that missile's sustained speed. They were cancelled because they were too fast for the fire control systems of the day. The computers literally could not stay ahead of such fast moving missiles. The aerodynamic performance was superb.
In the ducted rocket ramjets the US Navy has used, such as Coyote and MA-31, the boost grain closes off the entrance to the combustion chamber. This grain has it's own oxidizer. It burns out completely to open a passage for air to flow across the remaining fuel. This grain has no oxidizer and uses the air in the intake airflow to sustain combustion. The challenge is less about the intake shape but in the shape of the grain. This shape is even more critical to maintaining airflow through the ramjet and preventing reverse airflow.
Your argument about acceleration is fatuous. The boost grain is a normal rocket grain and will accelerate the missile just as quickly as any other similar rocket grain.
Btw, MA-31 most certainly does put a solid fuel grain in the combustion chamber. We flew them. My old boss was a maintainer on them. Two grains in them, one for initial boost and the second for ramjet propulsion. She was there at the meeting when Boeing proposed a different grain to the Russians to improve it's lackluster performance.
You can choose not to believe it, but the USAF is most definitely testing a ducted rocket ramjet AMRAAM replacement.
 

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
The boost grain is a normal rocket grain and will accelerate the missile just as quickly as any other similar rocket grain.

WRONG. Ever learned physics eh? If the fuel---liquid or solid---does not have a built in oxidizer then it requires air for complete combustion. The moment it requires air of any quantity then it is subjected to atmospheric factors. The lack of acceleration of a ramjet HAS NOTHING to do about what kind of fuel it uses, but rather, THE RAMMING EFFECT OF THE AIR that provides compression.

COMPRESSION of the fuel and oxidizer just before combustion is what gives increased power and efficiency to an engine, whether its a piston, turbine or ramjet. Do you really ever understands how a ramjet works? The ramming effect of the air through the engine intake is what provides this compression. However to get this ramming effect the engine has to be up in speed. In a turbine this is mitigated because of a series of turbine sections that make up the compressor stage. A ramjet does not have a compressor stage and has to rely on a pure aerodynamic approach to the inlet and sheer speed.

It so happens the integral rocket booster is what provides the initial acceleration boost, not the ducted rocket principle. But the problem of the integral rocket booster as compared to a staged rocket booster is that the integral rocket booster can only store as much propellant as the size of the combustion chamber, not based on what is actually required to achieve optimal peak velocity.

And please, a lot of the stuff you're mentioning, I could read them from different websites and you don't have to bother copying them word by word.
 
Last edited:

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
Your knowledge of modern propellants is a little stale Crobato.
Now wrap your mind around this, a hypersonic turbine engine that doesn't use afterburning to exceed Mach 3.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

All three articles have nothing to do with propellants.

You certainly can't tell the difference between a turbine and a ramjet. Jeez, and now you're talking about a turbojet here after going on blah blah blah with ducted rockets, which is very different from a turbojet.

Furthermore you are straying further and further away from the topic. You're trying to justify your AMRAAMs from a HUMVEE remember, and an AMRAAM has nothing to do with a ramjet.

If your next post has nothing to do with the PLA or a SAM, you will get an official warning.
 
Last edited:

planeman

Senior Member
VIP Professional
Iran just unveiled a significantly upgraded 100mm AAA gun. Fully automated and possibly with 'smart' ammunition. Similar in many ways to the latest Swiss "Skyshield" 35mm guns.

I think that one of the air defence needs of a country like China is essentially a cheap yet modern system for defending static locations (eg cities, bases etc) from cruise missiles, artillery and mortar attack. Current AAA fielded by the PLA is inadequate for this.

There are three general advancements that can be made to AAA:
* Improved situational awareness and targeting: Advanced electro-optical and radars plus network connectivity. Use of targeting computers can vastly increase the engagement envelope of the gun for a given ballistic performance because targeting has always been a bigger limiter than ballistics for AAA - this goes hand-in hand with the below to advancements.
* Improved automation: crew-less (optionally crewed of course) systems with automatic and precise transverse and elevation controls, recoil adjustment etc.
* Improved 'smart' ammunition: AHEAD and/or advanced-fusing type anti-missile ammunition and radar and/or laser homing ammunition, possibly with rocket boost for extended range (a true gun-fired missile).

Although such sophistication reduces the cost-advantage of AAA over SAMs, I still think the price advantage is there and there are other advantages too.

The closest PLA has is LD2000 which is similar to the US' successful Land-Phalanx, but like the US counterpart it's much too short ranged (despite the missiles) for my liking and too small calibre for cheap guided ammunition. I'm thinking 57mm or better still something in the 76-120mm range. Rate of fire need not be so high. Range should be about 10km and altitude 10km (ballistic range much further).

I'd envisage 3-4 versions all using the same gun:
jakg47.jpg

Top:
A basic version designed for minimum cost but still offering significant advantage over existing mounts. Fully crewed and unable to fire AHEAD Ammo (no electronic fusing on barrel muzzle). But able to fire radar or laser guided rounds provided a targeting module is sufficiently close by - guided rounds can partially compensate for human transverse and elevation inefficiencies.

Middle:
A fully automated but towed system with auxiliary power unit for limited on-site mobility (same motor acts as generator if no power-cable is available etc). Optionally crewed as back-up. Crew compartment is heated and/or air-conditioned for improved crew readiness. Compatible with sensor modules such as mast-mounted electro-optical device as shown. Typical deployment would be one gun with sensor/targeting module and one-two guns without as "slaves".

Bottom:
As above except mounted on fully-mobile chassis and with additional on-mount ammo etc. Crew cabin, although small, makes unit capable of single-unit full operation, but ideally deployed as part of a network.
 
Top