Russian Military Pictures & Videos

Miragedriver

Miragedriver

Brigadier
March 21, 2015. Russia-24. Russia. The S-400 Triumph air defense missile system division of the Russian Northern Fleet took up combat duty in country's northwest Murmansk region.



Back to bottling my Grenache
 
Miragedriver

Miragedriver

Brigadier
VDV recent exercises
source and more pics:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

photos by Alexander Sidorenko

122652


122678


122696


122684



Back to bottling my Grenache
 
b787

b787

Captain
Jura said:
b787, I'm no expert in airplanes, so my assumptions might be wrong, feel free to correct them; they are:
  • air-to-air, the Sea Harrier had on-board radar, while Як-38 didn't
  • air-to-surface, the Sea Harrier had over-the-horizon missile, while Як-38 didn't
Click to expand...
Jura

The question always is the time frame, the Yak-38 is a 1970s aircraft, while the Harrier has several generations and modifications going on from the 1960s to almost to the present day.

You have to include Russia stop the development of Yak-38 in the early 1980s and designed the Yak-141 by 1989 to replace the Yak-38. By designed i meant built and flew.
4-2.jpg

Russia terminated both programs by the mid 1990s

Now see a Harrier in 1982, you will not see major advantages over the Yak-38 and by 1990, the Harrier was definitively inferior to the Yak-141.

In 1982 no harrier was able to fire AIM-7s, but they could only fire AIM-9s, YAk-38 was going to fire AA-8s where is the advantage?

Two_Yakovlev_Yak-38s_in_1983.JPEG

392596.jpg

What type of weapons used the sea Harriers in 1982?
harrier_34.jpg

If you stay in a time frame you will find both were quiet similar
 
Last edited:
Miragedriver

Miragedriver

Brigadier
b787 said:
.

In 1982 no harrier was able to fire AIM-7s, but they could only fire AIM-9s, YAk-38 was going to fire AA-8s where is the advantage?.....

......What type of weapons used the sea Harriers in 1982?
Click to expand...

***OFF TOPIC***

Yak-38 was more akin to the Harrier GR.1 or AV-8A Harrier versions in that it lacked any radar optimized for the fighter role despite its interceptor mission. It did have very simple ranging radar to aid with targeting and this was linked to a gun sight that was taken straight out of the MiG-21. Originally there were to be two versions of the Yak-36 (the designation given to the early Yak-38s) with one featuring a multi-mode radar and medium range air to air missiles. This would have made it the superior to the Sea Harrier FRS.1 but the project was cancelled with the intention of fitting these systems later although this too failed to materialize.

The Sea Harrier FRS.1 was equipped with the excellent AIM-9L Sidewinder which introduced all-aspect detection capability meaning a pilot didn’t have to get on an enemy plane’s tail to acquire the target. The missile had a powerful fragmentation warhead which meant that even a proximity hit could do potentially fatal damage to a single engine aircraft. In the fighter role the AIM-9 was backed up by two ventral 30 mm guns whose mounting was designed to help give the aircraft increased stability. The aircraft had a wide range of unguided weapons available to it from rockets to bombs and the maximum warload was around 8,000lbs spread out between a total of five pylons (excluding the two dedicated 30mm cannons). A seldom carried weapon that was nonetheless available to the Sea Harrier was the Sea Eagle anti-ship missile which was a potent open ocean weapon and was capable of disabling all but the largest warship.

The Yak-38 could only carry just over half of the warload of the Sea Harrier at 4,500lbs on just four pylons. Primary air to air armament was the miniscule R-60 (AA-8 ‘Aphid’) infra-red missile. The AIM-9 dwarfed the R-60 in terms of size but the R-60 had several advantages over the Sidewinder. The R-60 was all-aspect like the AIM-9L but had a much wider detection scope with the later R-60MK variant having limited off bore sight capability albeit with a reduced range. The weapon could also be fired at much closer ranges than the Sidewinder making it especially deadly in a very tight turning dogfight but its main drawbacks was far less range and a very small warhead. As a result to carry out its role of destroying multi-engine patrol aircraft the Yak-38 would most likely have to get very close to the target and ripple fire its R-60s to mortally wound it. The Yak-38 also had a wide array of unguided bombs and rockets to call upon for the ground attack role but if guns were needed then a pod had to be carried taking up one of the wing pylons. The Yak-38 could use the Kh-23 (AS-7 ‘Kerry’) guided air to surface missile but had to carry a data link on a pylon to do so thus further limiting what could be carried.

However, the Yak-38 could never maneuver or have the range of the Harrier.

***ON TOPIC***
We can have a discussion of the Harrier vs Yak-38 on a different thread. Please start one if you wish.:)


Back to bottling my Grenache
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top