Vympel offers new R-27EP anti-radar missile

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 2,713

Please do not copy elsewhere- under the terms of usage, I am allowed one copy for personal/fair use, and I would rather not get in trouble for propagation of this article. thanks.

Date Posted: 26-Apr-2004

JANE'S MISSILES AND ROCKETS - MAY 01, 2004

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Vympel offers R-27EP anti-radar air-to-air missile
Piotr Butowski

Vympel is offering the R-27EP anti-radar version of its R-27 (AA-10 'Alamo') series of air-to-air missiles on the export market, writes Piotr Butowski. It showed a model of the weapon at the recent FIDAE defence exhibition in Santiago, Chile.

The missile is not a totally new concept. The first test launchings of the original R-27P passive-radar homing missile were made from a MiG-29 testbed in 1984. In 1987, the R-27P missile was adopted for service with what was then the Soviet air force, and in 1991 the Artem factory in Kiev, Ukraine, made a short production run of missiles. These are currently in service with the Russian Air Force.

Until recently, the existence of the R-27P could not be confirmed. Reports described it as being a weapon for use against fighter aircraft, AEW aircraft or standoff jammers. The first direct evidence for the weapon came when the Ukraine company Artem offered it for export.

Production of R-27P ended after the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Although the Artem factory is still offering the R-27P, it is unlikely to be able to deliver these because the homing head - an essential component of the missile - is made only by the CKBA factory in Omsk, Russia.

The R-27P and -EP missile - P for passivnaya (passive) - are equipped with a PRGS-27 (or 9B-1032) seeker developed by CKBA. This operates at centimetric wavelengths, and guides the round to the radar of enemy fighter aircraft. The missile is intended for use against enemy fighters at long range, when the launch aircraft may still be beyond the maximum range of the target's radar. Since the weapon uses passive homing, it will give the target no warning that a launch has been made.

Vympel offers two versions of the missile: the standard R-27P with a maximum range of 72km and the 'energetic' version R-27EP with a bigger rocket motor which gives a maximum range of 110km. This maintains the dual-standard policy set by the original active-radar and infrared-guided versions, which were fielded in medium (R-27R and -27T) and long-range (R-27ER and -27ET) variants respectively. The R-27P and -27EP retain the basic configuration of the earlier members of the AA-10 'Alamo' series, including the novel trapezoidal 'butterfly' control surfaces.

The homing head is capable of detecting a target from a range of more than 200km, but the R-27EP cannot carry out an interception at such distances. The flight time would exceed the operating duration of the missile's onboard power supply. Vympel is working on ways of increasing the operating time of the power supply in order to allow R-27EP engagements at up to 200km.

Series manufacturing of R-27P/EP missiles would be carried out at Vympel's facilities in Moscow. The company does not envisage large production orders for such a specialised weapon, so it would be able to meet the likely demand using its own workshops. At present Vympel is manufacturing small batches of R-77 (RVV-AE) and Kh-29 missiles for export. Annual production of these amounts to only 200-300 examples.

Vympel R-27P/EP anti-radar air-to-air missile specification R-27P R-27EP
Launch weight 248kg 346kg
Warhead weight 39kg 39kg
Length 4,000mm 4,700mm
Diameter 230mm 260mm
Wing span 772mm 800mm
Fin span 972mm 972mm
Maximum altitude of the target 20 km 20 km
Maximum g-load of the target 5.5 5.5
Maximum range 72km 110km
Minimum firing distance 2-3km 2-3km

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance their understanding of arms trade activities, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

Original post

Member for

19 years 11 months

Posts: 1,303

This maintains the dual-standard policy set by the original active-radar and infrared-guided versions, which were fielded in medium (R-27R and -27T) and long-range (R-27ER and -27ET) variants respectively.

The R-27R ('ALAMO-C') and R-27ER ('ALAMO-D') versions are SARH, not active radar homing. The new R-27EP is a passive homer? So how does it home? On enemy fighter radar emissions?

Is there still an active radar version of the R-27 on the way?

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 2,713

The R-27R ('ALAMO-C') and R-27ER ('ALAMO-D') versions are SARH, not active radar homing.

I know! Can't believe Pibu made that mistake.


The new R-27EP is a passive homer? So how does it home? On enemy fighter radar emissions?

Is there still an active radar version of the R-27 on the way?

It would appear that way. That would be one heck of a passive seeker head; well, it does have a 200km range.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 2,257

The new R-27EP is a passive homer? So how does it home? On enemy fighter radar emissions?

On any airborne radar transmissions, presumably. That's what the 'P' stands for- passive. Good for killing AWACS I'd say.

Is there still an active radar version of the R-27 on the way?

The active-radar version of the R-27 was the R-27AE. It's development was halted- the R-77 is already there and available for export, with the improved R-77M and ramjet-powered variant (RVV-AE-PD) in development- seems like a needless duplication of scarce resources.

The R-77 will be the next missile 'family'.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 2,713

On any airborne radar transmissions, presumably. That's what the 'P' stands for- passive. Good for killing AWACS I'd say.

The active-radar version of the R-27 was the R-27AE. It's development was halted- the R-77 is already there and available for export, with the improved R-77M and ramjet-powered variant (RVV-AE-PD) in development- seems like a needless duplication of scarce resources.

The R-77 will be the next missile 'family'.

According to some sources, the active radar version of the R-27 may outperform the R-77.

Artem originally proposed as far back as 1999 to incorporate a passive seeker, but Vympel refused collaboration.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 2,257

Well, the R-27AE is based off the long-burn versions of the R-27, so I assume it might have had greater range, but really, there's no reason why the R-27AE should have a superior seeker. I also understand it couldn't deal with targets maneuvering as hard as the R-77 can (awkward sentence, but you know what i mean).

But still, the R-77M is sure to outperform the R-27AE.

Well, the R-27AE is based off the long-burn versions of the R-27, so I assume it might have had greater range, but really, there's no reason why the R-27AE should have a superior seeker. I also understand it couldn't deal with targets maneuvering as hard as the R-77 can (awkward sentence, but you know what i mean).

But still, the R-77M is sure to outperform the R-27AE.

I have read that the R-77 family will be expanded to include passive radar homing and Imaging IR as well as IR (ie R-73 seeker and R-74 style seeker models). But until these are available I think the R-27 family should be expanded. Besides although the R-27 family can't manage 9g targets an enemy AWACs or other similar type like AEW won't be a 9g target.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 6,409

Well, the R-27AE is based off the long-burn versions of the R-27, so I assume it might have had greater range, but really, there's no reason why the R-27AE should have a superior seeker. I also understand it couldn't deal with targets maneuvering as hard as the R-77 can (awkward sentence, but you know what i mean).

But still, the R-77M is sure to outperform the R-27AE.

Actually, there is no reasony why the R-27AE should not have a superior seeker over the R-77. The R-27AE allows a larger seeker and antenna than would be possible with the R-77.

The whole point of the R-27AE is to upgrade existing stocks of R-27 with a simple change of the seeker-warhead body since the missile is modular.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 2,282

Garry, I think the R-27 can handle 12G targets.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 2,257

Actually, there is no reasony why the R-27AE should not have a superior seeker over the R-77. The R-27AE allows a larger seeker and antenna than would be possible with the R-77.

The whole point of the R-27AE is to upgrade existing stocks of R-27 with a simple change of the seeker-warhead body since the missile is modular.

Well, that was the whole point. Then it was halted. Oh well- regardless, the difference in seeker size between the R-77 and R-27AE is quite negligible. (260mm body diameter vs 200mm diameter).

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 2,257

Garry, I think the R-27 can handle 12G targets.

No, 8g. R-77 is 12g.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 1,437

In fact R-27P/EP can only handle up to 5.5g targets due to seeker limitations.

Of course, being passive means it could slam into you without warning....

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 2,282

Oops, 8G is right.

What about the AIM-7F and AIM-7M?

Attachments

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 6,409

Well, that was the whole point. Then it was halted. Oh well- regardless, the difference in seeker size between the R-77 and R-27AE is quite negligible. (260mm body diameter vs 200mm diameter).

That's still more than a 20% difference difference.

Member for

20 years 5 months

Posts: 1,220

8g...will be a competition to get a fighter plane...

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 2,257

That's still more than a 20% difference difference.

Yeah, but in terms of actual increased size, is it worth continuing development rather than favoring the newer, more agile generation?

(I hear the R-77M is supposed to have increased diameter as well- or maybe it was increased length ...)

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 6,409

Yeah, but in terms of actual increased size, is it worth continuing development rather than favoring the newer, more agile generation?

If there was a serious customer (read India or China) who would buy it in quantity and sponsor the development, it probably would be worth the development. Both countries have significant R-27 inventory investment. With the -EA, all they need is to acquire the "head", and use it to upgrade the missile body. The radars may need reworking but it may be possible to make the missile fire from the STT mode, without upgrading the radar. The result is your MiG or SU-27 that can fire an active missile without radar upgrade.

But alas, there was no interested sponsor.

This passive R-27 on the other hand seems to be a tailor made proposal that the Chinese could use and could be aimed at that market, the target of the business end of that missile being the ROC's E-2's, or the AWACs of any intervening power.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 1,437

8g...will be a competition to get a fighter plane...

Yeah, because fighter planes spend their whole mission doing 9g turns....

Member for

19 years 11 months

Posts: 1,303

Well, that was the whole point. Then it was halted. Oh well- regardless, the difference in seeker size between the R-77 and R-27AE is quite negligible. (260mm body diameter vs 200mm diameter).

Was the R-27AE development halted to concentrate funding on the R-77? Or for another reason..

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 2,257

I don't know whether it was to transfer funding to the R-77 or some other project/priority, but the R-77 definitely played a role in the demise of the R-27AE in some way.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 1,437

Why did the US make AMRAAM and not just stick a new seeker on Sparrow?

The whole missile was better...