Can Mavericks still be salvoed?
-
@Stevie said in Can Mavericks still be salvoed?:
@Icarus - Yeah…that’s a BMS-ism. No way one could do that in RL. Multiple missiles into one target - maybe. Multiple missiles into multiple targets? No way.
It is a capability of the RL airplane. I even see evidence of “RP 3” launch (might be a typo because htf that work?). Is it a good idea? That’s a debate. Is the airplane capable of simultaneous independent track with no less than two missiles on two targets with a single WPN REL press launching? Absolutely, unless if it was nixed M7 tape or later I dunno about current day. They usually don’t nix ability for no reason. If it’s a bad idea just tell them not to use it.
-
@Frederf - I think you can actually set the rack up to do that…I recall you can do that with a TER for Mk80 series (and LAU-10, LAU-68 for rockets). But MAV triple racks are no longer in use in the USA, so it’s sort of moot, operationally. I’d very much like to see the MAV triple rack pulled from BMS entirely, frankly.
Also - given that MAV is a CAS weapon, and doctrine is/was to be able to fire over the shoulders of Friendlies in contact, a ripple of MAVs would be tactically unreasonable. Which is probably another reason the rack has been abandoned.
Yes - I do believe that the TGP will track multiple targets. However, I very highly doubt that the jet can assign multiple targets to multiple MAV (of the same type) on the same - or two different - rack(s) without Stepping. In which case the previous one will drop track/lock.
This is based on what I know about how the RL missile(s) function, and they are a bit independent of the jet in that regard. I’ve been involved in the weaponeering and launch of a number of RL MAVs. Out of three, I’d expect only one to actually lock the target, and possibly only one to actually detonate.
-
That’s not how it works. There’s no MTT to multi missile assignment that I’m aware of (and not in BMS by any means). You don’t even need TGP to do RP2 launches nor is LAU-88 or LAU-88A necessary. You can be in EO BORE, PRE, VIS whatever just get one missile tracking normally but instead of firing it step to a different station of the same type missile to track that as normal too. The first non-selected tracking missile will retain its track “in the background” as it were. The two missiles are independent for tracking purposes, same target, different, all up to pilot. Obviously one wants to check both are in good parameters before launching both. All you need is two missiles on two stations.
From memory the earlier RP 2 launch would launch both missiles simultaneously but the electrical draw of true simultaneous launch was a bit high so they added a delay between launches so holding down the release switch is necessary to ensure both. The “quick pickle” (at least with JDAMs) was solved by a latching “sure fire” system so that you couldn’t get a partial JDAM launch. I don’t know if that was also applied to Maverick as well. I’ve also seen mixed info on whether launch is inhibited without track. In some cases it’s not and in some cases it seems to be.
BMS behavior is a bit of a slice in time/conditions that isn’t representative of all F-16 behavior for all time. In any case in BMS it is perfectly possible to track two things with two missiles and release both with one button press.
As to terminology “salvo” is not the noun I would use to describe any Maverick launch. You can fire the missiles individually, two individually from prior simultaneous track, or two release pulses on a single switch press. From command’s perspective they don’t care in the moment how you made the missiles fly in terms of switchology. Shooting several missiles individually on one attack, setting up simultaneous track and individual switch presses per launch, setting up simultaneous track and grouped launches with a single switch press… all of these I would report as “Rifle, ripple two” over the radio. Functionally they are ripple delivery. The idea of calling them “salvo” would not be one that crosses my mind but I understand the intention behind that word choice for this question.
-
@Frederf - I wouldn’t call it a “salvo” either…I’d call it a “ripple”.
…and I’d still expect the second launch to miss.
-
Don’t have time to make videos myself, so here is what I found :
-
@CheckPoint - I’d like to see some RL video…
-
@Stevie said in Can Mavericks still be salvoed?:
@CheckPoint - I’d like to see some RL video…
Me too
-
yeah the ripple-fire-mavs thing never made any sense to me, from a risk vs benefit pov… it’s fun in the sim, just for the challenge… but I always wondered why anyone would ever want to do this.
Risk => increase chance of losing a $100k missile, and possibility of collateral damage to friendlies or civilians
Benefit => saves about 3 seconds vs just pressing the pickle button a 2nd time, after visually verifying lock is still good
-
@airtex2019 - the baseline issue is simply the amount of time it takes to get multiple missiles targeted on multiple targets for a single pass…it’s just not tactically/functionally suitable, IMO. For the reasons you point out and more.
Not to mention that the IMAV seeker (and EO sensors in general) can be finicky based on time of day, atmospherics, and background…and a bite to get resolved to even a single target. Once the first target blows up and the air gets full of dust and heat, the second shot is highly likely to just plain miss - and so proximity of targets also factors. Big time.
I once had a chance to go out and stick my hand in the sand an hour or so after a MAV detonation against a tank hulk…I didn’t get burned, but I could still feel the heat!
-
@airtex2019 I totally agree!