New Cuda Missile for F-35

Is someone able to tell more about this ?

http://translate.google.com/translate?c ... pair=fr|en

Sorry is an automatic translation of a french website. i'm not verry fluent in english.

Probably good for this to have its own thread.
We were speculating on the other thread whether this could use the 360 degree MADL in a semi-active mode in short range engagements -- though the article says it has a fully active radar.

just a litlle precision, i'm the author of this article. I said that is an fully article because LM says that CUDA is similar to AMRAAM.
But strangly, i found no more information about CUDA on the Web. it appeared out of nowhere

count_to_10 wrote:Probably good for this to have its own thread.
We were speculating on the other thread whether this could use the 360 degree MADL in a semi-active mode in short range engagements -- though the article says it has a fully active radar.

I still don't see that this would often be necessary. It could use data links to give targeting from an aircraft that does have a proper radar angle. That is what the data link is for after all. I would think F-35 tactics would take advantage of this by fighting in a more extended formation with a trailing aircraft many times. That aircraft could provide all the necessary targeting for the other group if it gets into a tight turning fight.

bubzy wrote:just a litlle precision, i'm the author of this article. I said that is an fully article because LM says that CUDA is similar to AMRAAM.
But strangly, i found no more information about CUDA on the Web. it appeared out of nowhere

Probably just because it's an internal company idea, not a design intended for a stated requirement from an customer so far...

@Bigjku:

My off the wall idea of using MADL with CUDA sprung from using CUDA in SARH mode. Instead of homing in on reflected radar energy, it would home in on reflected MADL energy.

The benefits are several fold
1. MADL is 360 so you would not need to keep the F-35 pointed towards the target.
2. MADL could illuminate the target despite any evasive maneuvers by either the F-35 or the target.
3. Other F-35 could also co-illuminate the targets

I love this idea if it works. Can you say "ripple fire". My worry is that we might end up with another M-16 .223 vs .30 argument. I can carry 1000 rounds instead of 500 but I have to head shot him or shoot him twice. How big is the warhead? Can it head shot a fighter jet? I want to be able to fire two missiles because I can(they are missiles and not hitiles after all) and not because one hit won't stop him from emptying his AK or 6 Amraamski's into me before he dies.

Good idea and the one worth pursuing, IMO.
6 SDBs + 6 AAMs give a good persistence and def capability.

borntoholdout wrote:I love this idea if it works. Can you say "ripple fire". My worry is that we might end up with another M-16 .223 vs .30 argument. I can carry 1000 rounds instead of 500 but I have to head shot him or shoot him twice. How big is the warhead? Can it head shot a higher jet? I want to be able to fire two missiles because I can(they are missiles and not hitiles after all) and not because one hit won't stop him from emptying his AK or 6 Amraamski's into me before he dies.

This is a pretty valid argument. But seeing as how even Sidewinders (with expanding rod warheads) have more than enough kick to cripple (and in some cases cut in half) fighter aircraft, I think whatever they put in this one will be enough.

I always thought that the current size missiles could be smaller, considering the body of the AMRAAM was designed around electronics/chemical rocket systems nearly three decades old. Still, there are many questions surrounding this "CUDA" missile system- Range? Warhead? Other launch platforms besides the F-35?
What does "CUDA" even stand for? Perhaps the marketing guys like Mopar?...

But can they make half scale aim-9's?

SpudmanWP wrote:@Bigjku:

My off the wall idea of using MADL with CUDA sprung from using CUDA in SARH mode. Instead of homing in on reflected radar energy, it would home in on reflected MADL energy.

The benefits are several fold
1. MADL is 360 so you would not need to keep the F-35 pointed towards the target.
2. MADL could illuminate the target despite any evasive maneuvers by either the F-35 or the target.
3. Other F-35 could also co-illuminate the targets

I get the argument and if it is cheap then I would say go for it.

borntoholdout wrote:But can they make half scale aim-9's?

You mean a Stinger?

http://www.airforce-magazine.com/Magazi ... 12expo.pdf (1.3Mb)

CAPTION: “A Lockheed Martin model shows how its “Cuda” concept for a small AMRAAM-class radar guided dogfight missile could triple the air-to-air internal loadout on an F-35. The missile is about the size of a Small Diameter Bomb & fits on an SDB-style rack.”

spazsinbad wrote:http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Magazine%20Documents/2012/November%202012/1112expo.pdf (1.3Mb)

CAPTION: “A Lockheed Martin model shows how its “Cuda” concept for a small AMRAAM-class radar guided dogfight missile could triple the air-to-air internal loadout on an F-35. The missile is about the size of a Small Diameter Bomb & fits on an SDB-style rack.”

Makes sense to leverage an existing rack.

count_to_10 wrote:

borntoholdout wrote:But can they make half scale aim-9's?

You mean a Stinger?

Cuba is amraam "class". I take that as medium range "class". Stinger's don't have the aim-9's range. But I get it.