USAF requests info on new anti-radiation missile for F-35A

F-35 Armament, fuel tanks, internal and external hardpoints, loadouts, and other stores.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24476
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post13 Jan 2020, 09:11

Started a new thread because possibility the AARGM-ER will become available for the F-35A (or so sayeth the article).
US Air Force requests information on new anti-radiation missile for F-35A
11 Jan 2020 Garrett Reim

"The US Air Force (USAF) is requesting information for modifications to the US Navy’s (USN) Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile-Extended Range (AARGM-ER) programme that would make that weapon suitable for its Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II stealth fighter.

The so-called Stand-in Attack Weapon (SiAW) would “heavily leverage” the Northrop Grumman-manufactured AARGM-ER, according to a request for information posted online on 9 January. The AARGM-ER is to be integrated on the USN’s Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and Boeing EA-18G Growler aircraft, as well as the internal carriage on the F-35C variant.

[ 12 Mar 2019: https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing ... 89.article ]

“The SiAW modifications will make the weapon relevant for fifth-generation aircraft and include the development and integration of a warhead and fuze capable of prosecuting an expanded target set, an active radar homing guidance system and a universal armament interface message set for the SiAW missile and F-35A aircraft,” says the USAF in its notice. “SiAW will also seek development of future advanced capabilities to keep it relevant for evolving threats.”

The USAF says it is conducting market research for potential vendors to provide the modifications.…"

Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing ... 97.article
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6695
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post13 Jan 2020, 09:41

While, much of the discussion regarding the AARGM-ER was around the F-35C. I just assumed it was also being integrated into the F-35A. As it would fit both and would be the primary anti-radiation missile for the US and her Allies in the coming years.


:?
Offline

castlebravo

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 231
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2011, 19:10

Unread post13 Jan 2020, 20:15

Corsair1963 wrote:While, much of the discussion regarding the AARGM-ER was around the F-35C. I just assumed it was also being integrated into the F-35A. As it would fit both and would be the primary anti-radiation missile for the US and her Allies in the coming years.


:?


The AARGM-ER should fit in the F-35A, but the USAF doesn't want the AARGM-ER as-is for their SIAW program, they want to modify it for different capabilities.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6695
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post14 Jan 2020, 05:07

castlebravo wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:While, much of the discussion regarding the AARGM-ER was around the F-35C. I just assumed it was also being integrated into the F-35A. As it would fit both and would be the primary anti-radiation missile for the US and her Allies in the coming years.


:?


The AARGM-ER should fit in the F-35A, but the USAF doesn't want the AARGM-ER as-is for their SIAW program, they want to modify it for different capabilities.



I understand the USAF wants to modify the AARGM-ER for other roles. Yet, what will it use in the Anti-Radiation Role in the case of the F-35A???
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3105
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post14 Jan 2020, 07:32

“The SiAW modifications will make the weapon relevant for fifth-generation aircraft and include the development and integration of a warhead and fuze capable of prosecuting an expanded target set, an active radar homing guidance system and a universal armament interface message set for the SiAW missile and F-35A aircraft,” says the USAF in its notice. “SiAW will also seek development of future advanced capabilities to keep it relevant for evolving threats.”


I thought AARGM and -ER already had active radar homing guidance along with passive radar homing guidance. Maybe they meant new or upgraded version of ARH guidance? IIRC AARGM-ER already has modular payload section, so new warheads should not be much of a problem. I really wonder what kind of things USAF wants from the new warhead and fuze that don't exist in the current version? Not that I expect to get any answer to that... :D
Offline

aussiebloke

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 124
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2017, 22:29

Unread post14 Jan 2020, 11:18

Oddly the FY2020 budget papers make no mention of the ARH guidance system [edit: with regard to R&D for SiAW]

Stand In Attack Weapon (SiAW) system will provide strike capability to defeat rapidly relocatable targets that create the Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) environment.
The target environment includes Theater Ballistic Missile Launchers, Land Attack and Anti-Ship Cruise Missile Launchers, GPS Jammers, Anti-Satellite Systems, and Integrated Air Defense Systems. Key attributes of the Stand-in Attack Weapon (SiAW) will include Lethality, Responsiveness, Survivability, Range, and Internal Carriage. The F-35 is the Air Force threshold platform. The path to the SiAW capability is through the Navy Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile-Extended Range (AARGM-ER) program with additions to the Universal Armament Interface (UAI), Warhead/Fuze, and Integration on the F-35.


https://apps.dtic.mil/descriptivesum/Y2 ... B_2020.pdf
Last edited by aussiebloke on 14 Jan 2020, 15:26, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2713
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post14 Jan 2020, 15:00

aussiebloke wrote:Oddly the FY2020 budget papers make no mention of the ARH guidance system.

https://apps.dtic.mil/descriptivesum/Y2 ... B_2020.pdf



Well, I found this on naval-technology.com:
https://www.naval-technology.com/projec ... ile-aargm/

The AGM-88E is equipped with an advanced multi-sensor system comprising a Millimetre Wave (MMW) terminal seeker, advanced Anti-Radiation Homing (ARH) receiver and Global Positioning System / Inertial Navigation System (GPS/INS). The system can quickly engage traditional and advanced enemy air defence targets, as well as non-radar time-sensitive strike targets.


And also this (entitled: "Navy adds millimeter wave radar to AGM-88B anti-radiation missile"):
https://defensesystems.com/articles/201 ... /navy.aspx

The U.S. Navy is working with Orbital ATK to convert AGM-88B High Speed Anti-Radiation Missiles into 25 AGM-88E Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) All-Up-Rounds as part of an effort to destroy relocatable air defenses.

Additional features of the AARGM include weapon-impact-assessment transmit, millimeter wave radar terminal seeker, global positioning system/Inertial Navigation System guidance, net-centric connectivity, and digital, anti-radiation homing sensor.


It seems that one of the diferences between the "traditional" HARM or AGM-88B and the AARGM or AGM-88E is the addition of a Millimeter Wave Radar seeker.

Actually and to be honest with you I also didn't know about this! I had to search due to hornetfinn's post.


Maybe what the USAF wants is an AARGM or AARGM-ER variant with a multi-sensor seeker similar to the SDBII which would be a multi-sensor system that not only uses radar (passive and active) but also Infrared and who knows maybe Laser as well??
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3560
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post14 Jan 2020, 19:37

ricnunes wrote:



It seems that one of the diferences between the "traditional" HARM or AGM-88B and the AARGM or AGM-88E is the addition of a Millimeter Wave Radar seeker.

Actually and to be honest with you I also didn't know about this! I had to search due to hornetfinn's post.


Maybe what the USAF wants is an AARGM or AARGM-ER variant with a multi-sensor seeker similar to the SDBII which would be a multi-sensor system that not only uses radar (passive and active) but also Infrared and who knows maybe Laser as well??


Typically the warhead will differ significantly, depending on the target. A warhead optimized for taking out radar emitters, may not be suitable for other uses. It sounds like the USAF wants a different warhead/sensor, to go after non-emitting/moving/hardened targets. It sounds like the SIAW is intended to be sort of a long range, M3 SDB2 type weapon.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2713
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post14 Jan 2020, 22:48

wrightwing wrote:Typically the warhead will differ significantly, depending on the target. A warhead optimized for taking out radar emitters, may not be suitable for other uses. It sounds like the USAF wants a different warhead/sensor, to go after non-emitting/moving/hardened targets. It sounds like the SIAW is intended to be sort of a long range, M3 SDB2 type weapon.


Yes, it makes sense that such weapon (SIAW) will use a different warhead when compared to the AARGM-ER.

It could also be (my speculation, of course) that due to having more sensors that when SIAW is employed in Anti-Radiation mode/task that it uses passive radar homing seeker to so after the enemy Air Defense Radar (like the regular HARM or AARGM would do) but once it gets close it would switch to another seeker such as IR for example and instead of going directly after the radar antenna it would go directly against the vehicle where the enemy radar is mounted at which means that a "general purpose" and more powerful warhead would work and perform the job successfully.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

marauder2048

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1086
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post15 Jan 2020, 03:58

The budget documents mention anti-radiation homing(ARH)/UAI integration i.e. providing an emitter
descriptor (like a GPS jammer) to the missile via UAI.

So it's totally possible that someone just mis-expanded the acronym in the solicitation.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24476
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post21 Feb 2020, 04:41

New Missile Prepares for F-35 Tests
20 Feb 2020 Rachel S. Cohen

"The Air Force is moving forward with its Stand-In Attack Weapon, preparing to check how it fits inside the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter this summer. Though the service previously said the missile would fly on the B-21 as well, Air Force spokeswoman Ilka Cole said recently the F-35 is now the only USAF aircraft under consideration. Fit checks will entail wind tunnel testing and ground tests.

The weapon is based on the extended-range version of the Navy’s Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile in development at Northrop Grumman. Cole said missile design specifications like its range are classified....

...“SiAW targets include theater ballistic missile launchers, land attack and anti-ship cruise missile launchers, GPS jammers, anti-satellite systems, and integrated air defense systems,” according to Air Force budget documents...

...The baseline version [AARGM] is already integrated onto the F-35. Military testers will vet the SiAW on the F-35 in the early 2020s so it can begin regular operations by the mid-2020s. It’s expected to wield a new warhead, the design of which is slated to end in fiscal 2021.

The Air Force created the program in 2018 and requested $160.4 million for SiAW development in its 2021 budget, ramping up to $364.5 million in 2025. The request did not say how much the weapon will cost in total."

Source: https://www.airforcemag.com/new-missile ... -35-tests/
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

eloise

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1838
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

Unread post21 Feb 2020, 07:26

So AARGM-ER is Mach 4 missileand can fly 300 km, these specs make its kinematic very similar to Kh-15
Orbital ATK's ER solution features a number of design changes to the existing AARGM configuration and leverages what Mike Stuart, Orbital ATK's director of missiles strategy, business development and marketing, characterises as "higher technical readiness level (TRL) subcomponents with reduced risk, to accelerate the timeline to the US Navy customer".

"From our design concept perspective, we took a look at the threats, we took a look at, most importantly, the ranges that we thought were going to be needed, and then we wanted to bring in technology associated with achieving those goals, that were higher TRL," Stuart told Jane's .

The Orbital ATK design introduces an aft actuator control system with the mid-body wings on the legacy AARGM removed. This not only enables a form fit capability internal to the F-35 but also improves manoeuvrability and reduces drag, Stuart said. The company has introduced side-body strakes that deliver lift during the missile's flight.

To assist the required range increment, the existing mid-body control section componentry is repackaged to deliver additional space for propulsion, while the airframe is tapered up from aft of the seeker section to deliver an approximate 10% increase in diameter, with consequent additional volume for propulsion.

Stuart said the company is evaluating multiple sources for the aft actuator solution and also for the new rocket motor design that, Jane's understands, is expected to deliver an engagement speed that is double that of the current AARGM. "Our assessment is that there are propulsion options out there that are high TRL and can quickly transition into a production scenario to meet the USN's timelines," he said.

While the propulsion type has yet to be decided, a ramjet solution has not been discounted. "The current Orbital ATK design concept is not a ramjet, but it certainly doesn't remove that potential. However, it will be the USN and its requirements office that make the final decision on where they want to go with propulsion," he said.

'Increased Survivability' is built into the AARGM ER requirement, although Stuart declined to comment on the specifics of the Orbital ATK solution, noting only that "speed is in the equation. We're going double the range in about the same amount of time, and you have to increase speed to achieve that; so speed in and of itself is an improvement to survivability. There are other aspects of our design solution that improve survivability, but these are not releasable".

http://www.janes.com/article/71285/orbi ... gn-concept
Image
Image
Last edited by eloise on 21 Feb 2020, 08:00, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24476
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post21 Feb 2020, 07:58

The link did not work for me - this link may be useful: Progressive HARM: An evolution in capability https://www.janes.com/images/assets/298 ... bility.pdf (0.6Mb)

BTW it would be very helpful to FIND the article above to have the TITLE, DATE & Author of said missing article. Thanks.

Please remember that HOT LINKING IMAGES is not likely to work in this era of the FckED internet. So first image then 2nd.

REMEMBER until someone else puts those images in their cache they will not be able to see the missing HOTlinked images.
Attachments
https___s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com_the-drive-cms-content-staging_message-editor%2F1557245380322-aargm-er.jpg
1280px-AS-16_Kickback_2008_G1.jpg
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

squirrelshoes

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 121
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2016, 23:53

Unread post23 Feb 2020, 10:36

Weren't they working on (or at least proposing) an anti-radiation version of SDB? I wonder what ever become of that.

Obviously would be less capable than a mach 4 long range missile but carrying 8 flying slick prosecutes a lot more targets.
Offline

eloise

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1838
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

Unread post23 Feb 2020, 11:53

squirrelshoes wrote:Weren't they working on (or at least proposing) an anti-radiation version of SDB? I wonder what ever become of that.

Obviously would be less capable than a mach 4 long range missile but carrying 8 flying slick prosecutes a lot more targets.

Sound like SPEAR-EW with warhead
CA551E7A-D495-4D18-96A6-B1B1B9C20AC2.png

(no more hotlink)
Next

Return to F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests