Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 10:04
by garrya
Capture.PNG

https://twitter.com/hashtag/SAS2019?src=hash
Is it just me or that looks like a hypersonic glider than a scramjet missile?

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 10:53
by marsavian
The F-35B should be able to carry this too having similar 5000 lb inner pylon capacity.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 12:48
by garrya
marsavian wrote:The F-35B should be able to carry this too having similar 5000 lb inner pylon capacity.

STOVL fighter will ablity to launch hypersonic missile

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 13:15
by madrat
I really thought we'd see hypersonic weapons more akin to rocketpacks by now. INS with DU tips and delayed fuses. Hitting from 20km at Mach 5+ to crack concrete bunkers wide open on the cheap.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 13:57
by crosshairs
Was anyone here around in the 80s? A-10s with these suckers would have been awesome.

Image

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 14:46
by popcorn
LM's counter to proponents of F-15EX as a future launch platform for hypersonic missiles.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 15:04
by sferrin
crosshairs wrote:Was anyone here around in the 80s? A-10s with these suckers would have been awesome.


Go look up "hypervelocity missile" on Secret Projects. Still waiting to hear the tale of how they modified the XF-108 Rapier into a Vigilante, including using many of the Rapier's systems. :roll: :lmao:

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 15:16
by garrya
madrat wrote:I really thought we'd see hypersonic weapons more akin to rocketpacks by now. INS with DU tips and delayed fuses. Hitting from 20km at Mach 5+ to crack concrete bunkers wide open on the cheap.

a small DU dart will be fairly ineffective against bunker

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 15:25
by eloise
where is the air inlet?
Image

The artist's conception of an F-35C firing a HAWC derivative first appeared at the Navy League's annual Sea, Air, Space convention just outside of Washington, D.C., on May 6, 2019. The rendering shows the stealth aircraft configured to carry two of these weapons externally, one under each wing. In April 2018, the U.S. Air Force, working together with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), awarded Lockheed Martin a contract worth approximately $928 million for the development of HAWC.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 16:29
by SpudmanWP
There were two paths in development, Boost-Glide and Boost-Scramjet. This is the Boost-Glide version.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 18:55
by eloise
SpudmanWP wrote:There were two paths in development, Boost-Glide and Boost-Scramjet. This is the Boost-Glide version.

But HAWC stand for hyper sonic air breathing weapon concept, boost glide do not have an engine so i don't think they can be called air breathing

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 19:01
by SpudmanWP
You are assuming that PowerPoint prepares & the reporters who watch their presentations know the difference.

Then again, maybe it's a pop-out inlet :)

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 20:06
by sferrin
SpudmanWP wrote:You are assuming that PowerPoint prepares & the reporters who watch their presentations know the difference.

Then again, maybe it's a pop-out inlet :)


Or under a fairing.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 21:22
by marauder2048
Or the inlet design is proprietary (3D?) and they don't want to share it.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 01:14
by gc
Have the Navy considered slinging a SM-6 under the F-35 wing for near term anti-air and surface capability? They can get a Mach 3.5 missile with a range way greater than 250nm (this is the surface launched range) with some software tweaks i suppose.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 02:33
by sferrin
gc wrote:Have the Navy considered slinging a SM-6 under the F-35 wing for near term anti-air and surface capability? They can get a Mach 3.5 missile with a range way greater than 250nm (this is the surface launched range) with some software tweaks i suppose.


No. It's a horrible idea.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 02:52
by eloise
marauder2048 wrote:Or the inlet design is proprietary (3D?) and they don't want to share it.

As far as i know, HSSW is a different program

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 02:58
by madrat
garrya wrote:
madrat wrote:I really thought we'd see hypersonic weapons more akin to rocketpacks by now. INS with DU tips and delayed fuses. Hitting from 20km at Mach 5+ to crack concrete bunkers wide open on the cheap.

a small DU dart will be fairly ineffective against bunker


A tiny hole to insert the delayed fuse package is actually quite sound. The over-pressure then near instant partial vacuum effects of a contained explosion would clean a bunker out.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 03:52
by sferrin
madrat wrote:
garrya wrote:
madrat wrote:I really thought we'd see hypersonic weapons more akin to rocketpacks by now. INS with DU tips and delayed fuses. Hitting from 20km at Mach 5+ to crack concrete bunkers wide open on the cheap.

a small DU dart will be fairly ineffective against bunker


A tiny hole to insert the delayed fuse package is actually quite sound. The over-pressure then near instant partial vacuum effects of a contained explosion would clean a bunker out.


A Mach 5 SDB.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 04:04
by marauder2048
eloise wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:Or the inlet design is proprietary (3D?) and they don't want to share it.

As far as i know, HSSW is a different program



It is. My point was that they aren't showing you much of the inlet there either.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 09:13
by marauder2048
sferrin wrote:
madrat wrote:
madrat wrote:I really thought we'd see hypersonic weapons more akin to rocketpacks by now. INS with DU tips and delayed fuses. Hitting from 20km at Mach 5+ to crack concrete bunkers wide open on the cheap.

A tiny hole to insert the delayed fuse package is actually quite sound. The over-pressure then near instant partial vacuum effects of a contained explosion would clean a bunker out.


A Mach 5 SDB.



Depends on what impact velocity the penetrator can survive. Previously, practical penetrator designs were
limited to ~ 4000 fps but I swear that I read something about Sandia reliably hitting 5000 fps with some new materials.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 10:45
by eloise
sferrin wrote:
gc wrote:Have the Navy considered slinging a SM-6 under the F-35 wing for near term anti-air and surface capability? They can get a Mach 3.5 missile with a range way greater than 250nm (this is the surface launched range) with some software tweaks i suppose.


No. It's a horrible idea.

Why is it horrible?

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 14:44
by lbk000
SM-6 is some 3x heavier than even an AIM-54, and that's not even considering the weight of a hypothetical carriage solution. It's an utter nonstarter.

Not even going to get into the engineering, logistical, and certification challenges that would suddenly make this a not-very-quick-and-cheap idea. Oh yeah, and in a world where saturation is ever more the name of the game, you want to bank on a deployment scheme that is anything but conducive to it?

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 16:02
by SpudmanWP
SM-6 is listed at 3300lbs but that likely included the booster which would not be needed for airborne use.

Whatever is left over is well within the weight limits of the inner pylon of any F-35 (5k lbs).

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 16:19
by optimist
Just a question. Do they still have black weapon programs and procurement?

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 16:38
by SpudmanWP
What is this "black program" you speak of? :roll:

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 16:49
by sferrin
SpudmanWP wrote:SM-6 is listed at 3300lbs but that likely included the booster which would not be needed for airborne use.

Whatever is left over is well within the weight limits of the inner pylon of any F-35 (5k lbs).


It's definitely sans-booster (you could even put a twin launcher on the inboard pylons) but it's still a terrible idea. Lots of money and not much capability in this role. A LRASM would be far superior in every regard but speed.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 19:25
by SpudmanWP
well, LRASM can't hit a plane or missile/rocket.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2019, 19:30
by sferrin
SpudmanWP wrote:well, LRASM can't hit a plane or missile/rocket.


True. And in that regard (at least conceptually) an SM-6 minus booster might not be a bad Band-Aid for anti-air. (Assuming smaller, 2-stage, weapons are off the table.)

To attack a ship though, LRASM would be the better choice.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2019, 04:35
by garrya
which is better
Image
Image

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2019, 06:05
by SpudmanWP
Depends on target, warhead size, and survival chance fo the missile & launch platform.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2019, 07:55
by garrya
SpudmanWP wrote:Depends on target, warhead size, and survival chance fo the missile & launch platform.

This target
Image

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2019, 10:48
by knowan
An air-launched SM-6 would also have far more range than is useful.

If you want to propose converting a SAM for air-launch, the RIM-162 ESSM Block II would be a better idea; the F-35 could probably even carry that internally.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2019, 12:53
by sferrin
garrya wrote:which is better


Which is better:

Comparison-Essay.jpg

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2019, 12:54
by sferrin
knowan wrote:An air-launched SM-6 would also have far more range than is useful.


With CEC there's no such thing. But you're packing a 1,500lb weapon when you could get the same effect with a fraction of the weight by using a 2-stage missile.

Capture.PNG

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2019, 03:47
by eloise
sferrin wrote:
knowan wrote:An air-launched SM-6 would also have far more range than is useful.


With CEC there's no such thing. But you're packing a 1,500lb weapon when you could get the same effect with a fraction of the weight by using a 2-stage missile.

Capture.PNG

i do not know what is in your photo, but iam skeptical if it has the reach of SM-6
SM-6 is 2 stage missile
Image

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2019, 04:07
by SpudmanWP
That is an SM-6 that includes a booster for launching out of an Mk-41 VL cell. An air-launched version would not need the booster but would need lugs and datalinks plumbed.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2019, 05:04
by fidgetspinner
garrya wrote:which is better
Image
Image


As much as I am dying to know the size, length, speed, range, date test and operational production date of the missile I think a better preference in my opinion regarding a stealth aircraft is to carry such weapons internally without losing its stealth profile.

More or less it seems the Russians are getting the right idea to carry their supposedly in development mini-kinzhal to fit in their su-57s. I would prefer an aircraft like the F-35 to carry such weapons internally if its carried externally have some F-16, F-15 or F-18 carry it instead its just my personal preference.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2019, 10:45
by knowan
SpudmanWP wrote:That is an SM-6 that includes a booster for launching out of an Mk-41 VL cell. An air-launched version would not need the booster but would need lugs and datalinks plumbed.


A SM-6 without the booster would basically be a SM-2MR, although with the better guidance package of the SM-6. That would bring the weight down to around 1600 lbs, so it'd still be half again as heavy as an AIM-54.


fidgetspinner wrote:More or less it seems the Russians are getting the right idea to carry their supposedly in development mini-kinzhal to fit in their su-57s. I would prefer an aircraft like the F-35 to carry such weapons internally if its carried externally have some F-16, F-15 or F-18 carry it instead its just my personal preference.


They already have a mini-Kinzhal, it's called the Kh-15. That's about the best performance in range/speed/warhead they're likely to get within the size restrictions they have.
They'd be able to increase range while retaining Mach 5-6 speeds if they change from rocket to ramjet propulsion though, ending up with something like the ASALM.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2019, 13:41
by garrya
fidgetspinner wrote:
As much as I am dying to know the size, length, speed, range, date test and operational production date of the missile I think a better preference in my opinion regarding a stealth aircraft is to carry such weapons internally without losing its stealth profile.

More or less it seems the Russians are getting the right idea to carry their supposedly in development mini-kinzhal to fit in their su-57s. I would prefer an aircraft like the F-35 to carry such weapons internally if its carried externally have some F-16, F-15 or F-18 carry it instead its just my personal preference.

Same here

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2019, 13:42
by garrya
sferrin wrote:Which is better:

Imho, they will be used against the same kind of target, more or less

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2019, 14:27
by sferrin
garrya wrote:
sferrin wrote:Which is better:

Imho, they will be used against the same kind of target, more or less


Neither one of them is likely to be used against a ship.

Re: Lockheed Martin reveal hypersonic weapon for F-35

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2019, 17:07
by fidgetspinner
So looking back at that image is it possible for the F-35 to carry up to 2 HAWC hypersonic missiles? I think the F-35 can launch those missiles at a far enough distance towards targets without compromising much of its stealth by coming at a closer distance towards its targets. I think the F-35 can handle the weight load of 2 HAWC missiles while carrying 4-6 AMRAAMs internally. So the pilot has the option to either launch and hopefully not jettison the HAWC missiles if an aerial target started approaching the F-35.

I am cool with the idea but that depends on the range of the missiles. The small size of the missile is definitely a huge plus making it difficult to intercept but I would preferably want the range of the missiles to be 750kms+ unless anyone here has better preferable range estimates?