
uclass wrote:hornetfinn wrote:That looks exactly like EFP (Explosively Formed Penetrator) used in anti-tank missiles and mines. That would make sense since HTK missile tech would make such a warhead very effective as it would point directly towards most vulnerable parts of the target. Then launching copper or tantalum slug weighing few pounds towards it at Mach 6 would make enormous damage as that could take out many armoured ground vehicles with ease.
That's the impression I got. A bit like a top-attack TOW warhead.
USAF developing next generation air dominance missile
BY: Leigh Giangreco 30 May 2017
...
Based on AFRL and Carlisle’s description, SACM could have shades of the USAF and Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s defunct joint dual-role air dominance missile (JDRADM) programme, which sought a combined air-to-air and air-to-ground missile for the F-22A and F-35, and external carriage on selected legacy aircraft. The air force effort spun a DARPA programme, the triple target terminator (T3) programme, which pursued a missile that could combine the capabilities of Raytheon’s AIM-120 and AGM-88 High-speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM).
Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... il-437728/
Would such an EFP warhead, packaged to fit in a 6" dia (or perhaps 7" dia) SACM / CUDA missile be large enough to destroy an MBT or at least an APC from a top attack? If so, an F-35 with upwards of twelve SACM / CUDA missiles would seem to be a tremendous CAS / Air-to-air threat. Even two AIM-120C7 or D with four SDB-II (or SPEAR) and four SACM/CUDA would be a very flexible arrangement. At only ~155lb each, payload weight would not be an issue. Could an innovative payload rack be created that enables small munitions such as these to be loaded two deep vertically? Mechanical simplicity probably goes out the window, so from that perspective KISS would seem to be violated. May not be worth the engineering efforts / costs.