US Navy Standard Missile Family

[Scott Kenny]

I'm wondering is there much information out their concerning the RGM-66F AShM that was a backup to the Harpoon AShM?

Not that I've run across, but most of the folks here have a much better reference library than I do.

 

[TomS]

Re RGM-66F, this post has the little bit more I've found over the years.

Post in thread 'DARPA Long Range Anti-ship Missile (LRASM)' https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/darpa-long-range-anti-ship-missile-lrasm.8992/post-454957

 

[NMaude]

In regards to the Mk-70 launcher here's a Defense Updates video concerning its deployment in Germany:

The United States will start deploying long-range fire capabilities in Germany in 2026, the United States and Germany said in a joint statement.

The White House announced ,“The United States will begin episodic deployments of the long-range fires capabilities of its Multi-Domain Task Force [MDTF] in Germany in 2026, as part of planning for enduring stationing of these capabilities in the future. When fully developed, these conventional long-range fires units will include SM-6, Tomahawk, and developmental hypersonic weapons, which have significantly longer range than current land-based fires in Europe,”

In this video, Defense Updates analyzes why the deployment of long-range U.S. missiles in Germany would be a step towards a new Cold War ?

#defenseupdates #usvsrussia #coldwar

Chapters:
00:11 INTRODUCTION
01:47 INF TREATY FALLOUT
03:23 GERMAN & RUSSIAN POSITION
04:34 THE WEAPONS
06:34 ANALYSIS

 

[Forest Green]

Russia has already deployed nuclear-tipped SRBMs in Belarus and Kaliningrad, so until Dark Eagle gets a nuclear warhead, it's not even a like-for-like counter move.

 

[NMaude]

Russia has already deployed nuclear-tipped SRBMs in Belarus and Kaliningrad, so until Dark Eagle gets a nuclear warhead, it's not even a like-for-like counter move.

That's why Russia's hypocritical whinging and whining about these NATO deployments annoy me.

 

[Forest Green]

That's why Russia's hypocritical whinging and whining about these NATO deployments annoy me.

Yeah, they complain about escalation an awful lot, all while escalating an awful lot.

 

[paralay]

Meet Iskander in Cuba and Venezuela

 

[Forest Green]

Meet Iskander in Cuba and Venezuela

Good luck getting past the naval blockade if intelligence points in that direction.

 

[Hanse]

Meet Iskander in Cuba and Venezuela

LOL Good luck with that.

 

[NMaude]

Meet Iskander in Cuba and Venezuela

And the Patriot PAC3 has proven in Ukraine that the SS-26 Stone can be intercepted.

 

[Moose]

Meet Iskander in Cuba and Venezuela

Unless they've developed an anti-protest mode for Iskander, I doubt it would be worth a turd in Venezuela.

 

[Forest Green]

Unless they've developed an anti-protest mode for Iskander, I doubt it would be worth a turd in Venezuela.

I once ran someone over with a HIMARS launcher on Battlefield 4 if that counts.

 

[Yellow Palace]

Unless they've developed an anti-protest mode for Iskander, I doubt it would be worth a turd in Venezuela.

Technically, most of the warhead options would be effective at ending a protest.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Navy missile intercepts target using Army’s new missile defense radar

The Navy's SM-6 missile intercepted a target in a test during Valiant Shield using the Army's new missile defense radar and battle command system.

www.defensenews.com

 

[Scott Kenny]

Navy missile intercepts target using Army’s new missile defense radar

The Navy's SM-6 missile intercepted a target in a test during Valiant Shield using the Army's new missile defense radar and battle command system.

www.defensenews.com

Which suggests that Typhon launchers with SM6 could be used as big nasty SAMs between Patriot and THAAD.

 

[NMaude]

Which suggests that Typhon launchers with SM6 could be used as big nasty SAMs between Patriot and THAAD.

Ukraine no doubt would love to get a few of those launchers with the SM-6 missiles, they could quickly thin out Russia's ranks of Su-30s, Su-34s and Su-35s.

 

[GTX]

SM-6 Eyed As New Surface-To-Air Interceptor For The Army

SM-6, which the Army is already fielding to strike targets on land and at sea, could help bolster the service's strained air defense branch.

www.twz.com

 

[NMaude]

SM-6 Eyed As New Surface-To-Air Interceptor For The Army

SM-6, which the Army is already fielding to strike targets on land and at sea, could help bolster the service's strained air defense branch.

www.twz.com

If the US army selects the SM-6 then that will lower the SM-6's unit cost.

 

[Forest Green]

If the US army selects the SM-6 then that will lower the SM-6's unit cost.

It could only really replace the PAC-2 at the moment. The PAC-3 would still be needed to MRBM/ALBM intercepts even though the SM-6 has capability there, since it would be cheaper. But it would provide longer range options if needed and SM-3 launch compatibility, assuming suitable radars.

 

[Firefinder]

It could only really replace the PAC-2 at the moment. The PAC-3 would still be needed to MRBM/ALBM intercepts even though the SM-6 has capability there, since it would be cheaper. But it would provide longer range options if needed and SM-3 launch compatibility, assuming suitable radars.

Also the Pac3 is... What?

Half the Size of the SM6?

So a launcher can carry 6-8 of them compare to 4 SM6s.

And as shown by Ukraine, alot of ready missiles is Freaking handy when dealing with MRBMALBM intercepts.

 

[Forest Green]

Also the Pac3 is... What?

Half the Size of the SM6?

So a launcher can carry 6-8 of them compare to 4 SM6s.

And as shown by Ukraine, alot of ready missiles is Freaking handy when dealing with MRBMALBM intercepts.

Indeed, 4 missile launchers have not faired well.

 

[TAOG]

SM-2 Block4A can reach 6 mach

(closing velocity >8mach mean the target (Lance missile) speed is >2 mach when been intercepted.）

https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.1997-6000?continueFlag=bc8e1f0217e070b0d0213187d65e6d57

 

[NMaude]

Does anyone know what the burn time for the Mk-104 DTRM rocket-motor is? I remember reading somewhere years ago that the burn time was ~30 seconds.

 

[TAOG]

40s
some source say 44s

 

[NMaude]

40s
some source say 44s

Do you have links to these sources?

 

[Hanse]

Does anyone know what the burn time for the Mk-104 DTRM rocket-motor is? I remember reading somewhere years ago that the burn time was ~30 seconds.

Go here. In the black and white segment shot from the air you can see almost the entire burn time. (Motor burns out behind cloud but not much is hidden. ~30 sec. IIRC)

edit: part of it, at the beginning, is the end of the booster burn. If you look carefully, you can see when it drops off.

 

[Jimmo952]

It could only really replace the PAC-2 at the moment. The PAC-3 would still be needed to MRBM/ALBM intercepts even though the SM-6 has capability there, since it would be cheaper. But it would provide longer range options if needed and SM-3 launch compatibility, assuming suitable radars.

The Navy clearly likes the SM-6. Raytheon is going to have to figure out how to build more of them.

 

[Ronny]

40s
some source say 44s

Do we have burn time of MK-72 booster?

 

[Scott Kenny]

Do we have burn time of MK-72 booster?

~5sec till burnout. 1sec delay between Mk72 burnout and Mk104 ignition to get the booster separated.

 

[NMaude]

Do we have burn time of MK-72 booster?

~5sec till burnout. 1sec delay between Mk72 burnout and Mk104 ignition to get the booster separated.

The usual figure I've seen mentioned is six seconds (Although seven has been mentioned).

Who manufactures the Mk-72 and Mk-104 rocket-motors? I must get around to emailing their public relations department to see if I can obtain all documentation cleared for public release.

 

[TomS]

The usual figure I've seen mentioned is six seconds (Although seven has been mentioned).

Who manufactures the Mk-72 and Mk-104 rocket-motors? I must get around to emailing their public relations department to see if I can obtain all documentation cleared for public release.

Both are Aerojet Rocketdyne (L3 Harris).

 

[Ronny]

~5sec till burnout. 1sec delay between Mk72 burnout and Mk104 ignition to get the booster separated.

Do you have a source for that? I’m trying to find the source but no luck yet

 

[Scott Kenny]

Do you have a source for that? I’m trying to find the source but no luck yet

Something from this forum, I don't remember where, sorry.

 

[NMaude]

Both are Aerojet Rocketdyne (L3 Harris).

I checked around and here's the relevant webpage - AEGIS Ballistic Missile Defence System, Contact us

Now in one of the required fields where you have to add information - "Company/Organization/Agency" , what do you put if you're a private citizen who's just very curious and has a strong interest in military aviation?

 

[MihoshiK]

I checked around and here's the relevant webpage - AEGIS Ballistic Missile Defence System, Contact us

Now in one of the required fields where you have to add information - "Company/Organization/Agency" , what do you put if you're a private citizen who's just very curious and has a strong interest in military aviation?

Be honest. "Private citizen, military aviation enthusiast."

It's not like your email adress isn't a dead giveaway.

 

[TomS]

Be honest. "Private citizen, military aviation enthusiast."

It's not like your email adress isn't a dead giveaway.

And be prepared to hear nothing at all. That form is labeled Sales Contacts; it's intended for business, not for questions for random enthusiasts. In my experience, company PR offices are rarely willing to give random private citizens anything not already on their website. That stuff is safely already cleared for public release.

 

[NMaude]

And be prepared to hear nothing at all. That form is labeled Sales Contacts; it's intended for business, not for questions for random enthusiasts. In my experience, company PR offices are rarely willing to give random private citizens anything not already on their website. That stuff is safely already cleared for public release.

Then tell me which email contact I should use, I remember back in 1999 when I made a similar email request with Raytheon I got some interesting pamphlets in my mail.

It's not like your email adress isn't a dead giveaway.

Are you trying to be sarcastic? If you are you aren't being funny.

 

[MihoshiK]

Are you trying to be sarcastic? If you are you aren't being funny.

? I'm sorry?

If you're a private citizen, I assume you're going to give them a private email. These people ususally have at least an idea of what constitutes a government/industry email, or private email.

So you using your private email is a dead givaway (I.E., really obvious) to them anyway that you're a random Joe and not an official looking for information.

 

[Scott Kenny]

? I'm sorry?

If you're a private citizen, I assume you're going to give them a private email. These people ususally have at least an idea of what constitutes a government/industry email, or private email.

So you using your private email is a dead givaway (I.E., really obvious) to them anyway that you're a random Joe and not an official looking for information.

But if you happen to use a .edu or your work email...

 

[MihoshiK]

But if you happen to use a .edu or your work email...

A .edu email is as good as a private email when you're approaching a manufacturer about stuff like this, and the work email depends entirely on which work. I'm not sure that me using my work email would help. I mean, we're a multinational, but I doubt a cosmetics manufacturer would engender much trust when you're asking someone to hand out missile specs.

And, of course, if your boss is okay with you using your work email for stuff like this.

Mind you, @NMaude , I do not know what work you do. Your work email might entirely be valid for inquiries like what you propose. But what you said was that you were approaching this as a private person, and that's how I approached the situation. I did not intend to insult you.