AARGM / VFDR Missiles

[Ronny]

Is it just me or AARGM-ER speed and range is very similar to Raduga Kh-15? they even looks similar

 

[totoro]

AARGM-ER has some 40 years of technological advances working for it. Including the lifting body strakes which Kh-15 lacks. So it's not that surprising both may achieve similar range and speed, even though they're wildly different class of missile. One is approximately 400 kg missile, the other is a 1200 kg missile.

 

[Ronny]

AARGM-ER has some 40 years of technological advances working for it. Including the lifting body strakes which Kh-15 lacks. So it's not that surprising both may achieve similar range and speed, even though they're wildly different class of missile. One is approximately 400 kg missile, the other is a 1200 kg missile.

I think AARGM-ER is heavier than 400 kg, AGM-88E is 355 kg, and AARGM-ER supposed to have 11.5" dia. rocket motor

 

[bring_it_on]

Navy completes first AARGM-ER captive carry flight on F/A-18

NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, Patuxent River, Md.
--
NAVAIR AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, Patuxent River, Md. -- The U.S. Navy completed the first captive carry flight test of an Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile – Extended Range (AARGM-ER) missile on an F/A-18 Super Hornet June 1 at the Patuxent River test range.
During the test, the F/A-18 Super Hornet conducted a series of aerial maneuvers in order to evaluate integration and structural characteristics of the AARGM-ER. Test points were completed across a range of flight conditions to demonstrate carriage compatibility of AARGM-ER with the F/A-18 Super Hornet.
“This first flight represents a significant step in the AARGM-ER Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase,” said Capt. Mitch Commerford, who oversees the Direct and Time Sensitive Strike program office (PMA-242). “Data collected from this testing will inform the planned build-up and overall expansion of flight testing with AARGM-ER.”
Testing will continue over the next few years in preparation for initial operational capability in fiscal year 2023, he said.
The extended range variant, which leverages the AARGM program that’s currently in full rate production, has been upgraded with a new rocket motor and warhead. It will provide advanced capability to detect and engage enemy air defense systems.
AARGM-ER is being integrated on the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G, and will also be compatible for integration on the F-35A/B/C.

 

[sferrin]

 

[Josh_TN]

Seeing it actually carried makes it clear that it is a pretty beefy missile. The old HARMs were narrow enough they could almost be mistaken for an AAM.

 

[Josh_TN]

I've tried to skim the topic so my question would not be redundant - but I can't seem to find the answer online or here: how is the USAF's SiAW going to differ outside of having a bespoke warhead? And what is the purpose of said warhead? The HARM already got a warhead upgrade that I think doubled the lethal area against soft targets, so I'm going out on a limb and guessing the new warhead has hard kill options and some kind of exotic fragmentation pattern to retain a wide area soft kill? But more particularly my question is about guidance - is the USAF weapon even going to be an ARM, or just a stand off GPS weapon with a millimetre active seeker?

 

[TomcatViP]

Northtrop Grumman completed critical tests with AARGM-ER missile - Naval News

Northrop Grumman Corporation recently completed its Critical Design Review (CDR) following successful design verification tests of key components for the U.S. Navy's Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile-Extended Range (AARGM-ER) program.

www.navalnews.com

 

[bobbymike]

Stand-in Attack Weapon RFP delayed as Air Force refines design approach
The Air Force is refining its acquisition strategy for the Stand-in Attack Weapon -- an emerging guided missile intended for the F-35 fighter jet -- to place greater emphasis on digital engineering and open-systems architecture

 

[Ronny]

Stand-in Attack Weapon RFP delayed as Air Force refines design approach
The Air Force is refining its acquisition strategy for the Stand-in Attack Weapon -- an emerging guided missile intended for the F-35 fighter jet -- to place greater emphasis on digital engineering and open-systems architecture

Siaw is basically aargm-er with new warhead

 

[Grey Havoc]

It would seem that way.

 

[Ronny]

Any suggestion on why the leading edge of AARGM-ER is eject able ? Doesn't that make the missile draggier when crusing?

 

[marauder2048]

I don't think they are ejectable just removable to allow the existing AARGM front-end to be mated to the new SRM.

 

[Ronny]

I don't think they are ejectable just removable to allow the existing AARGM front-end to be mated to the new SRM.

I thought AARGM-ER has bigger diameter than the previous one?.
I was thinking it can be some form of penetration aid?

 

[TomS]

I don't think they are ejectable just removable to allow the existing AARGM front-end to be mated to the new SRM.

The front end isn't quite identical. It's apparently got some insulation and such added to it (which probably pads it out to match the diameter of the new propulsion stack. Components inside are the same, though.

I think they're showing how easy it is to swap front ends for other missions, like SiAW or the proposed antiship version.

 

[Ronny]

AARGM-ER use the 14 inches launch lugs which is common for bombs instead of the same Lau-118 rail adapter as on previous HARMs version. Highly possible AARGM-ER will be loaded on dual rack in the future

 

[Bhurki]

Highly possible AARGM-ER will be loaded on dual rack in the future

Yep... The graphic in the bottom left shows a capability to carry 10 Aargm-Er.
8 exterior (4 x dual racks) + 1 in each bay.

 

[bobbymike]

USAF's SiAW program abandons sole-sourced, AARGM-ER upgrade plan​

The Air Force has changed its acquisition strategy for the Stand-in Attack Weapon -- a new strike capability for the F-35 -- and is no longer solely pursuing an upgrade to the extended-range variant of the Navy and Northrop Grumman's Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile.

 

[sferrin]

USAF's SiAW program abandons sole-sourced, AARGM-ER upgrade plan​

The Air Force has changed its acquisition strategy for the Stand-in Attack Weapon -- a new strike capability for the F-35 -- and is no longer solely pursuing an upgrade to the extended-range variant of the Navy and Northrop Grumman's Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile.

Should we just write it off now?

 

[bring_it_on]

The Department of Defense, United States Air Force (USAF), Air Force Material Command (AFMC), Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC), Armament Directorate, Agile Weapons Division is seeking to rapidly prototype SiAW and deliver leave-behind assets within 60 months. SiAW is an Air Force air-to-ground weapon that will provide stand-in platforms the capability to hold at risk surface elements of the Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) environment.

The fulfillment of the supplies/services listed above will be executed via a limited sources Justification and Approval (J&A) to the following companies: The Boeing Company, St Louis, MO; L3Harris, Plano, TX; Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, Orlando, FL; Northrop Grumman Defense Systems, Northridge, CA; Northrop Grumman Mission Systems, Linthicum, MD; and Raytheon Missile Systems, Tucson, AZ under the authority FAR 6.302-1(a)(2) - When the supplies or services required by the agency are available from only one responsible source, or, for DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, from only one or a limited number of responsible sources, and no other type of supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements, full and open competition need not be provided for. The Government has determined that the listed sources are the only ones with the requisite knowledge, experience and technical expertise necessary to develop and integrate the advanced technologies to fulfill the requirements for SiAW within the accelerated timeline. The Government requests that initial feedback, comments and questions be submitted no later than fifteen (15) calendar days from the date of this posted notice. In accordance with FAR 5.207 (c) (16) (ii), all responsible sources may submit a capability statement, proposal, or quotation, which shall be considered by the agency.

SAM.gov

beta.sam.gov

 

[Ronny]

USAF's SiAW program abandons sole-sourced, AARGM-ER upgrade plan​

The Air Force has changed its acquisition strategy for the Stand-in Attack Weapon -- a new strike capability for the F-35 -- and is no longer solely pursuing an upgrade to the extended-range variant of the Navy and Northrop Grumman's Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile.

To be fair, this is great news
Siaw should be something else rather than merely an AARGM-ER with modified warhead. Would be far more useful if Siaw is ramjet or even scramjet powered

 

[bring_it_on]

If IWB compliant and Twice as far and twice as fast as the HARM doesn't cut it then good luck trying to field something in 60-months that is better (unless someone already has some flying hardware that they can adapt). But schedule, cost and other performance elements may well benefit from competition or at least get them a look at some other capabilities (like a smaller weapon allowing for a larger magazine) that a sole source (they Navy should have probably competed the ER upgrades as well) may have neglected.

 

[Ronny]

If IWB compliant and Twice as far and twice as fast as the HARM doesn't cut it then good luck trying to field something in 60-months that is better (unless someone already has some flying hardware that they can adapt). But schedule, cost and other performance elements may well benefit from competition or at least get them a look at some other capabilities (like a smaller weapon allowing for a larger magazine) that a sole source (they Navy should have probably competed the ER upgrades as well) may have neglected.

I think the Thor-er prototype is a good candidate
They already tested a 10 inches diameter prototype which is same diameter as AARGM and smaller diameter than AARGM-ER
the way the inlet is set up , the diameter of the ramjet version doesn't increase compared to solid fuel version.
While the peak velocity of solid fuel rocket is higher, the average speed of the ramjet missile of similar size is much better, so I think that is more useful.
60 months is about 5 years, not too short for some well known technology like ramjet

 

[Deino]

Highly possible AARGM-ER will be loaded on dual rack in the future

Yep... The graphic in the bottom left shows a capability to carry 10 Aargm-Er.
8 exterior (4 x dual racks) + 1 in each bay.

View attachment 650363

Is there a reason, why this de fact new missile still carries the AGM-88-designation?

 

[Ronny]

Highly possible AARGM-ER will be loaded on dual rack in the future

Yep... The graphic in the bottom left shows a capability to carry 10 Aargm-Er.
8 exterior (4 x dual racks) + 1 in each bay.

View attachment 650363

Is there a reason, why this de fact new missile still carries the AGM-88-designation?

It originated from AGM-88E, same sensors and all that

 

[bring_it_on]

USAF's SiAW program abandons sole-sourced, AARGM-ER upgrade plan​

The Air Force has changed its acquisition strategy for the Stand-in Attack Weapon -- a new strike capability for the F-35 -- and is no longer solely pursuing an upgrade to the extended-range variant of the Navy and Northrop Grumman's Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile.

"When asked why the Air Force has now changed its strategy, Cole said: "Market research was conducted and a competitive approach showed to be viable while maintaining a development schedule."

 

[Grey Havoc]

I am having visions of yet another trainwreck in the making...

 

[Ronny]

I am having visions of yet another trainwreck in the making...

Well, in worst case scenario, the Siaw is cancelled all together , nothing come from it but they still have AARGM-ER
In best case scenario, we have something better than AARGM-ER, preferably a ramjet missile. Or something new. I mean either way, it is much better than spending 5 years just to make a new warhead to put in AARGM-ER

 

[Bhurki]

Highly possible AARGM-ER will be loaded on dual rack in the future

Yep... The graphic in the bottom left shows a capability to carry 10 Aargm-Er.
8 exterior (4 x dual racks) + 1 in each bay.

View attachment 650363

Is there a reason, why this de fact new missile still carries the AGM-88-designation?

The only things that changed are the propulsion and flight control surfaces. Still carries the same mission payload.

 

[TomS]

USAF's SiAW program abandons sole-sourced, AARGM-ER upgrade plan​

The Air Force has changed its acquisition strategy for the Stand-in Attack Weapon -- a new strike capability for the F-35 -- and is no longer solely pursuing an upgrade to the extended-range variant of the Navy and Northrop Grumman's Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile.

"When asked why the Air Force has now changed its strategy, Cole said: "Market research was conducted and a competitive approach showed to be viable while maintaining a development schedule."

They found out that there was going to be a lot of protests if they tried to do a sole-source procurement, presumably.

 

[Lc89]

Navy completes F/A-18, AARGM-ER flight with separation test vehicle | NAVAIR

The U.S. Navy completed an Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile – Extended Range (AARGM-ER) captive carry flight on an F/A-18 Super Hornet April 22 at Patuxent River in support of the first live fire event this spring. This flight marked the first time the AARGM-ER weapon demonstrated it...

www.navair.navy.mil

 

[sferrin]

USAF's SiAW program abandons sole-sourced, AARGM-ER upgrade plan​

The Air Force has changed its acquisition strategy for the Stand-in Attack Weapon -- a new strike capability for the F-35 -- and is no longer solely pursuing an upgrade to the extended-range variant of the Navy and Northrop Grumman's Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile.

"When asked why the Air Force has now changed its strategy, Cole said: "Market research was conducted and a competitive approach showed to be viable while maintaining a development schedule."

They found out that there was going to be a lot of protests if they tried to do a sole-source procurement, presumably.

And then the new companies will demand more schedule because Raytheon already has a head start.

 

[Josh_TN]

Stand-in Attack Weapon RFP delayed as Air Force refines design approach
The Air Force is refining its acquisition strategy for the Stand-in Attack Weapon -- an emerging guided missile intended for the F-35 fighter jet -- to place greater emphasis on digital engineering and open-systems architecture

Siaw is basically aargm-er with new warhead

Is the new warhead 3d printed? That seems to be the new thing - precisely forming your fragments in any size and orientation you want and then printing them as a single piece casing that doesn't have to scored or milled to produce a fragment pattern.

 

[Josh_TN]

Highly possible AARGM-ER will be loaded on dual rack in the future

Yep... The graphic in the bottom left shows a capability to carry 10 Aargm-Er.
8 exterior (4 x dual racks) + 1 in each bay.

View attachment 650363

Is there a reason, why this de fact new missile still carries the AGM-88-designation?

In USN usage, the guidance system and warhead are the same as AGM-88E. The USAF apparently isn't satisfied, which seems shortsided since it could just be an off the shelf buy for them.

 

[Ronny]

Navy completes F/A-18, AARGM-ER flight with separation test vehicle | NAVAIR

The U.S. Navy completed an Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile – Extended Range (AARGM-ER) captive carry flight on an F/A-18 Super Hornet April 22 at Patuxent River in support of the first live fire event this spring. This flight marked the first time the AARGM-ER weapon demonstrated it...

www.navair.navy.mil

Is it just me or this version of AARGM-ER is skinnier with more pronoun strake compared to the previous version?

 

[TomS]

Navy completes F/A-18, AARGM-ER flight with separation test vehicle | NAVAIR

The U.S. Navy completed an Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile – Extended Range (AARGM-ER) captive carry flight on an F/A-18 Super Hornet April 22 at Patuxent River in support of the first live fire event this spring. This flight marked the first time the AARGM-ER weapon demonstrated it...

www.navair.navy.mil

Is it just me or this version of AARGM-ER is skinnier with more pronoun strake compared to the previous version?
View attachment 656827

I'm sure it's just a quirk of lighting, camera angles, and background. There's no way they're tinkering with the diameter of the missile at this point.

 

[NASA]

Seems like NG unveiled ground launched AARGM-ER called AReS ( Advanced Reactive Strike). They also seem to indicate that to increase range they can use Mk.135 or Mk.72 boosters from the TLAM/SM families respectively. It might fit into HIMARS and a new launcher, I'm not certain about the utility of this, you can probably do much better with a PrSM.

Northrop Tests First Pieces Of Ground-Launched AARGM-ER | Aviation Week Network

The newly-branded Advanced Reactive Strike (ARES) missile and the Modular Payload System (MPS) launcher could be fielded in 4-7 years, depending on the booster configuration.

aviationweek.com

 

[DrRansom]

Seems like NG unveiled ground launched AARGM-ER called AReS ( Advanced Reactive Strike). They also seem to indicate that to increase range they can use Mk.135 or Mk.72 boosters from the TLAM/SM families respectively. It might fit into HIMARS and a new launcher, I'm not certain about the utility of this, you can probably do much better with a PrSM.

Northrop Tests First Pieces Of Ground-Launched AARGM-ER | Aviation Week Network

The newly-branded Advanced Reactive Strike (ARES) missile and the Modular Payload System (MPS) launcher could be fielded in 4-7 years, depending on the booster configuration.

aviationweek.com

The article says it could be fielded in 4 - 7 years, that timeline seems ridiculous for a relatively simple configuration.

 

[Lc89]

Land-Based Strike Version Of Navy's Long-Range Air Defense Blasting Missile Breaks Cover

The Advanced Reactive Strike Missile will be able to hit targets on land and at sea and be fired from a launcher inside a shipping container.

www.thedrive.com

 

[bring_it_on]

I'm struggling to see why the Army will pick it over integrating a similar capability on say the PrSM (which it is already doing to an extent)?