AARGM / VFDR Missiles

NMaude said:
Are there plans for a ship-launched and/or ground-launched versions of the AARGM-ER?
Click to expand...
Seems to be but don't know how far along they are.

www.twz.com

Navy To Test Ground-Launched Version Of New Radar-Busting Missile

The Navy is exploring the feasibility of launching the AGM-88G AARGM-ER from the ground, as well as the P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol plane.
www.twz.com www.twz.com

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 aviationweek.com
 
The problem with the second article is that except for the first paragraph it's pay-walled.

One thing that's occurred to me is that a ground-launched AGM-88G as is will have a greatly reduced range due to being launched from the ground and at zero speed so to match the range of an air-launched AGM-88G it will need a launch-booster. This would entail modification of the missile's boat-tail to enable the mounting of a launch booster but no doubt an off-the-shelf booster could be used, something like the VL-ASROC's Mk-114, the SM-3/6 Mk-72 booster or the Harpoon's A/B44G-2/3 booster for example.
 
Last edited:
I really do not see a use case for a ground launched ARM for the US. If you know where there the target is, just use HIMARs. If you do not know where the target is, why are firing a two million dollar missile with reduced range from the ground to speculatively look for one?
 
The AARGM-ER has a longer range than the HIMARS (Which can't hit moving targets anyway) and for a GL version a launch-booster could easily be fitted and as for targets you don't know the precise location that's why it has a radar seeker also it can be retargeted during flight, there are no doubt applications where a GLAARGM-ER would be handy to have.
 
NMaude said:
The AARGM-ER has a longer range than the HIMARS (Which can't hit moving targets anyway) and for a GL version a launch-booster could easily be fitted and as for targets you don't know the precise location that's why it has a radar seeker also it can be retargeted during flight, there are no doubt applications where a GLAARGM-ER would be handy to have.
Click to expand...

Seems like a niche that does not need to be filled, especially by the USN. We'll see what comes of it.

Are you sure AARGMER can be retargeted? I had not heard it had a datalink, outside a oneway system to help with BDA.
 
Josh_TN said:
Are you sure AARGMER can be retargeted?
Click to expand...

All of the information I've read suggest it does and if it doesn't have that capability I'm sure it can be added in an upgrade, remember it is designed for internal carriage by the F-35 and it's logical given the F-35's capabilities to have a two-way datalink to fully utilise it.

As for ground-launch I've no doubt feasibility trials will be carried out and I could see a UGM-88G version implemented by loading the AARGM-ER (With the Harpoon booster attached) into the same 21" launch pod used by the UGM-84.
 
NMaude said:
All of the information I've read suggest it does and if it doesn't have that capability I'm sure it can be added in an upgrade, remember it is designed for internal carriage by the F-35 and it's logical given the F-35's capabilities to have a two-way datalink to fully utilise it.

As for ground-launch I've no doubt feasibility trials will be carried out and I could see a UGM-88G version implemented by loading the AARGM-ER (With the Harpoon booster attached) into the same 21" launch pod used by the UGM-84.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that the ER still uses the same guidance section as the 88E, which as far as I know has no target update capability. More over, the short flight time doesn’t seem conducive to target updates.

If I was surface launching a weapon that I wanted updates and terminal homing for, especially if I was the USN, I’d go SM-6 before anything else off the shelf. It is rumored this what Sea Dragon is, based on comments from officials (“existing weapon “/“supersonic”).
 
NMaude said:
All of the information I've read suggest it does and if it doesn't have that capability I'm sure it can be added in an upgrade, remember it is designed for internal carriage by the F-35 and it's logical given the F-35's capabilities to have a two-way datalink to fully utilise it.

As for ground-launch I've no doubt feasibility trials will be carried out and I could see a UGM-88G version implemented by loading the AARGM-ER (With the Harpoon booster attached) into the same 21" launch pod used by the UGM-84.
Click to expand...
That might actually be a more dangerous weapon than Sub-Harpoon, since we're talking a 1200lb weapon hitting at most of Mach 3...
 
Josh_TN said:
My understanding is that the ER still uses the same guidance section as the 88E, which as far as I know has no target update capability.
Click to expand...

Currently it has the G model's GCU repackaged a bit inside the AARGM-ER's forward section but from a cutaway diagram I've seen:

AARGM-ER_First_Live_Fire_Test_2.jpg


There's plenty of room for a two-way data-link and I strongly suspect that such a data-link would be a modified version of the one currently used in the latest AMRAAM variants.

Josh_TN said:
More over, the short flight time doesn’t seem conducive to target updates.
Click to expand...

I doubt it as it has at 160NMi/186Mi a considerably longer range than the AARGM and even flying a M3 there'd still be time for retargeting to adjacent targets also having a data-link means it can be carried and fired by a platform that is a LOT less sophisticated than the F-35.

Scott Kenny said:
That might actually be a more dangerous weapon than Sub-Harpoon, since we're talking a 1200lb weapon hitting at most of Mach 3...
Click to expand...

I hadn't thought of that but flying at M3 it was ~9 times the Harpoon's kinetic energy so even it the warhead fails to detonate it will still do a lot of damage.

Josh_TN said:
I think it’s a 1000 lbs class weapon and a fair amount of it is solid rocket fuel.
Click to expand...

Given the speeds it flies at its' rocket-motor's burnout it still packs quite a kinetic-energy punch.
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
Surely it would make more sense to stick the electronics section on a PrSM.
Click to expand...

Although the PrSM does have empty expansion space in its' ogive nosecone for upgrades with a terminal seeker I don't know if the electronics section could be put in it, at least not without repacking the electronics.
 
NMaude said:
Although the PrSM does have empty expansion space in its' ogive nosecone for upgrades with a terminal seeker I don't know if the electronics section could be put in it, at least not without repacking the electronics.
Click to expand...
They seem to have been able pack plenty of other electronics in there.

www.thedefensepost.com

New Precision Strike Missile Seeker to Turn It Into Ship Killer

The US Army flight tested a Precision Strike Missile multimode seeker last year that enables the missile to perform maritime targeting.
www.thedefensepost.com www.thedefensepost.com
www.thedefensepost.com

Lockheed Device Enables HIMARS Munitions to Strike Moving Targets

Lockheed Martin has demonstrated a communication device that provides in-flight target updates to munitions such as GMLRS.
www.thedefensepost.com www.thedefensepost.com
 
Forest Green said:
Was thinking on this. Does a ground launched version even make sense? Surely it would make more sense to stick the electronics section on a PrSM.
Click to expand...
If you take out a surface ship's radars, you've effectively killed it. Even with today's ships with datalinks/CEC.
 
Josh_TN said:
I’m guessing that the post you are quoting is more questioning the effective range rather than warhead size, which are similar.
Click to expand...
I was also questioning whether it was better to build a separate ground launched missile and launch system, or just change the electronics in an existing one, which also has a range and speed benefit.
 
The US State Department has greenlit the sale of advanced anti-radiation missiles to two NATO countries in Europe, the Netherlands and Poland, in deals potentially worth close to $2 billion. Announced by the US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) on April 24, these foreign military sales represent a significant stride in augmenting the defense capabilities of both nations.
Click to expand...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8W_LsVoqEY
 
No doubt by the end of this year/beginning of next year limited numbers of the AGM-88G will be appearing in Ukraine.
 
NMaude said:
No doubt by the end of this year/beginning of next year limited numbers of the AGM-88G will be appearing in Ukraine.
Click to expand...

No. Currently nothing newer than the C version as been observed. I’d be surprised if even the Echo was donated.
 
Josh_TN said:
No. Currently nothing newer than the C version as been observed. I’d be surprised if even the Echo was donated.
Click to expand...
I'm amazed that there were Cs left to be donate. -Es went into full production in 2012.

Though I wonder how many of the older models had been updated to -F guidance?
 
What about the D model? Also the Cs are old stock which will eventually run out so at some point Es will be start being donated if the war drags on long enough (I have a horrible suspicion it will last into 2026 if not longer) and the UAF's rate of use will increase when the donated F-16s enter service.
 
Last edited:
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Josh_TN said:
There is an active seeker, but I wonder what is used to guide the target to the terminal seeker basket without GPS coordinates or emissions?
Click to expand...
From TWZ:

“The Hind was reportedly struck on the ground, which is strange for a Growler,” The War Zone's Tyler Rogoway tweeted on May 16. “Best guess: they fired AARGM to hit coordinates, not home in on emissions, which it's capable of. It is a good time-sensitive target effector in this way. We'll find out more.”
Click to expand...
 
Defense Updates has just put out a video concerning a F/A-18G Growler taking out a Mil Mi-24 Hind with an AARGM:


An image appeared on May 15 with a mysterious “kill mark” of a Mi-24 Hind on a Growler deployed aboard the aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Click to expand...
The War Zone in an article stated that the US Navy confirmed that one of its EA-18G Growler electronic warfare aircraft used an AGM-88E Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) to destroy the Mi-24 Hind attack helicopter.
Click to expand...
However, AARGM is not meant for this kind of attack since it is primarily a weapon designed to neutralize air defense systems.
Click to expand...
In this video, Defense Updates analyzes how AARGM from USS Dwight D. Eisenhower-based EA-18G Growler destroyed Mi-24?
Click to expand...
#defenseupdates #usvshouthi #usvsiran
Click to expand...
Chapters:
Click to expand...
00:11 INTRODUCTION
Click to expand...
01:54 Mi-24 IS a DANGEROUS ASSET
Click to expand...
04:13 AARGM
Click to expand...
06:19 AARGM as RAPID RESPONSE WEAPON
Click to expand...
07:04 ANALYSIS
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Can hit anything emitting “energy waves” of any type. ;)
 
That's several hundred miles. Don't have Google Earth handy to check.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom