AGM-109 / BGM-109 Tomahawk / Gryphon Concepts, Projects and Prototypes

Scott Kenny said:
"Condor warhead"? What's Condor?
Click to expand...
I’ve always been curious, does the navy tomahawk Blk IV also have an IIR seeker? Some web articles think it has, but no authoritative source that confirms this.

NAVAIR mention: The Block IV missile is capable of loitering over a target area in order to respond to emerging targets or, with its on-board camera, provide battle damage information to warfighting commanders.

camera = seeker?
 
CIC-TAO said:
I’ve always been curious, does the navy tomahawk Blk IV also have an IIR seeker? Some web articles think it has, but no authoritative source that confirms this.

NAVAIR mention: The Block IV missile is capable of loitering over a target area in order to respond to emerging targets or, with its on-board camera, provide battle damage information to warfighting commanders.

camera = seeker?
Click to expand...
Camera from the DSMAC guidance system. It might be IR, but it's not an IIR seeker per se.
 
One of the main objectives in moving from Block 3 to Block 4 production is parts count reduction, which in turns reduces cost, assembly time, and improve producibility .....

Reducing the fins from 4 to 3 reduces parts count, and since actuators are now electromagnetic rather than hydraulic/pneumatic, reliability also improves ....

I observed that for the 3 fin configuration (inverse Y), the surface area of each of the 3 fins are larger than the individual fins in the original 4 fins (X configuration) ... probably the larger surface area is needed to maintain the same amount of control authority ....

Same goes for the submerged air intake ... doing away with the pop-up air scoop reduces another potential fault due to moving parts ....
 
Christopher Wang said:
During the Cold War, there were U.S. Navy proposals to convert and outfit the Iowa class battleships and Albany class guided-missile cruisers with Polaris missile launch tubes. If I recall correctly, the Iowa class battleships were projected to carry up to 16 Polaris SLBMs and the Albany class cruisers were planned to carry 8 Polaris SLBMs.

If those Polaris guided-missile warship conversions had been implemented, imagine later on those battleships' and cruisers' Polaris launch tubes being modified to carry the above-mentioned 5-tube Tomahawk missile modules. Each Iowa class battleship would have carried 80 Tomahawks while each Albany class cruisers would have carried 40 Tomahawks in their Polaris launch tubes.
Click to expand...

HAve you got a link for this plan please?

cheers
 
fightingirish said:
A few pictures showing a A-6 carrying and launching a Tomahawk cruise missile can be found at the San Diego Air & Space Museum on Flickr. [...]
Click to expand...
Here two pictures showing a F-4 carrying an early AGM-109A Tomahawk cruise missile during early testing at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake. These pictures can be found at the San Diego Air & Space Museum Flickr Archive.
https://flic.kr/p/2pDm8Yw
View: https://flic.kr/p/2pDm8Yw

https://flic.kr/p/2pDneD4
View: https://flic.kr/p/2pDneD4
 
TomS said:
As that page notes, there was a fly-off between AGM-109 and AGM-86B for the Air Force ALCM requirement. Those rounds should be AGM-109A but were almost always referred to AGM-109 without a letter.
Click to expand...
Ah yes, I see it now, it was the nuclear ALCM version, the H/K and L were all conventional.

In January 1977, the Carter administration initiated a program called JCMP (Joint Cruise Missile Project), which directed the USAF and the U.S. Navy to develop their cruise missiles using a common technology base. At that time, the Air Force was developing its AGM-86 ALCM (Air-Launched Cruise Missile). One consequence of JCMP was that only one cruise missile propulsion system (the Williams F107 turbofan of the AGM-86) and TERCOM guidance system (the McDonnell Douglas AN/DPW-23 of the BGM-109) would be further developed. Another one was a fly-off competition for the ALCM role between the AGM-86B and the AGM-109, an air-launched derivative of the YBGM-109A. After flights between July 1979 and February 1980, the AGM-86B was declared winner of the competition and the AGM-109 ALCM development was stopped.
Click to expand...
 
GD built seven AGM-109s for the ten-flight fly-off schedule.

Fly-off tests, 1979/80, filling-out table as I find data:

Flight SerialAGM-86BAGM-109
103 Aug
Crashed after 44 mins, "incorrect programming" during terrain-following		17 Jul
Three fly-over targets, 85 nav waypoints
Ground recovery
206 Sep01 Aug
Two fly-over targets, 85 nav waypoints
Ground recovery
325 Sep
4hrs		08 Sep
Crashed 2 mins after release from B-52 rotary launcher, autopilot error
Intended midair recovery
409 Oct
Commanded termination after 1hr 48 mins due to loss of datalink with chase F-4E		29 Sep
4hrs
Midair recovery
521 Nov
Crashed at Callao, UT after 2h 30 mins, "engine issue".
629 Nov15 Nov
Fell into sea 1 min 30 secs after release, wings & tail failed to deploy
704 Dec06 Dec
Crashed after 52 mins
8
9?? Jan
Successful
1022 Jan 1980
Crashed after 20 mins whilst chase controller tried to steer it around clouds		08 Feb 1980
First flight of Litton reference measuring unit & computer
Midair recovery
 
Last edited:
fightingirish said:
Here two pictures showing a F-4 carrying an early AGM-109A Tomahawk cruise missile during early testing at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake. These pictures can be found at the San Diego Air & Space Museum Flickr Archive.
https://flic.kr/p/2pDm8Yw
View: https://flic.kr/p/2pDm8Yw

https://flic.kr/p/2pDneD4
View: https://flic.kr/p/2pDneD4
Click to expand...
Anyone know what's going on with this BGM-109 Tomahawk on a Douglas A-4 Skyhawk seems like a cutdown version or something? These pictures can also be found at the San Diego Air & Space Museum Flickr Archive.

https://flic.kr/p/53263240703
https://flic.kr/p/2p9G2Ng
View: https://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/53263240703/

https://flic.kr/p/53616557676
https://flic.kr/p/2pFUSCd
View: https://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/53616557676/

https://flic.kr/p/53615685897
https://flic.kr/p/2pFQptx
View: https://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/53615685897/
 
What I find strange about the AGM-109A carried by the A-4 is that it only has two of its' four tail-fins attached to it.
 
Forest Green said:
What date is that pdf?
Click to expand...

Document properties​


File name:E3.pdf
File size:12.3 MB
Title:-
Author:-
Subject:-
Keywords:-
Created:9/22/09, 8:44:53 AM
Modified:6/25/15, 3:47:59 AM
Application:Adobe InDesign CS4 (6.0)
PDF producer:Adobe PDF Library 9.0
PDF version:1.4
Page count:136
Page size:8.50 × 11.00 in (portrait)
Fast web view:Yes
 
Anyone know why some early AGM-109 picture show visible black smoke from the engine? Perhaps early engine problems?
The attached picture taken right after one of the ALCM test launch from a B-52.
 

Attachments

  • unnamed2.png
    unnamed2.png
    1,008.6 KB · Views: 43
Cifu said:
Anyone know why some early AGM-109 picture show visible black smoke from the engine?
Click to expand...

That photograph must've been taken when the AGM-109's engine was starting up, IIRC the Williams International F107 turbofan uses a black-powder starter cartridge to spin up the engine when it is launched.
 
Last edited:
NMaude said:
That photograph must've been taken when the AGM-109's engine was starting up, IIRC the Williams International F107 turbofan uses a black-powder starter cartridge to spin up the engine when it is started.
Click to expand...
Could also be the engine not up to temperature yet, or just the fuel control running a bit rich.
 
Hello

I would like to ask if there are any detailed photos or drawings of the folding mechanism of tomahawk wings? I've searched everything but I can't find anything. In all the pictures I've seen the wings are in the same plane, but that's not possible because they wouldn't fit in the body. In the book "Evolution of cruise missile" it says that the wings are above each other (p. 155), that means asymmetric configuration, just like in kh-55.
 
Perseus1990 said:
Hello

I would like to ask if there are any detailed photos or drawings of the folding mechanism of tomahawk wings? I've searched everything but I can't find anything. In all the pictures I've seen the wings are in the same plane, but that's not possible because they wouldn't fit in the body. In the book "Evolution of cruise missile" it says that the wings are above each other (p. 155), that means asymmetric configuration, just like in kh-55.
Click to expand...

Yes, Tomahawk's wing placement is slightly asymmetrical.

Look at the two sides of this example hanging at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum.

On the port side, the wing is inside of the blue stripe.

1716655055169.png

On the starboard side, it is just at the top edge of the blue stripe.

1716655145418.png
 
TomS said:
Yes, Tomahawk's wing placement is slightly asymmetrical.

Look at the two sides of this example hanging at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum.

On the port side, the wing is inside of the blue stripe.

View attachment 729987

On the starboard side, it is just at the top edge of the blue stripe.

View attachment 729988
Click to expand...
Thank you very much
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom