AIM-174 Very Long Range AAM (SM-6)

[Scott Kenny]

~600km, or +50% over the assumed ranges of the other long range missiles. Frack!!!

This is fine for initial sizing for missile conceptual design. However if any real world scenario is to be taken, i would recommend going bit deeper with E.Fleeman's book/methods.

Do we know enough about the AIM174B to use those methods?

 

[Ainen]

~600km, or +50% over the assumed ranges of the other long range missiles. Frack!!!

I doubt PL-21 will be any shorter-ranged, though. It isn't any smaller, but it's a tailor-made a2a missile.

 

[Forest Green]

PL-21 seems considerably smaller.

PL-21 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

400km is the touted range for the PL-21:

China’s New Fighter Jet Is a Problem for Australia

If the J/H-XX becomes operational later this decade, it will give the PLAAF the ability to undertake offensive counter-air operations directly against Australia’s air approaches north of Darwin.

nationalinterest.org

The US wants to arm fighters with these new long-range missiles to hunt down China and Russia's best jets | Business Insider India

U. S.

www.businessinsider.in

 

[Ainen]

PL-21 seems considerably smaller.

It is the same 5.7(or so) meters long; neither 250kg(barely heavier than much shorter and slimmer PL-15) nor 400km number seems plausible to me...and in any case, I suspect that source of this 400 number was KS-172, which is a really old design, dating back to final Soviet years.

 

[Forest Green]

Only 250-300mm wide though and for longer range AAMs that coast large distances, ramjet intakes might not be helpful.

 

[Ainen]

Only 250-300mm wide though and for longer range AAMs that coast large distances, ramjet intakes might not be helpful.

It isn't a ramjet, there are no visible intakes; it's just a better-optimized(as a2a missile) rocket "pencil" of similar size.
And, probably, by itself one big reason to urgently launch AIM-174 development several years ago. Fielding within just months of PL-17 strongly(not conclusively of course - but it is quite likely) points towards it being a related development.

Not to gain a specific advantage, but at least to avoid an obvious disadvantage(when one side can effectively push away combat multipliers, and the other - can't).

 

[Forest Green]

It isn't a ramjet, there are no visible intakes; it's just a better-optimized(as a2a missile) rocket "pencil" of similar size.
And, probably, by itself one big reason to urgently launch AIM-174 development several years ago. Fielding within just months of PL-17 strongly(not conclusively of course - but it is quite likely) points towards it being a related development.

Not to gain a specific advantage, but at least to avoid an obvious disadvantage(when one side can effectively push away combat multipliers, and the other - can't).

There's a lot of sources saying it does have a ramjet, thta doesn't mean it's correct though I guess. Good sources are scarce. Most other sources say ramjet besides this (which is hardly a great source).

https://aminoapps.com/c/warfare-roleplay/page/item/pl-21/mmpr_gJI0I0KMdlB7Lp7eK3nevzB3EwKgm

It's hugely unclear whether the PL-21 is even a separate missile to the PL-17.

 

[Ainen]

There's a lot of sources saying it does have a ramjet, thta doesn't mean it's correct though I guess. Good sources are scarce. Most other sources say ramjet besides this (which is hardly a great source).

https://aminoapps.com/c/warfare-roleplay/page/item/pl-21/mmpr_gJI0I0KMdlB7Lp7eK3nevzB3EwKgm

It's hugely unclear whether the PL-21 is even a separate missile to the PL-17.

Yep, this PL-17/PL-21 naming controversy is indeed annoying.
I am specifically talking about this missile:
Massive PL-17 Air-To-Air Missile Seen On Chinese J-16 Fighters
Which seems to be almost direct AIM-174 counterpart (as R-37M is at least somewhat different, Meteor is something else entirely).

 

[Josh_TN]

I think it pretty clearly is solid rocket fueled, though I would suspect dual pulse.

The big advantage of AIM-174 is that it is basically an OTS solution. No development needed. Also it is already heavily networked.

 

[Forest Green]

Yep, this PL-17/PL-21 naming controversy is indeed annoying.
I am specifically talking about this missile:
Massive PL-17 Air-To-Air Missile Seen On Chinese J-16 Fighters
Which seems to be almost direct AIM-174 counterpart (as R-37M is at least somewhat different, Meteor is something else entirely).

Sorry, I thought the PL-17 name was only confused with PL-20 from the wiki article. 300mm diameter would give the AIM-174B ~30% more c/s area, so for an equivalent volume, the PL-17 would have to be ~6.25m long. At 250mm, it would need to be much longer. Less drag would help it though.

 

[bobbymike]

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8N9IqncIICM

 

[NMaude]

Sorry, I thought the PL-17 name was only confused with PL-20 from the wiki article. 300mm diameter would give the AIM-174B ~30% more c/s area, so for an equivalent volume, the PL-17 would have to be ~6.25m long. At 250mm, it would need to be much longer. Less drag would help it though.

Umm, 300mm is ~12", the AIM-174B like all Standard Missile variants is 13.5" in diameter.

 

[Ronny]

Using @Dilbert 's "Minizap" I made some rough estimate of ranges for the 174's. Also i recorded it, finally get the Obs to work with minizap.

Concern with this is that aside from known sizes and weight of the AIM-174 (basically SM-6 without booster) There is no disclosure on the burn duration and profile for the Mk 104 Rocket motor. So it's speculative. Te missile is assumed to be launched from 10000 m and M 1.25 speed.

Basically beyond 250 km it may have trouble engaging anything maneuvereable.

There are some estimation of MK 104 and MK72 performance from a Chinese study on the matter

 

[Ronny]

I never said it is useless. And we were talking not about SM-6, but about RGM-66F - an anti-ship version of SM-1MR with active seeker - which was far less advanced and capable. To put it simply, RGM-66F:

* Have a range of about 70 km on high ballistic trajectory
* Have a max velocity of less than 3.5 Mach (terminal velocity on max range would probably be no more than 1.5-2 Mach)
* Could not made low-altitude approach
* Have no capability for evasive maneuvering or ECM's
* Have no swarming capacity
* Have a small 60-kg wahread

Basically, it was a weapon against small ships and missile boats.

I think it worth noting that we should compare RGM-66F with missile of the same period.
RGM-66F were briefly tested in briefly tested in 1973 and cancelled in 1975, which put it in the same period as the first production version of RGM-84A which entered service in 1977.
*So RGM-84A has a range of 92 km
*Top speed: Mach 0.71-0.8
*Could fly at low altitude
*Has simple pop up maneuver when about 1.8 km from target (not sure how effective it is against SAM compared to high top speed though)
*No capability for ECM
*Have no swarming capacity
*Have average size warhead: 224 kg

 

[Forest Green]

Umm, 300mm is ~12", the AIM-174B like all Standard Missile variants is 13.5" in diameter.

If you increase diameter by 14.3% (343mm vs 300mm), you increase cross-sectional area by 30.6%.

There are some estimation of MK 104 and MK72 performance from a Chinese study on the matter

Astronautix has figures for the gross and unfuelled mass too.

Mk 104

Mk 104

www.astronautix.com

Mk 72

Mk 72

www.astronautix.com

 

[NMaude]

It adds 130lbs, 1760lbs (theoretical) to 1890lbs.

I highly doubt those modifications from what I've observed from the photograph would weigh 130Lb (The weight of an average woman), it should be pointed out that the SM round in the photograph is an NAIM-174B semi-inert missile so that stated weight is likely not the weight of the definitive operational round.

 

[Archibald]

400km is the touted range for the PL-21:

China’s New Fighter Jet Is a Problem for Australia

If the J/H-XX becomes operational later this decade, it will give the PLAAF the ability to undertake offensive counter-air operations directly against Australia’s air approaches north of Darwin.

nationalinterest.org

That website is a godsend.

Distance calculator - Calculate the distance online!

The popular distance calculator calculates distances in kilometres between any locations and coordinates, providing route planners, interactive maps, and information.

www.distance.to

List of extreme points of China - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

South: Hainan's southernmost tip (

18°09′33″N 109°34′27″E, south-east of Sanya) is the undisputed southernmost point.

James Shoal (

3°58′26″N 112°20′56″E) is the claimed southernmost point.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuarteron_Reef

Cuarteron Reef (

8°51′50″N 112°49′40″E) is the Chinese southernmost point with effective control.

And thus, behold:

https://www.distance.to/Sanya,Ya-Hsien,Hainan,CHN/Darwin,Northern-Territory,AUS = 2,570.60 mi (4,136.98 km)

https://www.distance.to/Darwin,Northern-Territory,AUS/3.5892353336686416,112.19237697611902

= 1,693.79 mi (2,725.88 km)

https://www.distance.to/Cuarteron-Reef/Darwin,Northern-Territory,AUS = 1,923.98 mi (3,096.34 km)

 

[stealthflanker]

There are some estimation of MK 104 and MK72 performance from a Chinese study on the matter

The thing is burn duration and profile is unknown. That "40 seconds working time" does not differentiate between Boost or sustain. While it was known that Mk-104 is a Dual pulse motor.

I think it pretty clearly is solid rocket fueled, though I would suspect dual pulse.

Mk-104 being dual pulse is a known fact for a while.. why do you think it has "DTRM" as name ?. Even Russian R-33 back in 1970's was dual pulse. So you can expect later missiles would do similar.

Do we know enough about the AIM174B to use those methods?

Yes. with exception of burn duration.. this would be speculative. Like images of SM-6 even good fidelity 3D model is available. You can measure Nose fineness ratio, base diameter, wing aspect ratio etc. You can then plot drag curve for the missile, then average them, then use the metods in "Flight performance" chapter to start iteration. Weight of components (e.g Guidance) Can be estimated from the "weight" chapter.

a long process tho but it allows alot of flexibility and modeling opportunities.

 

[Josh_TN]

Mk-104 is dual pulse? I had thought it only dual grain (thrust/sustainer).

 

[bring_it_on]

Dual thrust.

 

[Forest Green]

Mk-104 is dual pulse? I had thought it only dual grain (thrust/sustainer).

Isn't that the same thing?

 

[stealthflanker]

seem i'm ended up confusing things tho. Thought Dual Thrust is same as Dual Pulse. I should be more careful interpreting the image in Fleeman's book. Sorry.



Dual thrust is yes have boost and sustain part but no physical barrier between the two. While dual pulse, there is a physical barrier e.g some form of plate in the propellant grain.

 

[TomcatViP]

@stealthflanker : Could you kindly share the source of this document?

 

[Josh_TN]

Yes, dual pulse actually involves a reignition event. This allows the missile to coast towards its target on the first pulse, then reorient towards the target at close range and accelerate again. I do not think a lot of missiles have this configuration; the only U.S. missile I can think of is MIM-104 PAC3 MSE.

 

[Zoo Tycoon]

Yes, dual pulse actually involves a reignition event. This allows the missile to coast towards its target on the first pulse, then reorient towards the target at close range and accelerate again. I do not think a lot of missiles have this configuration; the only U.S. missile I can think of is MIM-104 PAC3 MSE.

A dual pulse motor was used on the British Alarm anti radiation missile. Production of a reliable barrier, ie strong enough to survive the first burn but will disintegrate benignly when commanded is really difficult but not impossible.

 

[NMaude]

Yes, dual pulse actually involves a reignition event. This allows the missile to coast towards its target on the first pulse, then reorient towards the target at close range and accelerate again. I do not think a lot of missiles have this configuration; the only U.S. missile I can think of is MIM-104 PAC3 MSE.

A good example of a dual-pulse rocket-motor currently in production is the SM-3's Mk-136 TSRM.

 

[stealthflanker]

@stealthflanker : Could you kindly share the source of this document?

That's from Missile Design Guide by Eugene L. Fleeman (AIAA education series, AIAA 2022)

 

[siegecrossbow]

Takeoff.

 

[sferrin]

seem i'm ended up confusing things tho. Thought Dual Thrust is same as Dual Pulse. I should be more careful interpreting the image in Fleeman's book. Sorry.

View attachment 735916

Dual thrust is yes have boost and sustain part but no physical barrier between the two. While dual pulse, there is a physical barrier e.g some form of plate in the propellant grain.

Yep. A couple examples of true dual pulse would be SRAM, SM-3 upper stage, and PAC-3 MSE.

 

[GTX]

US Navy Deploys the AIM-174B, Longest-Range Air-to-Air Missile Ever Used

US Navy Deploys the AIM-174B, Longest-Range Air-to-Air Missile Ever Used

www.armyrecognition.com

 

[HyFonic]

Full load anyone?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1833684592554861009

View: https://x.com/John_A_Ridge/status/1833684592554861009

 

[sferrin]

Imagine four of those babies in an F-12B. (They managed to shoehorn in 4 AGM-69 SRAMs, which are longer and heavier than the AIM-174.)

edit: Whoops. The 15' 10" for the AGM-69 is with the tail fairings. Without (which is what they fit in the FB-12) it was only 14'. Might have had to make some modifications to make the AIM-174 fit.)

 

[Yellow Palace]

The MDS is going to get weird with more multirole missiles coming into stock...

The simple and obvious approach would be to create a new mission symbol for 'multirole'. That could be 'B', using whatever weird logic was used for the launch environment symbol, though that might cause confusion among the hard-of-thinking with 'ABM' not meaning 'Anti-Ballistic Missile'. Or it could be 'M', with the existing-but-unusued 'M' for scientific measurements discontinued. Or some other letter; 'J' and 'Z' are completely free in both the missile and aircraft system.

Of course, being simple and logical, it certainly won't happen.

 

[raptor82]

link removed

 

[Ronny]

OMG it is not fake? WTF

 

[Trident]

Note IRST21 centre line tank.

 

[FighterJock]

Four AIM-174s on the F/A-18? Very impressive if I say so myself.

 

[Dilandu]

Four AIM-174s on the F/A-18? Very impressive if I say so myself.

Impressive, indeed!

 

[4decaa]

Four AIM-174s on the F/A-18? Very impressive if I say so myself.

not to mention the handful of other useful cylindrical tools that are also carried in this photo

 

[TomcatViP]

That you all know, I have flagged to moderators this picture as X-rated.