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

What sort of pod is that on one of the intake stations? Doesn't look like the usual targeting pod to me.
 
Colonial-Marine said:
What sort of pod is that on one of the intake stations? Doesn't look like the usual targeting pod to me.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it's an ATFLIR pod with the windows rolled up toward the fuselage. Possibly for comparative testing with the IRST21 in the centerline tank.

www.wikidata.org

AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR

targeting pod
www.wikidata.org www.wikidata.org
 
I meant the one on the right intake, station 5 I think, it might just be the regular ATFLIR pod, for some reason I thought it looked a bit different.

I'm still not sure what to think of the IRST integrated into an EFT like that. I'm sure it's great to have but if a pilot ever has to drop that tank, he'll probably spend the rest of his career doing paperwork. It makes me rather wish that the IRST envisioned under the nose of the F/A-18XT had become a real thing. The USN intends to keep the Super Hornet around for a long time yet but the decisions they've made on upgrades has me scratching my head sometimes.
 
Desertfox said:
Just imagine an ST-21 with 6 of them...
Click to expand...
Given the greater length and weight of the booster-less Standard (e.g. AIM-97 Seekbat) compared to the AIM-54 Phoenix, the Super Tomcat 21 would have likely been limited to carrying two AIM-174s underneath the fuselage stations and possibly an additional two AIM-174s underneath the glove stations.
 
TomS said:
I'm pretty sure it's an ATFLIR pod with the windows rolled up toward the fuselage. Possibly for comparative testing with the IRST21 in the centerline tank.

www.wikidata.org

AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR

targeting pod
www.wikidata.org www.wikidata.org
Click to expand...

Or for target ID, like in the TCS + AAS-42 combination on the F-14D - in terms of range and tracking performance there will be no comparison. As a derivative of the AAS-42 however, IRST-21 is a long-wave-only sensor with correspondingly poor imaging capability (it's certainly going to be no match for a modern designator pod).
 
Ronny said:
Even F-15 which supposed to be a very fast aircraft is limited to Mach 1.4 when missiles are carried on CFT station
Click to expand...

Mach 1.4 sounds rather low for the F-15 carrying AIM-120s in those stores positions, if it's flying at high-altitude, say, 40,000Ft, 45,000Ft or even 50,000Ft it should be able to reach M2.0 with full reheat.
 
NMaude said:
Mach 1.4 sounds rather low for the F-15 carrying AIM-120s in those stores positions, if it's flying at high-altitude, say, 40,000Ft, 45,000Ft or even 50,000Ft it should be able to reach M2.0 with full reheat.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure about AIM-120 but AIM-7 at CFT station limit top speed by quite a lot
f-15ex.png
basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com

Aircraft Maneuvers – Quick Guide

Introduction Ability to perform maneuver has always been a very important aspect of fighters capability. However, fighter agility and tactics is a complex art that rather hard for a laymen to under…
basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com
 
Ronny said:
I'm not sure about AIM-120 but AIM-7 at CFT station limit top speed by quite a lot
Click to expand...
This is from the 1993 manual I guess. It's a store limitation, not a drag/thrust limit. So a higher speed could possibly have been cleared in the meantime. Or alternatively, the limit could simply be ignored in wartime.


totoro said:
That 660 knot speed limit is strange as this document, showing F15C with CFTs and 4 sparrows, seems to suggest over 1100 knots.
Of course if that's apples to oranges comparison, feel free to explain it.
Click to expand...
The F-15C is equipped with type 2 CFTs, which offer lower drag and weight. And they have been cleared up to Mach 2 iirc.
 
eagle said:
This is from the 1993 manual I guess. It's a store limitation, not a drag/thrust limit. So a higher speed could possibly have been cleared in the meantime. Or alternatively, the limit could simply be ignored in wartime.



The F-15C is equipped with type 2 CFTs, which offer lower drag and weight. And they have been cleared up to Mach 2 iirc.
Click to expand...
So the F-35 have the better kinematic capacity with the full A/A Missile payload if it can reach mach 1.6+
 
VTOLicious said:
Here is my estimate of dimensions, based on the known dimensions of AIM-120.
Click to expand...
Yeah this Shows quite well how hard Pixel counting is and how we got non acurate numbers. But its also hard given that one never knows where they count from for the diameter for example. Are those small strakes also part of the 343mm diameter?
 
sferrin said:
Aren't the dimensions going to be the same as a late model SM-2? (15' 6" x 13.5")
Click to expand...
Yes more or less (it could be a little thicker given the reinforcements that it got for the Air to Air Launch and the modifikations SM-6 got to fit the MK.72 Booster which i believe make it a little longer (6.6m- 1.72m= ~4.88m))
 
sferrin said:
Aren't the dimensions going to be the same as a late model SM-2? (15' 6" x 13.5")
Click to expand...

Looks like not quite.

Navy's official number for the length of SM-6 is 21' 6" (6.55 meters). And the MK 72 booster is reported to be 5' 6" (1.68 m). Which leaves 16' (4.87m) for the upper stage.
 
Last edited:
Bring-back payload for the 18E is publicly listed as 9,900lb.

That config must be about 8,000lb for missiles alone!
 
eagle said:
This is from the 1993 manual I guess. It's a store limitation, not a drag/thrust limit.
Click to expand...
True, but then to be fair, the majority of top speed limit of aircraft are Placard limit rather than drag/thrust limit. For example: F-35A is not limited at Mach 1.6
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom