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

[Josh_TN]

One can only hope the USN pursues it. A number of commentators have been calling for this since before the first picture was released in 2021. It makes so much sense capability wise you almost have to wonder why this was not completed years ago.

 

[Moose]

One can only hope the USN peruses it. A number of commentators have been calling for this since before the first picture was released in 2021. It makes so much sense capability wise you almost have to wonder why this was not completed years ago.

That's easy, they have to work within budget caps at best and Continuing Resolutions when things get worse.

 

[Jimmo952]

That's easy, they have to work within budget caps at best and Continuing Resolutions when things get worse.

They can only build SM-6s so fast and they have nowhere what they need to fill Burke VLS cells.

As production ramps up and a comfortable inventory exists, we might see alternative uses of SM-6 gain traction.

 

[NMaude]

What I'd like to see is for the airborne carriage of SM-6s extended to the F-15 and especially the F-16, if the F-16 is cleared to carry SM-6s then that opens up the possibility of a greatly enlarged market for the SM-6 (And its' derivatives) as large numbers of F-16s are flown by a LOT of foreign airforces. If Raytheon can then expand its SM production line greatly that should dramatically drop the unit-price of the SM-6.

Something else that could be done is to develop an air-launched version of the SM-6 where its' seeker assembly is replaced with the AGM-84's seeker (With any repackaging needed), a radio-altimeter (To enable sea-skimming mode) and the Harpoon's 500Lb warhead. This would make a good ant-ship/land-attack variant.

 

[Josh_TN]

The USN can hardly build enough SM-6 for itself. AFAIK SM-6 has not been exported (maybe Japan?). More over this is more of a specialty item for high value, slow moving targets at long range. Even if the USAF has SM-6 or some other in house very long range AAM, it likely is limited to the F-15E fleet (or even more likely, a subset of the F-15E fleet).

 

[TomS]

AFAIK SM-6 has not been exported (maybe Japan?).

I see DSCA cases for SK-6 sales to Japan and South Korea, but they are from 2022-23, so probably not delivered yet even if actually ordered. And the quantities are tiny (32 for Japan, 38 for Korea)

SM-6 Standard Missile | Defense Security Cooperation Agency

www.dsca.mil

 

[NMaude]

The USN can hardly build enough SM-6 for itself.

Given that massive increase in use by the USN *(Shooting down Houthi and Iranian missiles targeting shipping in the Red Sea and Israel) I can see Raytheon not only having to increase production capacity in its' existing Standard missile production line but having to open a second-source production line.

I see DSCA cases for SK-6 sales to Japan and South Korea

What about Australia?

*Also Ukraine's experience in the high-intensity Russo-Ukrainian war the current anti-air missile stocks are inadequate for such wars (It's increasingly likely that the PRC will attempt to invade Taiwan in the next few years and the USN will be pulled into it along the JSDF navy).

 

[GTX]

What about Australia?

Australia – Defense Services Related to Future Standard Missile Production | Defense Security Cooperation Agency

www.dsca.mil

 

[TomS]

Australia – Defense Services Related to Future Standard Missile Production | Defense Security Cooperation Agency

www.dsca.mil

Ok, that's maddening. I used the "SM-6" tag in the DCSA system, but of course this announcement isn't tagged "SM-6", but "DEFENSE SERVICES RELATED TO FUTURE STANDARD MISSILE PRODUCTION".

What's the point in using metadata tags if you don't use them consistently?

 

[NMaude]

Defense Updates has just put out a video about the recently spotted F/A-18F carrying an SM-6:

Newly surfaced photos reveal a U.S. Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornet equipped with what looks like an air-launched variant of the highly versatile SM-6 missile. This combination of the Super Hornet and SM-6 was seen three years ago but has never been officially confirmed by the US Navy.This is an interesting development.

In this video, Defense Updates analyzes why the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet armed with SM-6 missile boon for the US Navy?

#defenseupdates #SM6 #usnavyhttps://www.youtube.com/hashtag/usnavy

Chapters:

00:11 INTRODUCTION

01:35 SM-6 MISSILE

03:43 F/A-18E/F SUPER HORNET

05:25 US NAVY FACES THREAT

07:19 ANALYSIS

 

[Christopher Wang]

Based on available specifications data of boosterless Standard missile variants such as the RIM-66 Standard MR, AGM-78 STARM, AIM-97 Seekbat, and RGM-165 LASM, an air-launched boosterless variant of the RIM-174 ERAM / SM-6 could weight in the range of 600-kg / 1300-lb to 620-kg / 1370-lb and with a length of 4.47-m / 14-ft 8-in to 4.72-m / 15-ft 6-in.

 

[NMaude]

I wonder if an air-launched version* of the SM-3 will be developed? It could be used as an ASAT taking over the role of the long retired ASM-135 ASAT.

*Without the Mk-72 booster attached.

 

[Josh_TN]

Given that massive increase in use by the USN *(Shooting down Houthi and Iranian missiles targeting shipping in the Red Sea and Israel) I can see Raytheon not only having to increase production capacity in its' existing Standard missile production line but having to open a second-source production line.

What about Australia?

*Also Ukraine's experience in the high-intensity Russo-Ukrainian war the current anti-air missile stocks are inadequate for such wars (It's increasingly likely that the PRC will attempt to invade Taiwan in the next few years and the USN will be pulled into it along the JSDF navy).

Not until we see the money.

 

[NMaude]

Not until we see the money.

I strongly suspect we're going to see that funding in the near future.

 

[TomS]

Based on available specifications data of boosterless Standard missile variants such as the RIM-66 Standard MR, AGM-78 STARM, AIM-97 Seekbat, and RGM-165 LASM, an air-launched boosterless variant of the RIM-174 ERAM / SM-6 could weight in the range of 600-kg / 1300-lb to 620-kg / 1370-lb and with a length of 4.47-m / 14-ft 8-in to 4.72-m / 15-ft 6-in.

The Navy gives an actual weight for SM-2 MR Block IIIB as 1558 lbs (706 kg). That 1370-lb weight is for SM1 MR which is shorter by about 10 inches. Notably, the weight gain to SM2 MR is greater in percentage terms than the length gain, so SM2 got denser as well as longer. Some of that may be because the length gain is all in the straight body, not the tapered nose, but it still looks like the new propellants are noticeably denser.

And just to complicate things, the weight for SM-6 is generally quoted in official sources as "roughly" 3300 lbs. SM-2 Block IV is 3225 lbs, so that's probably the lower bound. The Mk 72 booster is somewhere around 1500 to 1600 lbs (sources vary), which leaves the upper stage at more like 1650-1700 lbs. Thing is, SM-6 is bumping up against the max length in a Mk 41 VLS, so unless it got MUCH denser (again), some of these official numbers are bogus.

Still, the main takeaway is that the likely weight of an SM-6 upper stage and derived AAM are probably more like 1600 lbs than 1300.

 

[Jimmo952]

Not until we see the money.

Raytheon is increasing production. They are working to get to a build rate of 300 per year for SM-6.

 

[Cordy]

Raytheon is increasing production. They are working to get to a build rate of 300 per year for SM-6.

Inside the Navy's $2B plan to surge solid-rocket motor production and revitalize a historic arsenal​

"Due to a shortage of private-sector producers, Indian Head’s first objective is surging solid-rocket motor production to help industry meet the growing demand for munitions like the Standard Missile family."

| InsideDefense.com

insidedefense.com

 

[NMaude]

In regards to an air-launched SM-6 aside from the USN I can also see the RAAF using it as they have Super Hornets too.

 

[aonestudio]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1808356846010523979

View: https://x.com/CurtisLeeCICMCC/status/1808356846010523979?t=BPddbpX_9ZUZkpbs1AZWhA&s=19

 

[Forest Green]

Will this pave the way for an air-launched SM-6 IB AGM? Can it also do air-to-ground like the SM-6?

 

[eagle]

Air launched SM-6 aka AIM-174B



Pics from: https://www.instagram.com/aeros808
Article: https://theaviationist.com/2024/07/03/first-images-super-hornet-carrying-two-sm-6-missiles/

 

[NMaude]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1808356846010523979

View: https://x.com/CurtisLeeCICMCC/status/1808356846010523979?t=BPddbpX_9ZUZkpbs1AZWhA&s=19

XAIM-147B? When I first quickly over it for a moment I thought it it said "XAIM-47B".

Will this pave the way for an air-launched SM-6 IB AGM?

Very likely and it wouldn't take much modification to the seeker IMO, the question is does it have a multi-mode warhead?

Can it also do air-to-ground like the SM-6?

If the RIM-174A SM-6 has secondary AShM and SSM capabilities then the AIM-174B should in principle have have the same abilities.

On another note if the USAF wants to make an SM-6ER they could mount the R/UGM-84's Harpoon's launch-booster (Aside from a weird designation which I can't remember it has a thrust of 12,000Lb with 2.9s burn-time).

 

[Ainen]

Air launched SM-6 aka AIM-174B

View attachment 733526View attachment 733525

Pics from: https://www.instagram.com/aeros808
Article: https://theaviationist.com/2024/07/03/first-images-super-hornet-carrying-two-sm-6-missiles/

After 20 years F/A-18E is finally getting its AAAM.
Though with interesting (potential) dual-purpose capabilities.

 

[Josh_TN]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1808356846010523979

View: https://x.com/CurtisLeeCICMCC/status/1808356846010523979?t=BPddbpX_9ZUZkpbs1AZWhA&s=19

So it seems it really does exist. The -174 designation seems like an oddly low number, given that JATM is -260. But nomenclature has been a mess for awhile now. The X designation sadly means this is not a general capability yet, though hopefully it will be.

 

[kqcke for you]

So it seems it really does exist. The -174 designation seems like an oddly low number, given that JATM is -260. But nomenclature has been a mess for awhile now. The X designation sadly means this is not a general capability yet, though hopefully it will be.

It actualy looks like an N if you zoom in.

 

[sferrin]

Those are some serious doublers.

 

[TomS]

So it seems it really does exist. The -174 designation seems like an oddly low number, given that JATM is -260. But nomenclature has been a mess for awhile now. The X designation sadly means this is not a general capability yet, though hopefully it will be.

The surface-launched SM-6 is RIM-174, so this is the same number, just switching the launch platform letter. That's actually how the system is supposed to work so I'll call this a win.

 

[sferrin]

I wonder why they went with this instead of ESSM Block 2. (Or not both.)

 

[aonestudio]

AIM-174 Super Hornet-Launched Variant Of SM-6 Missile Breaks Cover In Hawaii

After years in the shadows, what is likely the longest-range air-to-air missile ever fielded by the Navy comes into full view. After years in the shadows, what is likely the longest-range air-to-air missile ever fielded by the Navy comes into full view.

www.twz.com

 

[Moose]

I wonder why they went with this instead of ESSM Block 2. (Or not both.)

This is about Range. Lots of it.

 

[sferrin]

This is about Range. Lots of it.

If only they had a decent platform to carry it. A Super Hornet with a pair of those is basically:

 

[TomS]

It actualy looks like an N if you zoom in.

Most definitely:



NAIM-174 is consistent with this being an instrumented test article, like NAEM-84D/E, which was assigned to jettison test versions of Harpoon/SLAM with special telemetry equipment fitted.

Edit: the two dark patches (windows) alongside the designation seem to be unique to this version. I'd bet they are cameras for filming separation from the missile's perspective.

 

[TomS]

If only they had a decent platform to carry it. A Super Hornet with a pair of those is basically:

View attachment 733529

It might be interesting to hang a couple on an MQ-25.

 

[Josh_TN]

I wonder why they went with this instead of ESSM Block 2. (Or not both.)

I assume the goal is long range BVR, in which case the SM-6 has a big kinetic advantage.

 

[asVAL]

If only they had a decent platform to carry it. A Super Hornet with a pair of those is basically:

View attachment 733529

4X count between the nacelles on an F-14

 

[Moose]

Something I missed at first glance is this latest picture shows SM-6 mounted on stations 3 and 9, whereas in previous pictures the orange test round hung on 4 or 8.

 

[sferrin]

One can't help but wonder if this can go after the complete range of targets that a surface-launched SM-6 can. Can't think of any reason it shouldn't be able to.

 

[Josh_TN]

One can't help but wonder if this can go after the complete range of targets that a surface-launched SM-6 can. Can't think of any reason it shouldn't be able to.

The physical missile itself I would say almost certainly, though there likely are issues with aircraft integration. SM-6 can accept target updates from other platforms, so perhaps F-18s could fire them and they could accept a surface target update from some other platform as a work around.

 

[TomS]

On another note if the USAF wants to make an SM-6ER they could mount the R/UGM-84's Harpoon's launch-booster (Aside from a weird designation which I can't remember it has a thrust of 12,000Lb with 2.9s burn-time).

That's really not going to give you much of a boost. And it's designed for surface launch from a tube; air launch with that booster would be entirely unknown territory.

 

[Forest Green]

Though with interesting (potential) dual-purpose capabilities.

Yes, that's exactly what struck me. From killing AEW to killing IADS in a single missile. How do they operate in anti-surface mode, do they use just their radar, or also enemy transmissions? I know GPS was added.

How long is the booster on a surface launched SM-6? Trying to gauge the length here? Astronautix says 1.7m for the SM-6 Mk72 booster, so that makes the rest of the missile 4.85m long and 343mm diameter. This makes it slightly longer than an SM-2 and the same diameter. The SM-2 has a range of 170km form a ground launch and x3 or x4 is a typical conversion factor for a high speed/altitude air-launch! So 500-700km range for the AIM-174. I guess this is why the F-18E/F got GaN radar.

Raytheon Flies APG-79(V)4 GaN-AESA Radar in Marine Corps F/A-18 - Seapower

EL SEGUNDO, Calif. — Raytheon Intelligence & Space’s (RI&S’s) pre-production APG-79(V)4 radar system was successfully flown on a U.S. Marine Corps F/A-18 Hornet earlier this year, at Naval Air Weapons Station in China Lake, California. This is the radar system’s...

seapowermagazine.org