Close Combat Missile System - Heavy

stealthflanker said:
So basically a new MGM-157.
Click to expand...

Not really. Primarily intended for direct fire while EFOGM was meant to be used almost entirely non-LOS. And was twice the size of TOW.

Pioneer said:
Didn't the Pentagon spend a shit ton of $$$$ developing MGM-166 LOSAT specifically to replace the TOW missile system??

Regards
Pioneer
Click to expand...

Sort of? LOSAT was massive overkill, and would really have replaced TOW only in dedicated AT vehicles. Again, much larger than TOW and would not have fit on Bradley IFVs/CFVs.

sferrin said:
And then replaced that with CKEM - which they also cancelled.
Click to expand...

CKEM was closer to being fit to purpose, but still much larger than TOW.

The common theme here is size. The CCMS-H is meant as a direct physical replacement for TOW, the same way JAGM is a pretty direct drop in replacement for Hellfire. The closest existing weapon has to be Spike ER II. But even that doesn't quite fit the request for a weapon that fits in existing TOW launchers.
 
TOW 3 info

"The industry expert noted at a TOW International User’s summit in late 2017 revealed plans for the evolution of the missile to a TOW3 configuration to continue to exceed future near-peer competition on the battlefield. A TOW3 missile would include a more insensitive munitions (IM) compliant propellant, improved stability and safety, and other enhancements. The evolved missile would be backward compatible with any current launch systems in the field today."

https://monch.com/mpg/news/land/3050-tow1.html (March 2018)

- -
"Developed by ATK (NYSE: ATK), the enhanced system doubles TOW's range and reduces the missile's flight time by one-third.
During the test, the developmental propulsion system flew the missile more 4 miles and reached 2.5 miles in less time than the previous propulsion system."

https://www.militaryaerospace.com/t...n-tests-new-propulsion-system-for-tow-missile (Febuary 2012)
 
Last edited:
If it uses a TOW tube, why isn't it a TOW? (see TOW RF)

Half the weight of a HJ-10 with the same range is interesting. 10km range seems the right number for masted vehicle self targeting.
----
CKEM/LOSAT is imo more a proof of invalidity of tank firepower-armor arms race than a practical weapon if one doesn't face swarms of APS with a very particular performance band.

Minimum range means it is useless in the Hills of Germany, costs are double of mmW missiles. Kinetic kill means it is useless against anything that is not a tank, while recent wars have shown that ATGMs are useful omni-functional weapons that can kill every not-very-fast things in ground combat.
 
Request for Information: Close Combat Missile System – Heavy

SAM.gov

sam.gov sam.gov

I CCMS-H Desired Characteristics

The TAGM PMO will use the submitted White Papers to assess the ability of industry to develop a munition with the following desired characteristics. Characteristics 1- 4 are not tradeable while characteristics 5 -16 can be traded in support of characteristics 1- 4.

DC# Desired Characteristics

1 (U) System Survivability

Threshold: (U) CCMS-H should remain fully capable and operable in CBR contaminated environments as a designated CBRN mission critical system; withstand various electromagnetic pulse; operate in a degraded or denied GPS and EW contested environments; provide cybersecurity protection, mitigation, and recovery; and both manually and autonomously moderate electromagnetic emissions. If CCMS-H will rely on GPS/APNT data, one of the following conditions should be met: 1) The system should utilize existing platform GPS/APNT capabilities; or 2) CCMS-H should be capable of receiving M-code and should apply the latest APNT standards at the time of fielding.

2 (U) Sustainment

Threshold: (U) The CCMS-H prototype munition should have the reliability to achieve a successful shot to include conditioning checks, launch, flight, and warhead event to evaluate the desired characteristics (DC3 - DC16). Reliability of production CCMS-H should meet or exceed currently fielded TOW weapon system successful flight requirements after 10 yr. storage. CCMS-H production systems should meet all standards for transportation, storage, and handling requirements of the current TOW FoM. [.91 reliability at 80% confidence – Specified for RFI use only]

3 (U) Lethality - (Armor)

Threshold: (U) The CCMS-H should defeat current and future Tier-1 armored threats equipped with soft and hard-kill active protection systems from all aspects while adversary is stationary, moving, and in defilade (top attack).

4 (U) Form Factor

Threshold: (U) CCMS-H should launch from existing TOW Missile Launchers, stow in existing TOW missile racks, and should not exceed the weight of the latest version of the TOW missile.

5 (U) Cooperative Engagements (CE)

Threshold: (U) CCMS-H should participate in CE using current and future networks. The CCMS-H capability should attack a target identified by an off-platform sensor (other platforms, Soldier-borne, UAS, etc.).

6 (U) Guidance/Fire Control

Threshold: (U) CCMS-H should allow multiple guidance modes (command line of sight; fire and forget [lock-on before/after launch]) while providing two-way communication between the munition and the fire control system.

7 (U) Range

Threshold: (U) CCMS-H should maintain a minimal range of 65 meters, direct fire range of 4500 meters, and a cooperative engagement enabled range of equal to or greater than 8000 meters while maintaining a parabolic arc below 3000 feet above ground level (AGL). The munition should maintain sufficient endurance to abort, divert, and adjust munition flight.

8 (U) Engagement Time

Threshold: (U) CCMS-H should reduce engagement time to 4,000 meters as compared to current capabilities.

9 (U) Lethality -(Field Fortifications)

Threshold: (U) CCMS-H should defeat NATO standard earth and timber bunkers.

10 (U) Lethality (Urban Structures)

Threshold: (U) CCMS-H should create an entry hole in a NATO standard double-reinforced concrete (DRC) wall. Ideally, a single munition should create a hole sufficient for a Soldier equipped with organizational clothing and individual equipment to fit through it. [30 in. wide by 50 in. high – specified for RFI use only]

11 (U) Protection (Launch Signature)

Threshold: (U) CCMS-H should minimize audible and visual signatures to prevent detection.

12 (U) Shoot on the Move

Threshold: (U) CCMS-H should be able to shoot on the move for those combat platforms with stabilized launchers.

13 (U) Aided Target Detection

Threshold: (U) CCMS-H should provide aided target detection to enhance mission decision-making while the munition is in flight.

14 (U) Volley Fire

Threshold: (U) CCMS-H should support volley fire engagements coordinated by a single leader.

15 (U) Programmable Target Prioritization

Threshold: (U) CCMS-H should accept a Pre-Launch Target Engagement List provided by the fire control system.

16 (U) Overlapping Engagements

Threshold: (U) CCMS-H should provide the ability to engage near-simultaneous single/multiple targets without interference to other missiles.

*Note: the order of characteristics 5-16 does not indicate or define priority or perceived value.
Click to expand...
 
So, they want it faster and more than double the range... without losing warhead effectiveness... With IM-compliant rocket and warhead...

One hell of an ask.
 
Scott Kenny said:
So, they want it faster and more than double the range... without losing warhead effectiveness... With IM-compliant rocket and warhead...

One hell of an ask.
Click to expand...

It's actually very modest. TACAWS/JAWS did it 25 years ago as part of NG's gelled motor research.

TOW is just the Dragon of heavy ATGW these days.

1706961474949.jpeg

IIRC the TACAWS/FMTI demonstrator used a gel propellant motor to achieve the ~8 km range from a modified M2 TOW launcher.

The little radio antenna lets the FCS talk to the missile, like Spike, but more laboratory-ish.

Betting NG would provide the motor, and RTX the warhead and guidance, if they decide to go for a similar solution again.
 
Last edited:
Firefinder said:
Now that just disrespective to the Tow. The Tow actually works reliably unlike the dragon did.
Click to expand...

Dragon was fine when it hit the target. It just had an incredibly short range. Nowadays, TOW has among the shortest ranges of any extant heavy ATGW. Compare it to a Kornet or Spike and you'll see where it's lacking. Even HOT-3 has a longer range, albeit not by much.
 
Scott Kenny said:
So, they want it faster and more than double the range... without losing warhead effectiveness... With IM-compliant rocket and warhead...

One hell of an ask.
Click to expand...

Kat Tsun said:
It's actually very modest. TACAWS/JAWS did it 25 years ago as part of NG's gelled motor research.
Click to expand...
Going 2x the speed requires 4x the energy in the rocket, and this is a cylindrical missile so it needs more power still due to supersonic drag or you area-rule the body and lose volume. It also needs to burn for twice as long. It also cannot physically force the warhead to be smaller. Plus it and the warhead need to be IM-compliant.

It's still one hell of an ask.

Though I suppose the real question to ask is, "Do you make a 50lb missile that has the range we want and also replace Javelin, or do we make this beast a 100lb missile and never ask the troops to carry it?"
 
Scott Kenny said:
Going 2x the speed requires 4x the energy in the rocket, and this is a cylindrical missile so it needs more power still due to supersonic drag or you area-rule the body and lose volume. It also needs to burn for twice as long. It also cannot physically force the warhead to be smaller. Plus it and the warhead need to be IM-compliant.

It's still one hell of an ask.

Though I suppose the real question to ask is, "Do you make a 50lb missile that has the range we want and also replace Javelin, or do we make this beast a 100lb missile and never ask the troops to carry it?"
Click to expand...

Where does it say "twice the speed"?

The only thing about speed mentioned is reducing the time of flight. It doesn't mean reducing the time of flight of 8,000 meters (which isn't even its direct fire range, it's a highly arced lobbed trajectory), it means reducing the flight time from something like 18 or 20 seconds to 3,750-4,000 meters to a smaller number, maybe like 16 or 14 seconds instead.

It will also be 50 lbs, or around there, because it says it should not weigh more than TOW and fit in existing TOW ammunition racks, which limits the weight and size of the rocket.

What the actual warhead will be, who knows, I can't imagine Javelin's warhead is not out of the question though. It's very effective even against high performance tank armor, it has an HEDP mode in some variants of the rocket, and it's rather compact. A gelled motor should provide sufficient throttle to allow the missile to go a tad faster and a lot longer.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom