DARPA Long Range Anti-ship Missile (LRASM)

[sferrin]

"Plans call for two air launches of the LRASM-A from a U.S. Air Force bomber and four surface launches of the LRASM-B from the Mk29 vertical-launch canister using the Aerojet Mk72 booster from the Standard SM-3 surface-to-air missile. For the demonstration flights, LRASM-B will use integrated rocket/ramjets originally built for the Asalm-derived Supersonic Low-Altitude Target (SLAT) and stored at China Lake, Calif., since the program was cancelled in 1991, Kuller says."

I guess they're gonna be screwed after they've used those up and they have to try to make more. (That's when it'll get cancelled due to cost escalations and "technical challenges".)

Turns out I was being optimistic. It didn't even get that far:

"Working in close collaboration with the Navy to provide warfighters a capability that can make a difference at sea in the near term, DARPA decided in January 2012 to focus solely on technology development for LRASM-A, ceasing development of LRASM-B. By consolidating investments to focus solely on advancing LRASM-A technologies, DARPA aims to reduce risk and expedite delivery of cutting-edge capability to the fleet."

Why, I'm astonished.

I guess a 40 year old design is too risky for "DARPA hard".

 

[Grey Havoc]

Insanity.

 

[sferrin]

Insanity.

It's called, "what happens when you gut your industrial base". And the fun is just beginning. Watch the hilarity ensue when we try to build a bomber, ICBM, or nuclear warhead the next time.

 

[sferrin]

Insanity.

It's called, "what happens when you gut your industrial base". And the fun is just beginning. Watch the hilarity ensue when we try to build a bomber, ICBM, or nuclear warhead the next time.

And probably also somewhat tied to how DARPA itself is run and what program managers have gone and what new ones come in. For instance take the Airborne Launch Assist Space Access (ALASA) program, look who the PM is, Mr. Mitchell Burnside Clapp. See any coincidence given what he has advocated in the past?

That's one thing I dislike about DARPA. Some of these things aren't particularly difficult but do need consistant effort to see them through. LRASM-B is a perfect example.

 

[seruriermarshal]

Lockheed Martin Successfully Completes First LRASM Captive Carriage Test
Tweet

ORLANDO, Fla., July 16, 2012 – Lockheed Martin’s [NYSE: LMT] Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) sensor suite recently completed its first flight during a captive carry flight test off the coast of northwest Florida using a modified Sabreliner business jet.

The objectives of the flight test included detecting, classifying and recognizing targets. Conducted at various airspeeds and altitudes, the flight tests exceeded all objectives and demonstrated successful sensor operation, as well as integration of the sensor suite with the missile electronics. Littoral imagery was captured during the tests, and target data processing algorithms ran real-time in the missile electronics, and demonstrated outstanding performance.

“This is a tremendous step toward integrating the LRASM subsystems and getting the missile into additional flight testing,” said Mike Fleming, LRASM program manager in Lockheed Martin’s Missiles and Fire Control business. “Testing and validation of subsystems is on schedule and will lead to All-Up-Round flight tests in early 2013. Our experience with related missile technology development efforts, such as the Joint Air-to-Surface Missile-Extended Range program, is directly benefiting our efforts on LRASM.”

The sensor suite consists of a radio-frequency sensor to detect ships in the area, a weapon data link for communication with battlefield managers and an electro-optical seeker for positive target identification and precise targeting during the terminal phase of flight. The missile also employs an enhanced digital anti-jam Global Positioning System to detect and destroy specific targets within a group of numerous ships at sea.

LRASM is designed to meet the needs of U.S. Navy and Air Force warfighters. LRASM incorporates sensors and systems to achieve a stealthy and survivable subsonic cruise missile with reduced dependence on intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms, network links and GPS navigation in electronic warfare environments.

This stealthy missile is in development with DARPA and the Office of Naval Research. Lockheed Martin is planning to offer both surface-launched and air-launched variants to attack sea-based targets at significant standoff ranges.

Headquartered in Bethesda, Md., Lockheed Martin is a global security and aerospace company that employs about 123,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services. The Corporation’s net sales for 2011 were $46.5 billion.

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-releases/2012/july/mfc-071612-lm-successfullycompletes.html

 

[Grey Havoc]

http://www.dtic.mil/descriptivesum/Y2013/Navy/stamped/0604786N_4_PB_2013.pdf

(h/t to commentator Desert Tortoise over at one of the threads on CDR Salamander.)

 

[bobbymike]

AirSea Battle Weapon?: Lockheed Martin hopes to get on contract with the Navy in 2014 for a derivative of its Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile and JASSM-Extended Range system called the Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile, according to Dick Tate, the company's program manager for the new weapon. Developed as a DARPA project, LRASM has "the same mold line" and thus about the same stealth as the JASSM-ER, but replaces some of that weapon's internal fuel with avionics that permit man-in-the-loop "multimode" terminal guidance, said Tate last week at AFA's Air Warfare Symposium in Orlando, Fla. The sensors are designed to give the weapon capability against moving sea targets or mobile land targets. The JASSM-ER can go more than 500 miles, but LRASM would have close to the baseline JASSM's range of more than 200 miles, said Tate. LRASM has a 1000-pound warhead and is meant for launch from aircraft like F/A-18E/Fs or B-1Bs, or from shipboard vertical launch system tubes with an ASROC rocket boosting it. Lockheed Martin said it successfully tested the system pushing through a VLS tube cover and the nose-mounted apertures were unaffected. The company also has conducted captive carriage flight testing of the LRASM sensor suite. The weapon would have about 85 percent commonality with JASSM-ER and would be built on the same production line in Alabama, according to the company.

 

[bobbymike]

http://defensetech.org/2013/03/05/navy-oders-more-tests-for-anti-ship-missile/

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.businessinsider.com/this-is-the-us-missile-no-ship-will-see-coming-until-its-too-late-2013-3

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckBlogId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:9d8b2247-6370-4103-9ee2-0fecfa2beed2

 

[Triton]

Artist's impressions of Lockheed Martin LRASM-A.

Source:
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/lrasm-missiles-reaching-for-a-long-reach-punch-06752/

 

[Triton]

Artist's impression of Lockheed Martin LRASM-B. Cancelled January 2012.

Source:
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/lrasm-missiles-reaching-for-a-long-reach-punch-06752/

 

[fightingirish]

LockheedMartinVideos - LRASM Overview

LRASM represents a mature tactical missile, leveraging the JASSM-ER platform, for next generation offensive anti-surface warfare weapons capability that can be either air or surface launched.
LRASM offers new strike weapon capability that enables deep strike in previously-denied battle environments and effectiveness against robust target defense systems.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvHlW1h_0XQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvHlW1h_0XQ

 

[sferrin]

I'm interested in why they think an LRASM-A would have anymore chance against modern shipboard defenses than a plain old Harpoon. LARASM-B might have had a chance but then we can't do supersonics anymore so. . .

 

[SpudmanWP]

LRASM-A is a VLO platform that focuses on sneaking up on the enemy rather than using brute speed as in LRASM-B.

 

[sferrin]

LRASM-A is a VLO platform that focuses on sneaking up on the enemy rather than using brute speed as in LRASM-B.

Great, but considering it's flying directly AT the radar it's trying to evade it's going to be seen in plenty of time for CIWS to deal with it. Stealth doesn't make you invisible at every distance.

 

[John21]

Even I could tell that video was REALLY optimistic. I figured the radars would have caught them on the descent. What about thermal/infrared or electro-optic systems on board the ships?

 

[sferrin]

Even I could tell that video was REALLY optimistic. I figured the radars would have caught them on the descent. What about thermal/infrared or electro-optic systems on board the ships?

To be fair it's unlikely they'd have been caught on the decent considering you probably need to be inside 5-10 miles to be detected. On the other hand they didn't show a pop-up "whoops, I'm right in the middile of the envelope" either.

 

[SpudmanWP]

Great, but considering it's flying directly AT the radar it's trying to evade it's going to be seen in plenty of time for CIWS to deal with it. Stealth doesn't make you invisible at every distance.

Your target will always have a radar, there is no way to evade that. Accepting that there will always be a radar brings us to the next choice, how to make the defences as ineffective as possible. There are several factors that help in this scenario:

1. Flying directly at the radar makes you the smallest RCS target possible. Effective XLO (better than VLO) RCS signature is designed to minimize the reaction time for the defender. While low band tripwire radars may get a sniff, the higher band targeting radars will have a difficult time getting a lock.

2. By not doing a pop-up, the LRASM-A will try to sneak "under the radar" and take advantage of negative elevation limits of the radars and CWIS units. This also increases radar clutter for the defender which again reduces reaction time.

3. Reducing the effectiveness of radar-based CWIS will force the defender to depend on IR based sensors with are not as accurate in ranging as radar based sensors.


Before you ask, yes 100% pK is not likely to happen on an alert, modern target.

 

[sferrin]

Great, but considering it's flying directly AT the radar it's trying to evade it's going to be seen in plenty of time for CIWS to deal with it. Stealth doesn't make you invisible at every distance.

Your target will always have a radar, there is no way to evade that. Accepting that there will always be a radar brings us to the next choice, how to make the defences as ineffective as possible. There are several factors that help in this scenario:

1. Flying directly at the radar makes you the smallest RCS target possible. Effective XLO (better than VLO) RCS signature is designed to minimize the reaction time for the defender. While low band tripwire radars may get a sniff, the higher band targeting radars will have a difficult time getting a lock.

2. By not doing a pop-up, the LRASM-A will try to sneak "under the radar" and take advantage of negative elevation limits of the radars and CWIS units. This also increases radar clutter for the defender which again reduces reaction time.

3. Reducing the effectiveness of radar-based CWIS will force the defender to depend on IR based sensors with are not as accurate in ranging as radar based sensors.


Before you ask, yes 100% pK is not likely to happen on an alert, modern target.

It'll be interesting to see if it works.

 

[SpudmanWP]

Almost forgot about simultaneous impact.

This is very important, especially vs Russian systems as they have a 13+ second cycle to go from detection (1st target) --> lock --> engage --> back to search --> detect (assuming immediate detect) --> lock (2nd target).

These timings assume no delay in search pattern. For instance, the Russian CIWS fire control radar MR-123 takes 40 seconds to scan the sky from sea level to +36 degrees. If it misses the LRASM onthe first pass, the missile could be 10 kms closer by the time the radar comes around again.

I wonder if the LRASM software can take advantage of these gaps and time it's terminal phase?

 

[sferrin]

I wonder if the LRASM software can take advantage of these gaps and time it's terminal phase?

From watching that video it would imply LRASM has a lot of ESM and smarts onboard. Add to that the short distance to the horizon for a sea-skimmer and maybe it looks for gaps in coverage and timing and races in where/when the radar isn't looking.

 

[DrRansom]

sferrin - one could argue that the whole point of the LRASM was to build that guidance system. That seemed to be more important than advancing the state of the art in missile design.

And, if the USAF believes that it has to go hypersonic to get a speed advantage worthy of the name, give that air defenses are capable of hitting Mach 4 diving missiles, restarting older fast missile program may have seen unnecessary given the cost.

Personally, I think that this model is only good for the near term, until the Chinese develop a form of AEW for their carrier groups. AEW can fly ahead of the ships and, by looking down at the missiles from a different angle than that of the ship's radar, those planes can possibly detect a slow missile.

Hopefully by that time, 2020 - 2025, there'll be a hypersonic missile to supplement the LRASM.

 

[bobbymike]

Anti-Ship JASSM Test

DARPA intends to test an anti-ship version of Lockheed Martin's JASSM cruise missile in July at Pt. Mugu, Calif., according to Frank St. John, vice president of the company's Missiles and Fire Control business. The Long-Range Anti-Surface Missile, or LRASM, is externally "almost identical" to the company's JASSM Extended Range variant, said St. John. It "gives up some range" to accommodate "added sensor capability," he said, but retains the same warhead. The missile is designed to fly to a pre-set area and then look for its specific target autonomously. The project is on an "accelerated development pace," said St. John; DARPA is taking advantage of the extensive flight testing already done on the JASSM and "the maturity of the baseline system." If successful, the Air Force and Navy could add LRASM to their inventories. Australia and Finland are possible foreign users, said St. John, since they are also buying JASSM. DARPA is pursuing the project to fulfill a near-term need for a stealthy, long-range standoff missile useful against fixed or naval targets. The Navy launched the Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare project in 2010, and is seeking a missile that can operate with or without the help of satellite guidance.

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.asdnews.com/news-49389/LM_Successfully_Completes_LRASM_Vertical_Launch_System_Tests.htm

 

[Moose]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pP8pOtuo4Bo

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2013/07/lockheed-lrasm-completes-capti.html

 

[seruriermarshal]

The 337th Test and Evaluation Squadron successfully completed their first captive carry test of a Long Range Anti-Ship Missile on-board a B-1 Bomber June 17, marking a significant step forward toward the B-1's role in the maritime environment.

Designed and developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Office of Naval Research, the LRASM is based off the Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile Extended Range and was constructed as part of an effort to overcome challenges faced by current anti-ship missiles penetrating sophisticated enemy air defense systems.

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1152

 

[bring_it_on]

Has the Navy indicated whether it is willing to kick start a formal competition, and issue reqirements for a new Anti ship weapon as soon as this developmental program concludes? Missile development is currently being pursued in a strange way, with no formal RFP from the USN, and DARPA issued program that has a no clear path towards operationalization..In the MRAAM arena, you have the DARPA funded T3, that is all set to launch 2 weapons (ramjet) by september, and the USAF/USN has no formal program in anticipation...What happens when these DARPA programs wind down? The research team just goes home?

 

[seruriermarshal]

A black missile program maybe

 

[sferrin]

A black missile program maybe

But unlikely. How many "black" missiles have there been - ever?

 

[bring_it_on]

We'll i am not concerned about keeping the designers employed, but more about keeping the design team working at the AsM for which they have been funded for so many years. Ideally, their should be a smooth transition from the DARPA lead program over to the service concerned, so that the design teams are preserved. Since this is a program based on no formal requirement from the USN, one can only speculate that if and when such a requirement is released the LRASM would be one players and LM would be bidding for it. The requirement could well be different from what the LRASM is, so you could for example have a Subsonic ----> Supersonic transition program, or a different sort of weapon all together with different set of priorities, and specs. Given the neglect towards AsM weapons in the last decade(s), the USN should issue formal requests for fielding a LRASM like subsonic weapon as soon as possible, and perhaps look for faster solutions down the road. Something like what DARPA wanted to do with the LRASM -A and B version. No use for DARPA to work on the B Version as the expenses probably are going to be too significant for a Science and development program, but if a formal program is initiated, a B version or something like it, could well be asked for at a later date, with a LRASM-A "like" missile being brought in as soon as possible.

 

[seruriermarshal]

A black missile program maybe

But unlikely. How many "black" missiles have there been - ever?

Non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse warheads ? they used in Gulf War .

 

[seruriermarshal]

a LRASM-A in VLS

 

[sferrin]

A black missile program maybe

But unlikely. How many "black" missiles have there been - ever?

Non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse warheads ? they used in Gulf War .

"How many "black" missiles have there been - ever?"

A one-off warhead is nothing special (and I think you're confusing the carbon filament warheads with EMP warheads - which weren't used in 1991 AFAIK.)

 

[sferrin]

a LRASM-A in VLS

Interesting. I wonder why they don't just use a Tomahawk booster.

 

[seruriermarshal]

A black missile program maybe

But unlikely. How many "black" missiles have there been - ever?

Non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse warheads ? they used in Gulf War .

"How many "black" missiles have there been - ever?"

A one-off warhead is nothing special (and I think you're confusing the carbon filament warheads with EMP warheads - which weren't used in 1991 AFAIK.)

The US Navy reportedly used a new class of highly secret, non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse warheads during the opening hours of the Persian Gulf War to disrupt and destroy Iraqi electronics systems. The warheads converted the energy of a conventional explosion into a pulse of radio energy. The effect of the microwave attacks on Iraqi air defense and headquarters was difficult to determine because the effects of the HPM blasts were obscured by continuous jamming, the use of stealthy F-117 aircraft, and the destruction of Iraq's electrical grid. The warheads used during the Gulf War were experimental warheads, not standard weapons deployed with fielded forces.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/hpm.htm

 

[bring_it_on]

Regardless of what has been done in the past, there is very little reason to develop an Anti Ship missile, for fleet wide usage in the dark. If and when the USN issues RFP's for a new anti-ship weapon, it would be all out in the open.

 

[seruriermarshal]

Regardless of what has been done in the past, there is very little reason to develop an Anti Ship missile, for fleet wide usage in the dark. If and when the USN issues RFP's for a new anti-ship weapon, it would be all out in the open.

or just used attack High-value targets .

 

[seruriermarshal]

;D

Darpa Tests Jassm-Based Stealthy Anti-Ship Missile

By Graham Warwick

September 06, 2013

Lockheed Martin has conducted the first flight test of a prototype anti-ship weapon based on its stealthy AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile-Extended Range (Jassm-ER).

The flight was conducted on Aug. 27 under the joint Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) and Office of Naval Research (ONR) Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) program.

LRASM is developing a stealthy, survivable missile that can autonomously engage specific enemy warships at long range, in heavy electronic countermeasure without help from intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) assets.

“We have taken a basic waypoint-following cruise missile and added brains to it,” says Artie Mabbett, Darpa program manager. “It can autonomously detect, track and engage targets of interest without depending on lots of a priori knowledge and with reduced dependence on ISR assets.”

Details of the multi-sensor, multi-spectral guidance system, developed by BAE Systems, are not being discussed, but Mabbett says LRASM incorporates an advanced inertial measurement unit to cope with GPS denial, and a better radar altimeter was added to enable the Jassm-ER to sea-skim.

For the first flight test, the LRASM was released from a Rockwell B-1 over the Point Mugu test range off southern California. Halfway to its target, the missile switched from following a pre-planned route to autonomous guidance.

“There were three vessels in the target area, all with representative emitters,” Mabbitt says. The missile autonomously detected the moving target and hit the 260-ft. unmanned ship in the desired location with its inert warhead. “The purpose of the test was to stress the sensor suite. It detected all the targets and only engaged to one we had told it to.”

Two more flight tests are planned this year, involving different altitudes, ranges and geometries in the target area. “We will push the envelope, with more stressing tests, to get a good assessment of the maturity of the technology,” Mabbitt adds.

Surface-launched flight tests have been added to the program, and work is underway to integrate the Jassm-based LRASM into the vertical launch system used on Navy warships. Two launches are planned for next summer.

Once the Darpa/ONR program is complete, LRASM will be a candidate for the Navy’s Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare program, which is ramping up and expected to become the program of record to replace the Harpoon anti-ship missile.

“We are working very closely with the Navy so they can assess LRASM’s capability along with other systems out there,” Mabbett says. noting that the Air Force also is interested in the capabilities being added to the Jassm-ER.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_09_06_2013_p0-613665.xml