ESSM / SLAMRAAM / rumors.

sferrin

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
3 June 2011
Messages
17,897
Reaction score
10,980
Was over on F-16.net today and a poster mentioned the following:

"I wonder if they have considered just using ESSM as a starting point for JDRADM? Raytheon appears to be doing a significant portion of the work needed to mate the AMRAAM seeker to ESSM as part of the SL-AMRAAM-ER project. And as you've said, an ESSM should fit in the same space as an AMRAAM in the F-22's bays.

It would be a significantly heavier solution. This would prevent it from carriage on some AAM-only stations on various aircraft.

Not ideal definitely, but might be far less costly than designing a new missile largely from scratch. It would also give you a lot more room for the warhead and ARM sensor (especially if you went to 10" diameter all the way)."


and somebody else:

"An AMRAAM seeker on the ESSM has been coined for quite a while under various monikers including "ASSM" -- Active Sea Sparrow Missile. "


Anybody know anything about these two projects? (Personally I wonder if they've confused "SL-AMRAAM-ER" with the Surface Launch AMRAAM with a ten-inch booster which has nothing to do with ESSM.)
 
It just sounds logical, especially for developing a new medium range SAM. One thing I've wondered is whether ESSM would need a new rocket motor with a different burn profile to become a true long-range AAM/ARM. I know that calling it short-ranged even in its current form is misleading, though. I do think a 39kg warhead with some fancy technology should be plenty, any larger and it may become a liability for the missile when used in the air-to-air role.
 
Trident said:
It just sounds logical, especially for developing a new medium range SAM. One thing I've wondered is whether ESSM would need a new rocket motor with a different burn profile to become a true long-range AAM/ARM. I know that calling it short-ranged even in its current form is misleading, though. I do think a 39kg warhead with some fancy technology should be plenty, any larger and it may become a liability for the missile when used in the air-to-air role.
Click to expand...

I've said so myself for years. I just didn't know there were any programs to actually DO it. (Cancelled or otherwise)
 
Follow this link for a picture I took of the SLAMRAAM-ER when it was unveiled by Raytheon at this year’s Salon le Bourget:

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c190/Blargon2002/Picture223.gif

SLAMRAAM-ER is the AIM-120 seeker head and missile data link added to the RIM-162 ESSM missile body with new tapered down fore body, from ESSM’s 10-inch to AMRAAM’s 7-inch diameters. With the ESSM’s rocket motor the SLAMRAAM-ER significantly extends the slant range of the AIM-120 in the ground based air defence application. This missile configuration (seeker/tdl/rocket) could easily be integrated onto an aircraft platform as it is already systems integrated and rail launched. It would just need a carry and ‘drop’ test campaign to proof it.

Fired from a Mach 1.0+ aircraft at 40,000 feet SLAMRAAM-ER should reach out to at least 300km. But at 620lb (280kg) a piece it would cut into your unit of fire by weight compared to AIM-120.

If you wanted even more range then you could air launch Block VI SM-2, aka SM-6. This is the AIM-120 seeker head and missile data link added to the SM-2 Block IV missile body, initial booster and missile data link. SM-1 was air launched in the Standard ARM configuration and there is no reason the latest versions couldn’t be. This missile would of course weigh in at 3,225 lb (1,466 kg) or 1,558 lb (708 kg) without the Mk74 booster. Air to air range for the boosted version would probably be over 1,000km and over 500km without.

Of course why would you do all this? Rocketing air to air missiles over long ranges has never been as hard as making sure they hit the target when they get there. Hence the demise of Phoenix and its proposed replacements.

I doubt Boeing’s JDRADM will utilise any of these Raytheon and ATK products. JDRADM’s requirement to replace both AMRAAM and SDBs capability at the flick of a switch would indicate an entirely new dual role rocket propellent and/or warhead.

PS This is my first post and this web forum is like finding a soulmate ;D
 
Where are you getting these ranges from as they sound extraordinarily high. ESSM is generally stated as having a ground-launched range of 27nm. You don't get a six-fold increase simply by putting it on an airplane. Double is fairly typical for AAM-sized missiles (you wouldn't get double for an air-launched ICBM for example).

Hmmm. In fact it looks like it's surface-launched range is even less than ESSM at 40 km vs 50km for ESSM.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/06/20/214940/raytheon-goes-for-grand-slam.html

Of course they need to stick this on an aircraft as it should fit in the F-22's bays (and no problem at all if carried externally by even an F-16).
 
Here's an interesting video from the Naval News channel concerning several Raytheon projects including the ESSM Block 2:


Interview with Gerry Hueber, requirements and capabilities' vice president for the naval power business at Raytheon, during Sea Air Space 2024.
Click to expand...
Hueber sheds light on the following topics:
Click to expand...
01:29 - SM-6 including its latest at-sea test with the MDA
Click to expand...
02:51 - ESSM Block 2
Click to expand...
03:37 - Australia's Guided Weapons Explosive Ordnance Enterprise
Click to expand...
04:45 - Challenges to ramping up missile production in the US
Click to expand...
 
I wonder if that means some time later on this year or next year (2025) we'll see the appearance of the ESSM in Ukraine?
 
NMaude said:
I wonder if that means some time later on this year or next year (2025) we'll see the appearance of the ESSM in Ukraine?
Click to expand...
Presumably launched from 9K37 Kub launchers.
 
Topi said:
Presumably launched from 9K37 Kub launchers.
Click to expand...

Certainly with surplus SA-6 Gainful or SA-11 Gadfly TELs but also mobile land versions of ESSM launchers and don't forget that the ESSM can be fitted with a jettison able JVC unit enabling vertical launchers.
 
sferrin said:
They already have SLAMRAAM-ER IIRC. ESSM would be superfluous.
Click to expand...

Not really, Ukraine needs as many SAMs and associated systems it can get its' hands on as recently for example one power plant in Kharkiv was severely damaged due to leakers that that couldn't be shot down due to all of the available SAMs already being expended.
 
Last edited:
NMaude said:
Not really, Ukraine needs as many SAMs and associated systems it can get its' hands on as recently for example one power plant in Kharkiv was severely damaged due to leakers that that couldn't shot down due to all of the available SAMs already being expended.
Click to expand...
So send more SLAMRAAM-ERs.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I'm sure we have a pile of ESSMs that are close to the end of safe life of their rocket motors we could donate to Ukraine right now.
Click to expand...

Those would be the Block I ESSMs and as mentioned upgrade to the rate of production has been ramped up so no doubt those Block Is will be replaced by the much more capable Block II variant. Note the increased rate of production will drop the unit price of the Block II ESSMs.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom