SCALP / Storm Shadow / MdCN

Trident said:
A lifting fuselage equates to a very low aspect ratio wing, hence extremely poor induced drag for the lift it contributes. We are not talking about a regime where you are happy to take ANY lift you can get (e.g. low speed, high-AoA turn in a fighter: vortex lift). In cruise, it will always be preferable to fulfill all of the lift requirement from an efficient high-aspect ratio wing and minimize the drag contribution of the rest of the airframe by keeping wetted area down.
Click to expand...
Perhaps but the fact still remains that the range claimed was 1.7x less than the TLAM-E and probably even more less than the Block Vb. So even with a lot less efficiency, the range is still plausible, especially with a air-launch. Even the early Tomahawks used in the Gulf War were 1300km range too. I would also argue that the internal volume of a Storm Shadow for storing fuel is probably slightly larger if anything.
 
So why did they have to cut warhead weight to 250kg to get MdCN into the quadruple digits?

Forest Green said:
I would also argue that the internal volume of a Storm Shadow for storing fuel is probably slightly larger if anything.
Click to expand...

If it carried more fuel and the same warhead weight, chances are it would be heavier.
 
Forest Green said:
This seems to just be a refurbishment. Anything new added?
Click to expand...
2 way data-link to allow re-targeting in flight allegedly (not sure of that has a BDA facility as well), enhanced GPS/Nav to deal with GPS denied conditions (quite relevant given recent news, tests were performed in a firing campaign in 2021 I believe at White Sands in a GPS denied environment).

CJGibson said:
Forget the range debate. Will they carry BROACH?

Chris
Click to expand...
Yes, its the only warhead qualified on them.
 
timmymagic said:
2 way data-link to allow re-targeting in flight allegedly (not sure of that has a BDA facility as well), enhanced GPS/Nav to deal with GPS denied conditions (quite relevant given recent news, tests were performed in a firing campaign in 2021 I believe at White Sands in a GPS denied environment).
Click to expand...
So will that allow the targeting of ships?
 
Forest Green said:
So will that allow the targeting of ships?
Click to expand...
Not unless they're stationary I suspect. Not sure if the terminal IR seeker is set up to deal with a moving target. I've never heard of any anti-shipping role for Storm Shadow, not really even for ships tied up at a pier.
 
zevets said:
I wonder what bizarre set of internal red lines caused us to give them MALD, Abrams but not ATACMS
Click to expand...
For all we know they may have arrived earlier with the HARM deliveries. They may even be in response to Russian AD learning to adapt to the presence of HARM rather than as cover for Storm Shadow.
 
In this drawing, there is a tank for "accumulator"

storm-shadow-cutaway-with-annnotations-mbda-uk-limited-copyright-2011.jpg


Does it mean Storm Shadow uses electro-hydraulic actuations instead of electro-magnetic ones?
 
Trident said:
So why did they have to cut warhead weight to 250kg to get MdCN into the quadruple digits?

If it carried more fuel and the same warhead weight, chances are it would be heavier.
Click to expand...
It was only cut to 300kg.
missilethreat.csis.org

SCALP EG / Storm Shadow / SCALP Naval / Black Shaheen / APACHE AP | Missile Threat

The SCALP EG and its variants are a series of French-made air-launched cruise missiles. Variants of the missile have been customized and sold to the United Kingdom, Italy, Greece, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. France has also developed and deployed a sea-launched version for use on...
missilethreat.csis.org missilethreat.csis.org

MdCN (missile) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org

Storm Shadow - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Some volume measurements:

Tomahawk - Pi x (.26)^2 x 5.56 = 1.18m^3

MdCN - Pi x (.25)^2 x 5.9m* = 1.16m^3(Estimated from 6.5m with booster, assumes same booster length as BGM-109)

Storm Shadow - Pi x 0.63 x 0.48 x 5.1 = 1.54m^3

Let's assume 0.58m^3 for warhead and engine in MdCN, with 0.58m^3 for fuel. If that is split 50:50 engine:warhead, the the Storm Shadow with a 50% larger warhead with occupy 0.725m^3 for engine and warhead with 0.815m^3 for fuel. The Storm Shadow is larger than anyone thinks.
 
timmymagic said:
Forest Green said:
May have had a little help it seems.
Click to expand...
I'd never have bet on MALD, would have thought the US would have used TALD and ITALD first...
Click to expand...

There might not be any left at this point. Also those were unpowered and relied on passive reflectors rather than digital recorded re transmission. They probably had a very limited ability to mimic target behavior when scanned by a modern PESA radar, to the point of being ineffective. The B variant is hardly a front line weapon for the US in any case.
 
The switch from turbojet to turbofan in AGM-158 more than doubled the range, on top of a modest increase in fuel. Though that weapon is in a different weight class in comparison. 500km doesn’t seem unreasonable particularly with a significantly faster cruise speed, though I can’t speak to what the actual range is of whatever is being used in Ukraine. It should be long enough to hit any part of the occupied territories regardless unless it was deliberately made MTRC compliant in some fashion. And even then, it’s only barely short of the Kerch strait from unoccupied Ukraine airspace.
 
The TRI-60-30 in the Storm Shadow actually has slightly better SFC than the TR50 in the MdCN. 2.425lbs/daNhr vs 2.64lbs/daNhr it seems.


This is all I can find on the Tomahawk F107-WR-402 and it works out to ~1.5lbs/daNhr based on 2.24 lbf per daN.
en.wikipedia.org

Williams F107 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

And this - F107-WR-400 and -WR-101 (AGM86) - 0.019kg/kNs = 0.042lbs/kNs = 150.8lbs/kNhr = 1.5lbs/daNhr

So, assuming the -402 is the same as the -400 and -101, Storm Shadow uses 60% more fuel (assuming everything else being equivalent) but has more drag but 30.5% more volume also. Tomahawk has a range of 1700km with a 454kg warhead. J402-CA-100 in the JASSM (A variant?) seems to have identical sfc to the MdCN's TR50 at 2.64lbs/daNhr. B variant uses an F107, so likely same as Tomahawk SFC-wise, but way smaller than a Storm Shadow.
 
Last edited:
Archibald said:
Tornadoskyi, here we go !
Click to expand...

More like Ardvarkski.

Anyway as another poster pointed out those remaining fuel-oil tank-farms in Crimea will be high priority targets for the Storm Shadow as destroying them will completely starve the remains Russian Black Sea navy ships of fuel rendering them useless. However there's another target that needs to be taken out by these missiles and that's the Kirsch straight bridge connecting Crimea to Russia, take out both bridges and you'll seriously bugger the Russians logistics in the peninsula.
 
Personally I think there are better places to cut the rail lines. Two routes come out of Crimea: one through the Isthmus over the canal the feeds crimea from the Dneiper and one farther East over a narrow strip of land and a bridge to the mainland. Those might not have the political value of attempting a strike on Kerch, but that bridge is super well protected and supplemented by train ferries. The bridges much further north wohave less cover and no back up mode of train travel, although they would be easier to repair over the long term. But you could always hit them again.
 
zjz said:
In this drawing, there is a tank for "accumulator"

storm-shadow-cutaway-with-annnotations-mbda-uk-limited-copyright-2011.jpg


Does it mean Storm Shadow uses electro-hydraulic actuations instead of electro-magnetic ones?
Click to expand...
Where exactly is fuel stored in this image? Does it even have a main fuel tank or is fuel really just dispersed all over, in small bladders in every nook and cranny?
 
totoro said:
zjz said:
In this drawing, there is a tank for "accumulator"

storm-shadow-cutaway-with-annnotations-mbda-uk-limited-copyright-2011.jpg
Click to expand...
Where exactly is fuel stored in this image? Does it even have a main fuel tank or is fuel really just dispersed all over, in small bladders in every nook and cranny?
Click to expand...

If you look carefully at the Center Section, you’ll notice it’s double walled;- that’ll be where the fuel is, bang on the Cg where it’s use has minimal effect on balance.
 
Range us a movable feast, dependent on flight profile.
More time at Medium Altitude substantially increases range.

Storm Shadow is armed with BROACH a tandem charge warhead able to penetrate hardend bunkers.
 
NMaude said:
I wonder if we'll ever see a Storm Shadow equipped with a W80 warhead instead of BROACH?
Click to expand...
Doubtful. I guess France could decide to equip it with the TN81 that they use on the ASMP-A, but no known plans at present.
 
Forest Green said:
NMaude said:
I wonder if we'll ever see a Storm Shadow equipped with a W80 warhead instead of BROACH?
Click to expand...
Doubtful. I guess France could decide to equip it with the TN81 that they use on the ASMP-A, but no known plans at present.
Click to expand...
Won't happen until Hell freeze over, for countless reasons.

Long story short, since its 1970's inception ASMP technology has been a separate development entirely, because nuclear.

en.wikipedia.org

Apache (missile) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org

Storm Shadow - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
=/=
en.wikipedia.org

Air-sol moyenne portée - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

SCALP (and Apache before it) were especially created 100% separately from ASMP - despite the aircraft above being almost the same (Mirage 2000N / Mirage 2000D). Besides nuclear, the requirements are not the same. ASMP is shorter range and ultrafast. Apache / SCALP are subsonic with a touch of stealth.

Also, Force de Frappe / Dissuasion is a sanctuarized, almost-untouchable pot of money almost entirely separate from conventional forces.

That's the reason why we will never see a BROACH-ASMP or a TNA-SCALP. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tête_nucléaire_aéroportée

ASMP / SCALP are from Venus and Mars, really. Like men and women.
 
I would wager that there's no chance of fitting a BROACH in an ASMP-A/R anyway. They did study developing a conventional anti-ship variant at one time though, but it was deemed too expensive.

Interesting that you mention 500+km as 'shorter range' though. ;)
 
BROACH was only intended for SCALP/Storm Shadow, like you Forest Green I would think it would be impossible to fit it onto the ASMP-A/R missile without a big redesign of the missile and that would be highly expensive.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom