Snub of MBDA Meteor BVRAAM?

[Triton]

Since the Obama Administration officially canceled the Next Generation Missile (NGM), formerly known as the Joint Dual Role Air Dominance Missile (JDRADM), in the 2013 budget, what alternatives exist to the United States armed forces for a beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile solution? Will the United States military buy the MBDA Meteor beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile (BVRAAM) or a licensed version of the missile from a United States-based aerospace manufacturer? Or will the United States military continue to snub Meteor?

 

[sferrin]

If we did it would be a travesty given we've tested several similar systems already.

 

[Triton]

If we did it would be a travesty given we've tested several similar systems already.

That were canceled while in development and did not reach production? Could Raytheon resurrect Future Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (FMRAAM) as a notional AIM-120E?

 

[Dragon029]

Is AIM-120D that less advanced than the Meteor? It's range is meant to be '180km+'.

Regardless, perhaps there's ideas to build something like a 2-stage, or ER version of the CUDA / SACM and those responsible are just waiting out to see how CUDA performs in real world tests.

 

[sferrin]

Is AIM-120D that less advanced than the Meteor? It's range is meant to be '180km+'.

Regardless, perhaps there's ideas to build something like a 2-stage, or ER version of the CUDA / SACM and those responsible are just waiting out to see how CUDA performs in real world tests.

There is no evidence CUDA is anything more than a paper project. A 2-stage CUDA would be the bomb though.

 

[Colonial-Marine]

Personally I'd rather see them actually produce something with all of the experience we've gathered from DARPA's T3. Maybe look back at whatever results HAVE DASH II gave us too.

In the short term getting a dual-pulse motor in AMRAAM would be good. Plus whatever seeker improvements can be made without too much modification.

 

[flateric]

1995 FMRAAM model

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1995-LARGE-Desk-Model-MISSILE-FMRAAM-HUGHES-aerospatiale-maquette-topping-mee/301896972069

 

[Ronny]

I read about proposal to make a dual role version of Meteor somewhere, does anyone know if it ever went beyond that stage?

 

[timmymagic]

I read about proposal to make a dual role version of Meteor somewhere, does anyone know if it ever went beyond that stage?

There have been a few proposals to use Meteor as the basis of an anti-radar missile and as a ground attack weapon for time critical targets, particularly after the ARMIGER project ended for Germany. To date they've gone nowhere. However, the RAF and MBDA were talking about using Meteor (presumably the AESA equipped JNAAM version) as a SEAD weapon at DSEi in 2019 as a software change only, so it looks like the idea is alive and being actively investigated.

There was also the below image from MBDA recently in response to the Land Indirect Precision Fires requirement from the British Army. The main proposal was a Boxer mounted CAMM/Brimstone hybrid with E/O or DMB seeker heads, an incredibly interesting concept for a whole lot of reasons (with implications for the Navy and Air Force). But sneaked in amongst it, with zero explanation was this...a green painted Meteor which could mean a SAM (would be fantastic paired with Land or Sea Ceptor) OR a ground attack missile for time critical targets (at colossal cost).

 

[zen]

Hmmmm.....
Certainly a Meteor could make a good time critical effector.

But is this that? Or a means to sneak a alternative SAM system into service?

Personally I thought the rockets with Brimstone seekers seemed to be faster than SPEAR III and longer ranged than Brimstone....

 

[Ronny]

. However, the RAF and MBDA were talking about using Meteor (presumably the AESA equipped JNAAM version) as a SEAD weapon at DSEi in 2019 as a software change only, so it looks like the idea is alive and being actively investigated.

Do you have like a source for that?. I search for that but can't find any information

 

[timmymagic]

No-one from MBDA has said a word about the green painted Meteor, it may have just been a CGI that they put in to muddy the waters. But at the time they were unveiling their concept to the British Army so perhaps not, they wouldn't have gotten any plus points for including an air launched weapon. The Boxer launcher for the CAMM/Brimstone hybrid was not long enough to incorporate a Meteor, so would require a different platform. Soft launch from the Land Ceptor MAN platform would be incredible (mind you CAMM-ER has medium range covered there as well, but a 200km Meteor...wow).

There was also something about Meteor as a potential ABM missile from MBDA (and by default SAM), read the thread below, MBDA might be considering it alongside Aster variants for specific threats.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1206747775536451584

Tim Robinson from the Royal Aeronautical Society magazine was the source for the Meteor as SEAD missile, apparently it was mentioned in briefings by the RAF with MBDA present. It does tend to go with the whole Complex Weapons programme ethos.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1171699243054239745

 

[Ronny]

Tim Robinson from the Royal Aeronautical Society magazine was the source for the Meteor as SEAD missile, apparently it was mentioned in briefings by the RAF with MBDA present. It does tend to go with the whole Complex Weapons programme ethos.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1171699243054239745

That incredible, I hope they success, it sad that there isn't more information

 

[timmymagic]

That incredible, I hope they success, it sad that there isn't more information

I suspect it's very much in the basic study phase at the moment, so I doubt we'll hear anything, the main focus of the effort at present will be on F-35 integration and the JNAAM. I think Tim Robinson is right that the AESA variant would be the one with utility in the SEAD role, if that's the case we're unlikely to see that until 2025-26, any real work on Meteor as a SEAD weapon would likely start after that. Using Meteor as a SAM would be very interesting. But I think it's a long shot. With Land/Sea Ceptor, CAMM-ER and SAMP/T MBDA have a strong product lineup, and unless someone has a specific role, and is willing to pay for it I can't see MBDA moving forward on it. They've got enough on with Aster BMD improvements and CAMM-ER at the moment. Realistically, I think it would need the UK to request it and finance as a longer range weapon for T26/31 and Land Ceptor. With CAMM-ER on the way doing part of that job and already funded by Italy and money being tight as ever, its improbable.

But the CAMM/Brimstone Hybrid has a whole lot more potential....and we'd be mad not to follow through, the number of roles one single missile could cover would be ground breaking.

 

[timmymagic]

That incredible, I hope they success, it sad that there isn't more information

Off topic I know...but the original pic of the green painted Meteor is here...

This is the original tweet from MBDA. Grant Turnbull also got some images of the models at the Army event on another tweet.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1042453708011921408

https://twitter.com/x/status/1042351216041381888

Brief article in EDR, makes no mention of the green painted Meteor, which seemed to blindside everyone. Note the size mentioned in the article for the CAMM/Brimstone hybrid.

"The eight-cell land indirect fire mission containerised launcher module would incorporate a 178 mm surface-to-surface weapons with either radio-frequency (RF)/semi-active laser (SAL) or electro-optic/infrared (EO/IR) seeker options. These could be based on a number of technologies developed for the MBDA missile portfolio, including developments of the 178 mm Brimstone and Spear missiles, as well as the 166 mm Common Anti-air Modular Missile (CAMM) family with active RF-seeker. "

MBDA Future Land Indirect Fires - EDR Magazine

By David Oliver MBDA exhibited new concepts for Army precision effects at the Defence Vehicle Dynamics (DVD) exhibition at Millbrook

www.edrmagazine.eu

I suspect that would be initially due to the difficulty in slimming the Brimstone/Spear seeker from 178mm to 166mm (and packing everything in Spear has apparently been a challenge). It would also imply that even with a hot ground launch and a slow burning propellant range could be >60km. But....I would think that if this ever moved towards reality MBDA would be tempted to squeeze it into a 166mm package with soft launch, as the benefits to doing so would be colossal, essentially making it more CAMM/Asraam than Brimstone. Off the top of my head some uses for it:

1) - Spike NLOS replacement/competitor - Probably cheaper, faster, much larger range (60km vs.25km) bigger warhead. UK built. No political issues around use/deployment. Could be added as the image suggests as a module on Boxer. The offensive capability of Strike Brigades enhanced enormously very easily. Replaces the poor trailer mounted version of Exactor (that by all accounts isn't really successful or suitable for peer-to-peer war).
2) - Anti-Armour Overwatch - A super Swingfire replacement. No MBT on earth could defend against a Mach 3-4 missile coming in near vertically, it wouldn't even need a warhead, KE alone would tear through a tanks top armour. A modern diving LOSAT. The speed of response would mean it could operate at much further range than Swingfire could and cover multiple units. Easiest to leave on Boxer and MAN chassis than add on to Ajax or other platforms.
3) - F-35 Outer Pylon compatible - Brimstone 2/3 will never be integrated, but Asraam has (and Asraam CSP will). The combination of the Asraam form factor and Brimstone seeker (as used on Spear which will be integrated) would allow a very straightforward integration to F-35. Very easily you give F-35B a cheaper, faster Spear capability but in 2 forms - Dual Mode and E/O. The Dual Mode would be very useful as a SEAD/DEAD weapon for pop up targets. The E/O capability is a new one to the F-35. Could be a tempting proposition to some F-35 users, maybe even a 'gateway drug' to Asraam and Ceptor variants.
4) - Compatibility with Land Ceptor launchers.
5) - Compatibility with Sea Ceptor launchers - A big advantage. Any RN vessel (including T31, and you would hope QE eventually) would have the capability of carrying an easy to integrate missile that can deal with Fast Attack Craft in any weather conditions or provide precision strike out to >60km. This would be a whole lot easier than integration of a Spear missile which would require a new booster and tip over mechanism.
6) - Export sales - New Zealand, Italy, Brazil and Chile. Plus India and Australia are Asraam users (and Australia and Italy F-35 users). As a solution to anti-air, anti-missile, precision strike, anti-FAC it's pretty much unique.
7) - Typhoon compatible - Another string to its bow. Not sure if the air to ground aspect could be easily ported to Tranche 1's though, be interesting if it could be.
8) - Falklands - There's no real credible threat there. But sending a few down south to be launched from the Land Ceptor battery would be a useful capability for the defence forces to have.
9) - UK Land Forces get a small anti-ship missile by default/accident.
10) - UK Industry benefits - No ITAR issues. for exports either (and available to export to ME countries)
11) – Could be quad packed in Sylver or Mk.41/57 launchers. Or canisters can be a standalone component, you just need a rack for them.
12) – CAMM, CAMM-ER, CAMM with E/O, CAMM with DMB head…that’s a very convincing selection of weapons for any platform to be able to fire. SAM from 200 metres to c80km, strike out to 60km+. I don’t particularly favour it but a cold launched Spear with a booster for when it clears the capsule could strike out to 150km as well, if it was lengthened with increased fuel storage to take advantage of the additional space in the canister it could go out to c250km…a lot of firepower and utility for smaller vessels.

 

[zen]

That incredible, I hope they success, it sad that there isn't more information

Off topic I know...but the original pic of the green painted Meteor is here...

This is the original tweet from MBDA. Grant Turnbull also got some images of the models at the Army event on another tweet.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1042453708011921408

https://twitter.com/x/status/1042351216041381888

Brief article in EDR, makes no mention of the green painted Meteor, which seemed to blindside everyone. Note the size mentioned in the article for the CAMM/Brimstone hybrid.

"The eight-cell land indirect fire mission containerised launcher module would incorporate a 178 mm surface-to-surface weapons with either radio-frequency (RF)/semi-active laser (SAL) or electro-optic/infrared (EO/IR) seeker options. These could be based on a number of technologies developed for the MBDA missile portfolio, including developments of the 178 mm Brimstone and Spear missiles, as well as the 166 mm Common Anti-air Modular Missile (CAMM) family with active RF-seeker. "

MBDA Future Land Indirect Fires - EDR Magazine

By David Oliver MBDA exhibited new concepts for Army precision effects at the Defence Vehicle Dynamics (DVD) exhibition at Millbrook

www.edrmagazine.eu

I suspect that would be initially due to the difficulty in slimming the Brimstone/Spear seeker from 178mm to 166mm (and packing everything in Spear has apparently been a challenge). It would also imply that even with a hot ground launch and a slow burning propellant range could be >60km. But....I would think that if this ever moved towards reality MBDA would be tempted to squeeze it into a 166mm package with soft launch, as the benefits to doing so would be colossal, essentially making it more CAMM/Asraam than Brimstone. Off the top of my head some uses for it:

1) - Spike NLOS replacement/competitor - Probably cheaper, faster, much larger range (60km vs.25km) bigger warhead. UK built. No political issues around use/deployment. Could be added as the image suggests as a module on Boxer. The offensive capability of Strike Brigades enhanced enormously very easily. Replaces the poor trailer mounted version of Exactor (that by all accounts isn't really successful or suitable for peer-to-peer war).
2) - Anti-Armour Overwatch - A super Swingfire replacement. No MBT on earth could defend against a Mach 3-4 missile coming in near vertically, it wouldn't even need a warhead, KE alone would tear through a tanks top armour. A modern diving LOSAT. The speed of response would mean it could operate at much further range than Swingfire could and cover multiple units. Easiest to leave on Boxer and MAN chassis than add on to Ajax or other platforms.
3) - F-35 Outer Pylon compatible - Brimstone 2/3 will never be integrated, but Asraam has (and Asraam CSP will). The combination of the Asraam form factor and Brimstone seeker (as used on Spear which will be integrated) would allow a very straightforward integration to F-35. Very easily you give F-35B a cheaper, faster Spear capability but in 2 forms - Dual Mode and E/O. The Dual Mode would be very useful as a SEAD/DEAD weapon for pop up targets. The E/O capability is a new one to the F-35. Could be a tempting proposition to some F-35 users, maybe even a 'gateway drug' to Asraam and Ceptor variants.
4) - Compatibility with Land Ceptor launchers.
5) - Compatibility with Sea Ceptor launchers - A big advantage. Any RN vessel (including T31, and you would hope QE eventually) would have the capability of carrying an easy to integrate missile that can deal with Fast Attack Craft in any weather conditions or provide precision strike out to >60km. This would be a whole lot easier than integration of a Spear missile which would require a new booster and tip over mechanism.
6) - Export sales - New Zealand, Italy, Brazil and Chile. Plus India and Australia are Asraam users (and Australia and Italy F-35 users). As a solution to anti-air, anti-missile, precision strike, anti-FAC it's pretty much unique.
7) - Typhoon compatible - Another string to its bow. Not sure if the air to ground aspect could be easily ported to Tranche 1's though, be interesting if it could be.
8) - Falklands - There's no real credible threat there. But sending a few down south to be launched from the Land Ceptor battery would be a useful capability for the defence forces to have.
9) - UK Land Forces get a small anti-ship missile by default/accident.
10) - UK Industry benefits - No ITAR issues. for exports either (and available to export to ME countries)
11) – Could be quad packed in Sylver or Mk.41/57 launchers. Or canisters can be a standalone component, you just need a rack for them.
12) – CAMM, CAMM-ER, CAMM with E/O, CAMM with DMB head…that’s a very convincing selection of weapons for any platform to be able to fire. SAM from 200 metres to c80km, strike out to 60km+. I don’t particularly favour it but a cold launched Spear with a booster for when it clears the capsule could strike out to 150km as well, if it was lengthened with increased fuel storage to take advantage of the additional space in the canister it could go out to c250km…a lot of firepower and utility for smaller vessels.

Isn't CAMM-ER about 7" in diameter?

 

[timmymagic]

Isn't CAMM-ER about 7" in diameter?

Think its 7.5" (190mm)

But that additional width over CAMM is in the new mid-body section, but it then thins at the rocket nozzle (believe it uses the same nozzle as standard CAMM), Consequently the tail fins don't affect the overall packing dimensions. Obviously the strakes add some width as well but it doesn't create an issue with the canister size as they are positioned to the corners of the boxes. If they went for a new missile with dimensions of 178mm, with a straight mold line as seen in the pics, I think they'd struggle to fit the folded tail fins in a CAMM canister form factor (as well as losing a lot of the potential benefits I listed).

CAMM-ER and CAMM side by side in sectioned canisters below:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1037244337334173701

 

[litzj]

No-one from MBDA has said a word about the green painted Meteor, it may have just been a CGI that they put in to muddy the waters. But at the time they were unveiling their concept to the British Army so perhaps not, they wouldn't have gotten any plus points for including an air launched weapon. The Boxer launcher for the CAMM/Brimstone hybrid was not long enough to incorporate a Meteor, so would require a different platform. Soft launch from the Land Ceptor MAN platform would be incredible (mind you CAMM-ER has medium range covered there as well, but a 200km Meteor...wow).

There was also something about Meteor as a potential ABM missile from MBDA (and by default SAM), read the thread below, MBDA might be considering it alongside Aster variants for specific threats.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1206747775536451584

Tim Robinson from the Royal Aeronautical Society magazine was the source for the Meteor as SEAD missile, apparently it was mentioned in briefings by the RAF with MBDA present. It does tend to go with the whole Complex Weapons programme ethos.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1171699243054239745

http://jaesan-aero.blogspot.com/2020/05/meteor-as-new-anti-radar-missile-for.html

If aircraft shoot Meteor to ground, it can be a good option against advanced SAM like S-300, 400, 500 series having few hundred km range.

AGM-88 based missile is now hard to deal with those SAMs.

 

[bring_it_on]

Maybe for the Typhoon or Gripen. I don't see the German AF picking the Meteor for the task on their Growlers when they have the AGM-88E and AARGM-ER, both of which are going to be compatible and available with their aircraft. Same for the Italians. The ER-AARGM/SIAW will also be a tough pass for F-35A operators as they choose NG weapons.

 

[sferrin]

Maybe for the Typhoon or Gripen. I don't see the German AF picking the Meteor for the task on their Growlers when they have the AGM-88E and AARGM-ER, both of which are going to be compatible and available with their aircraft. Same for the Italians. The ER-AARGM/SIAW will also be a tough pass for F-35A operators as they choose NG weapons.

At one point the Germans were at least thinking about something like that. The pics are from 2003.

 

[bring_it_on]

I remember that. But what are the odds that the Germans not only fund it but also fund its integration on their Growlers when the AGM-88E and AARGM-ER are available off the shelf fully devleoped and dev/ops tested?. The Italians already use the AARGM and the others are probably not interested in the investment. A multi-mode seeker, like what JDRADM was trying to achieve may be a more doable given a2a and a2g ability in one missile making it more affordable, but given platform fragmentation between some of the European air-forces, a common solution looks difficult particularly when SPEAR-EW is still out there in the future. It shouldn't be very hard for BayernChemie/MBDA to scale that VFDR technology to a 10" or larger motor and build themselves a proper SEAD/DEAD weapon. But with different platforms, and the availability of the AARGM family the business case will probably be really hard to close.

 

[timmymagic]

I remember that. But what are the odds that the Germans not only fund it but also fund its integration on their Growlers when the AGM-88E and AARGM-ER are available off the shelf fully devleoped and dev/ops tested?. The Italians already use the AARGM and the others are probably not interested in the investment. A multi-mode seeker, like what JDRADM was trying to achieve may be a more doable given a2a and a2g ability in one missile making it more affordable, but given platform fragmentation between some of the European air-forces, a common solution looks difficult particularly when SPEAR-EW is still out there in the future. It shouldn't be very hard for BayernChemie/MBDA to scale that VFDR technology to a 10" or larger motor and build themselves a proper SEAD/DEAD weapon. But with different platforms, and the availability of the AARGM family the business case will probably be really hard to close.

NAMMO are also working on ramjets with the US.

But realistically ARMIGER is dead. Meteor having a dual role as proposed by MBDA and being examined by the RAF is a very good partial solution, its not exactly a replacement for ALARM but mixed with Spear and Spear EW it has the bases more than covered. The warhead not being optimsed for ground attack does restrict it to a degree, but a mach 4+ missile tends to do a lot of damage on its own, if it can be made accurate enough and that will be the real test.

AARGM is spectacularly expensive as well...it might in fact make Meteor look cheap..and AARGM-ER is going to make AARGM look like pocket change. The US might end up pricing themselves out of the market. The networked abilities of Spear and Spear-EW working together could be the real game changer. SEAD and DEAD combined...if I was a SAM operator I might be tempted to leave my radar off...

 

[bring_it_on]

AARGM is spectacularly expensive as well...it might in fact make Meteor look cheap..and AARGM-ER is going to make AARGM look like pocket change. The US might end up pricing themselves out of the market. The networked abilities of Spear and Spear-EW working together could be the real game changer. SEAD and DEAD combined...if I was a SAM operator I might be tempted to leave my radar off...

The AARGM kits on the HARM run about $550K each at rate production. AARGM-ER will be more expensive in part because it is buying a complete missile and not a mod. but that is offset by the fact that is a next gen. weapon that is likely designed with room to grow via the "kit" upgrade strategy adopted on the HARM/AARGM.

I don't think it will be unreasonably expensive compared to what folks are willing to pay for strike missiles, particularly because it is multi-mission and not just an ARM so it isn't strictly a HARM target set that you are paying for. SiAW will be even more multi-mission given some of the USAF specific upgrades. It is a weapon that offers roughly double the range of the HARM with about the same flight duration (time) so is going to be fast and more survivable and field a more optimal warhead and guidance/comms package than what a smaller missile could likely accommodate.

But we can compare prices to alternatives in the SEAD/DEAD space that is similar or as capable. Right now, if you want a multi-mode medium-long range high supersonic SEAD/DEAD wepaon on the EA-18G, Tornado or F-35 A/C and possibly other HARM compliant platforms, then you really have one option. Nothing else is in development, rate production or integrated on some of these platforms.

For new AARGM's, Germany is expected to pay around $1.3 MM per round (acquisition cost). So roughly in line with the fly-away cost of something like an AIM-120D.

Germany through the NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA) – AGM-88E AARGM Missiles

June 28, 2019 - The State Department has made a determination approving a possible Foreign Military Sale to Germany, through the NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA) acting as its Agent, up to ninety-one (91) AGM-88E Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) Tactical Missiles, and up to eight (8) AGM-88E AARGM Captive Air Training Missiles (CATM) for an estimated cost of $122.86 million. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency delivered the required certification notifying Congress of this possible sale today.

The Government of Germany has requested to buy, through the NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA) acting as its Agent, up to ninety-one (91) AGM-88E Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) Tactical Missiles, and up to eight (8) AGM-88E AARGM Captive Air Training Missiles (CATM). Also included are up to six (6) telemetry/flight termination systems, Flight Data Recorders (FDR), U.S. Government and contractor engineering, technical and logistics support services and miscellaneous support equipment, and other related elements of logistical and program support. The total estimated cost is $122.86 million.

So how is this spectacularly expensive? Even setting the capability it offers aside?

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Good Day All -

From the recent Tailhook Convention, a cut sheet for the MBDA Meteor.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Voltzz]

Not sure if this fits here, but there is already a bunch of ARMIGER stuff here and no other fitting thread. I found this picture of a model on the German-Dutch Wind Tunnel website. It looks like ARMIGER with the dolphin-nose seeker and the 4 air-intakes. Also the file name has "sead" in it. Does anyone know if the main rocket bodys diameter was the same as on the Meteor? Would the dual-mode seeker fit on a Meteor?

 

[Voltzz]

On the same site there is also a picture of an A3M the German proposal for the Meteor, that later merged with the French and British-Swedish proposals. The only major external difference to the Meteor i can recognize, are the small wings near the engine intakes. The second picture is from somewhere else as a reference.

 

[TomS]

Not sure if this fits her, but there is already a bunch of ARMIGER stuff here and no other fitting thread. I found this picture of a model on the German-Dutch Wind Tunnel website. It looks like ARMIGER with the dolphin-nose seeker and the 4 air-intakes. Also the file name has "sead" in it. Does anyone know if the main rocket bodys diameter was the same as on the Meteor? Would the dual-mode seeker fit on a Meteor?

Armiger was ~8 inch rather then Meteor's ~7 inches. But there apparently was a proposal to do exactly this -- package Armiger's seeker onto the Meteor fuselage.

Europeans seek out radar killer

www.flightglobal.com

 

[Voltzz]

Not sure if this fits her, but there is already a bunch of ARMIGER stuff here and no other fitting thread. I found this picture of a model on the German-Dutch Wind Tunnel website. It looks like ARMIGER with the dolphin-nose seeker and the 4 air-intakes. Also the file name has "sead" in it. Does anyone know if the main rocket bodys diameter was the same as on the Meteor? Would the dual-mode seeker fit on a Meteor?

Armiger was ~8 inch rather then Metoer's ~7 inches. But there apparently was a proposal to do exactly this -- package Armiger's seeker onto the Meteor fuselage.

Europeans seek out radar killer

www.flightglobal.com

i unfortunately dont have a flightglobal subscription. is there any more info on this proposal there?

 

[TomS]

Not sure if this fits her, but there is already a bunch of ARMIGER stuff here and no other fitting thread. I found this picture of a model on the German-Dutch Wind Tunnel website. It looks like ARMIGER with the dolphin-nose seeker and the 4 air-intakes. Also the file name has "sead" in it. Does anyone know if the main rocket bodys diameter was the same as on the Meteor? Would the dual-mode seeker fit on a Meteor?

Armiger was ~8 inch rather then Metoer's ~7 inches. But there apparently was a proposal to do exactly this -- package Armiger's seeker onto the Meteor fuselage.

Europeans seek out radar killer

www.flightglobal.com

i unfortunately dont have a flightglobal subscription. is there any more info on this proposal there?

Neither do I. Surprised it's not working for you. The article is lacking in technical detail, however. The core of it is this:

Industry sources say that the French/Italian/UK MBDA and Germany's BGT are discussing linking up to produce a new anti-radar weapon that would combine the dual-mode seeker from BGT's Armiger programme with the fuselage and propulsion system of the Meteor beyond visual range air-to-air missile.

I found that article via a blog that also talked about the idea. Again, no real technical detail.

Replacing ALARM; fighting in hostile skies

The ALARM missile, national solution to the RAF requirement for the Suppression of Enemy Air Defences (SEAD), is arguably by far the ...

ukarmedforcescommentary.blogspot.com

 

[Voltzz]

Neither do I. Surprised it's not working for you.

Oh, it just doesnt like my adblocker. Why wouldnt it just tell my that. i have now for months thought that flightglobal just had a general paywall. Time to go through my search history for all the articles i missed.

 

[TomS]

Neither do I. Surprised it's not working for you.

Oh, it just doesnt like my adblocker. Why wouldnt it just tell my that. i have now for months thought that flightglobal just had a general paywall. Time to go through my search history for all the articles i missed.

I think there's a pretty low number of articles it will let you see before it asks for a subscription. But I've found that opening links in an Incognito or Private tab will work around that limit.

 

[Voltzz]

Article (in German) on the A3M, one of the predecessors of Meteor.

 

[Scott Kenny]

I remember that. But what are the odds that the Germans not only fund it but also fund its integration on their Growlers when the AGM-88E and AARGM-ER are available off the shelf fully devleoped and dev/ops tested?. The Italians already use the AARGM and the others are probably not interested in the investment. A multi-mode seeker, like what JDRADM was trying to achieve may be a more doable given a2a and a2g ability in one missile making it more affordable, but given platform fragmentation between some of the European air-forces, a common solution looks difficult particularly when SPEAR-EW is still out there in the future. It shouldn't be very hard for BayernChemie/MBDA to scale that VFDR technology to a 10" or larger motor and build themselves a proper SEAD/DEAD weapon. But with different platforms, and the availability of the AARGM family the business case will probably be really hard to close.

So make it an even faster missile, so you can hit targets at longer ranges in less time.

The idea of a 250km ARM should be getting very attractive, to deal with S-400 networks.

 

[timmymagic]

So make it an even faster missile, so you can hit targets at longer ranges in less time.

The idea of a 250km ARM should be getting very attractive, to deal with S-400 networks.

Mentioned earlier that at DSEi the RAF and MBDA stated they were investigating the use of Meteor as an ARM, but it was unclear if they were talking about it in its present configuration or in the AESA equipped JNAAM version. What was clear about it was that it wasn't going to be a different variant, essentially using the existing/future seeker head to provide guidance, which would tend to point to the AESA seeker head......but very little heard since....no contracts that I'm aware of being let, but someone was alive to the potential.

The other option is the high supersonic version of the FCASW which the French favour. That has been mentioned as having use as an ARM specifically for high value targets i.e. S400. Big missile though....should have enormous range, but if what RUSI are saying is correct about HARM's decreasing utility (albeit by forcing the Russian's to have multiple AD systems like Pantsir and Tor redeployed to protect their larger AD systems, thus not protecting other areas) as most are shot down now you have to wonder how well a large missile is going to do against a modern AD system.

We all know HARM in its earlier versions had its limitations, those were apparent in GW1 and 2, but most obviously over Kosovo (and Ukraine is primarily getting supplied with older missiles of a similar vintage). Most of the time that involved smart operators shutting down systems, relocating regularly etc. but not the actual missiles getting shot down....its going to be interesting to see the effect on ARM design and utilisation in the future based on what is happening...are AARGM or even AARGM-ER more likely to get through? Range is always a good thing...but is a really fast missile actually more effective than a slower, sneakier one? Which oddly enough appears to be the divide between the UK and France on FCASW....

 

[Scott Kenny]

So make it an even faster missile, so you can hit targets at longer ranges in less time.

The idea of a 250km ARM should be getting very attractive, to deal with S-400 networks.

Mentioned earlier that at DSEi the RAF and MBDA stated they were investigating the use of Meteor as an ARM, but it was unclear if they were talking about it in its present configuration or in the AESA equipped JNAAM version. What was clear about it was that it wasn't going to be a different variant, essentially using the existing/future seeker head to provide guidance, which would tend to point to the AESA seeker head......but very little heard since....no contracts that I'm aware of being let, but someone was alive to the potential.

The other option is the high supersonic version of the FCASW which the French favour. That has been mentioned as having use as an ARM specifically for high value targets i.e. S400. Big missile though....should have enormous range, but if what RUSI are saying is correct about HARM's decreasing utility (albeit by forcing the Russian's to have multiple AD systems like Pantsir and Tor redeployed to protect their larger AD systems, thus not protecting other areas) as most are shot down now you have to wonder how well a large missile is going to do against a modern AD system.

We all know HARM in its earlier versions had its limitations, those were apparent in GW1 and 2, but most obviously over Kosovo (and Ukraine is primarily getting supplied with older missiles of a similar vintage). Most of the time that involved smart operators shutting down systems, relocating regularly etc. but not the actual missiles getting shot down....its going to be interesting to see the effect on ARM design and utilisation in the future based on what is happening...are AARGM or even AARGM-ER more likely to get through? Range is always a good thing...but is a really fast missile actually more effective than a slower, sneakier one? Which oddly enough appears to be the divide between the UK and France on FCASW....

It certainly doesn't help that many heavy SAMs use a low frequency radar, which is hard for a small antenna to track and is also more effective against modern stealth designs.

Given the choice, I'd get both loitering missiles and fast ones. The loitering missiles go in ahead of a strike, the fast missiles are on the strike group for quick reaction. Probably the biggest example of this idea was the old AGM-122 Sidearm, an AIM-9C SARH Sidewinder modified for ARM use. The US really needs to do another run of those.

 

[PDMODE]

No idea how chinese get those meteor's information at the time earlier than 2010

 

[mfabbri2k]

Since the Obama Administration officially canceled the Next Generation Missile (NGM), formerly known as the Joint Dual Role Air Dominance Missile (JDRADM), in the 2013 budget, what alternatives exist to the United States armed forces for a beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile solution? Will the United States military buy the MBDA Meteor beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile (BVRAAM) or a licensed version of the missile from a United States-based aerospace manufacturer? Or will the United States military continue to snub Meteor?

Where do you have found the image?