StandOff & PGM Weapons

Joint Soviet Fighter said:
Right. Platforms like The Spice "family" from Israel are pretty close in their capabilities to Stormbreakers as are JSOWs, it's just that they're usually not employed as extensively as the cheaper JDAMs or Laser Guided variants owing to cost. I think.
Click to expand...

There are several glide bombs that feature IIR, MMW or GPS/INS guided weapons. Stormbreaker features all of these into a single networked weapon. SDB-1 exists as a cheaper option in that class of weapon if the unique capabilities ( dual band data-link for networking, Tri mode seeker for all-weather performance against moving target in a GPS contested enviornment) is not required. They've added HOJ and other seekers to SDB-1 as well so those are likely cheaper options in the same class..and Israel has an analog with IIR seeker in its spice family. All those lower cost options exist to complement the Stormbreaker.
 
Last edited:
tyrin said:
Not sure the point of this honestly, like a shitty hellfire?

View attachment 759738
View attachment 759739
Click to expand...
www.edrmagazine.eu

IDEX 2025 - Halcon unveils new guided missiles projects - EDR Magazine

Part of the Missiles and Weapons Cluster, one of divisions that form the EDGE group, Halcon is the guided missile
www.edrmagazine.eu www.edrmagazine.eu

“The G120, the second new system seen at the Halcon stand, which was part of the huge exhibition area occupied by the EDGE group, is still in the concept development phase. “This weapon is air launched and will have an 8 km range. It will also have a tandem warhead and a laser seeker, and it is being developed by a team of engineers in Halcon,”


Looking ahead, which might be emerging technologies that might impact Halcon and EDGE guided weapons in the wider sense? “I think one of the main issues today is to be robust against GNSS denial, so visual based navigation as well as AI will become essential. We must have a leading edge on our competitors, with low cost solutions that are extremely do robust and does not rely on any GNSS solution. And we’re pursuing that,” he underlined. “Sensor fusion will be key, having multiple sensors on the weapon, exploiting GNSS signal when available, implementing of course sophisticated anti jamming and anti spoofing solution, but visual based navigation will become essential, coupled with AI.
 
tyrin said:
View attachment 759894

Of note is the Saber cruise missile on the Mirage-2000 looking display. Looks just like a Storm Shadow, was there reverse engineering done or maybe convergent design?

Also in the back left is the MK84 guidance kit
Click to expand...

I see a bunch of detail differences. The Saber has more of a hexagonal cross section, while Storm Shadow has a trapezoidal shape. Saber's inlet has a small gap from then fuselage and seems to have a point in the middle, while Storm Shadow does not. Tail fins are very different.

Signs point to Saber just being similar through similar requirements.

1740001912698.png

1740002071729.png

Worth noting that Saber has changed quite a bit since it was first seen, in 2021.

1740002259655.png
 
TomS said:
I see a bunch of detail differences. The Saber has more of a hexagonal cross section, while Storm Shadow has a trapezoidal shape. Saber's inlet has a small gap from then fuselage and seems to have a point in the middle, while Storm Shadow does not. Tail fins are very different.

Signs point to Saber just being similar through similar requirements.

View attachment 760189

View attachment 760190

Worth noting that Saber has changed quite a bit since it was first seen, in 2021.

View attachment 760191
Click to expand...
Thank you for the analysis I was leaning towards the same theory as you. Many Denel engineers involved worked on cruise missiles at some point in their careers and likely brought that experience over.
 
Serious question....

I know Edge have the Denel design heritage, engineering and tech, they've clearly got investment...and the UAE have the military budget...

But how many of these things actually translate into reality...and sales (and I know the ME in particular is hard to get a clear picture around sales..).

A lot of CGI and models from Edge, not a huge amount of video or photos of actual kit in operation, even less of it in operational service....or is that just my ignorance or wrong perception? Or are things progressing so fast we'll suddenly see a slew of actual real world kit, like we did with Turkey?
 
timmymagic said:
Serious question....

I know Edge have the Denel design heritage, engineering and tech, they've clearly got investment...and the UAE have the military budget...

But how many of these things actually translate into reality...and sales (and I know the ME in particular is hard to get a clear picture around sales..).

A lot of CGI and models from Edge, not a huge amount of video or photos of actual kit in operation, even less of it in operational service....or is that just my ignorance or wrong perception? Or are things progressing so fast we'll suddenly see a slew of actual real world kit, like we did with Turkey?
Click to expand...
Not sure, but I'm hoping that we'll suddenly see a whole slew of real world kit show up. Is the UAE bombing the Houthis?
 
timmymagic said:
Serious question....

I know Edge have the Denel design heritage, engineering and tech, they've clearly got investment...and the UAE have the military budget...

But how many of these things actually translate into reality...and sales (and I know the ME in particular is hard to get a clear picture around sales..).

A lot of CGI and models from Edge, not a huge amount of video or photos of actual kit in operation, even less of it in operational service....or is that just my ignorance or wrong perception? Or are things progressing so fast we'll suddenly see a slew of actual real world kit, like we did with Turkey?
Click to expand...
This isn’t a very detailed post but I’m on my phone currently

Many of their developments are still generally pretty young but there is tangible evidence they’re testing them and producing some of them.

As for as I know what’s under production currently is a small amount of what’s being tested and developed.

Production line for Shadow-50 and -25 drone below which was ordered by the UAE armed forces

defensetalks.com

EDGE Awarded AED 1.33 Billion Contract to Supply SHADOW Systems to the UAE Armed Forces — Global Defense Insight

EDGE entity, ADASI, the regional leader in autonomous systems and services, today announced that it has signed an AED 1.33 billion
defensetalks.com defensetalks.com

IMG_1015.jpeg



They have their own little island called X range where they test drones and missiles. I’ve found a bunch of their videos but there are a lot of videos I’ve only been able to see on screens at trade shows without finding their links.


 
Last edited:
Last edited:
tyrin said:
www.edrmagazine.eu

IDEX 2025 - Halcon unveils new guided missiles projects - EDR Magazine

Part of the Missiles and Weapons Cluster, one of divisions that form the EDGE group, Halcon is the guided missile
www.edrmagazine.eu www.edrmagazine.eu

“The G120, the second new system seen at the Halcon stand, which was part of the huge exhibition area occupied by the EDGE group, is still in the concept development phase. “This weapon is air launched and will have an 8 km range. It will also have a tandem warhead and a laser seeker, and it is being developed by a team of engineers in Halcon,”


Looking ahead, which might be emerging technologies that might impact Halcon and EDGE guided weapons in the wider sense? “I think one of the main issues today is to be robust against GNSS denial, so visual based navigation as well as AI will become essential. We must have a leading edge on our competitors, with low cost solutions that are extremely do robust and does not rely on any GNSS solution. And we’re pursuing that,” he underlined. “Sensor fusion will be key, having multiple sensors on the weapon, exploiting GNSS signal when available, implementing of course sophisticated anti jamming and anti spoofing solution, but visual based navigation will become essential, coupled with AI.
Click to expand...
Okay, there are the contol surfaces. It's just a mini-missile for sub 150 knot aerial platforms. Helicopters and low speed drones?
 
Forest Green said:
www.twz.com

Ground-Launched And Powered Air-Launched Versions Of StormBreaker Glide Bomb Are In Development

The Small Diameter Bomb II already brings the ability to hit moving targets at standoff distances in any weather. As well as multimode guidance, Raytheon says the ground-launched version of its StormBreaker will offer greater range than the existing GLSDB.
www.twz.com www.twz.com

https://twitter.com/x/status/1894530912823505401
View: https://x.com/AirPowerNEW1/status/1894530912823505401
Click to expand...
That took longer than I expected.

I was honestly expecting GL-SDB2 maybe a year after Boeing announced GL-SDB1.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I was honestly expecting GL-SDB2 maybe a year after Boeing announced GL-SDB1.
Click to expand...

It's long overdue with IMO the concept being demonstrated with some moderate success (It seemed to do well when air-launched) in the last couple of years in the field, the SDBII having a tri-mode terminal seeker will make it a lot more flexible not to mention making the issue of anti-GPS jamming* somewhat moot.

From the article:

Meanwhile, the same motor that will be used on the ground-launched model is also planned to be added to the air-launched version, providing a considerably greater standoff range.
Click to expand...

The M26 rocket-motor is a logical starting point as there's a very large number of them in storage and they've already being proved to work with the GLSDB but to be air-launched they'll need a tube-launcher that's suitable for airborne carriage. However Raytheon should also look at other off-the-shelf rocket-motors such as the 7" diameter rocket-motor used to power the Hellfire II and the JAGM.

For ground-launch while the M26 is good perhaps Raytheon and Boeing should look at other pre-existing rocket-motors such as, for example, the Mk-114 launch-booster and the associated airframe for the RUM-139 VLA.
 
Last edited:
NMaude said:
It's long overdue with IMO the concept being demonstrated with some moderate success (It seemed to do well when air-launched) in the last couple of years in the field, the SDBII having a tri-mode terminal seeker will make it a lot more flexible not to mention making the issue of anti-GPS jamming* somewhat moot.

From the article:



The M26 rocket-motor is a logical starting point as there's a very large number of them in storage and they've already being proved to work with the GLSDB but to be air-launched they'll need a tube-launcher that's suitable for airborne launch. However Raytheon should also look at other off-the-shelf rocket-motors such as the 7" diameter rocket-motor used to power the Hellfire II and the JAGM.

For ground-launch while the M26 is good perhaps Raytheon and Boeing should look at other pre-existing rocket-motors such as, for example, the Mk-114 launch-booster and the associated airframe for the RUM-139 VLA.
Click to expand...

Look at the MBDA LPS concept offered to the UK as the basis of what it could look like...

If the UK doesn't fund it as part of the defence increase we're mad....M270 launch, potential air launch as a Spear-ER....the interesting thing will be if it can be Soft Vertical Launched...it might be just light enough based on what we know about SVL...
 
There’s a lot of programs looking for cheap SOW with swappable payloads, though I think ERAM and ETV already down selected without LM. So MACE seems perfectly likely, sure. It does have a short, snubby look to it, which might imply it is intended to fit the USN requirement of two per F-35 bay. While there are a lot of weapons in this class now (500# with 250-500 mile range) most of them are well over six feet long, which is roughly the cutoff for tandem carriage in a F-35 bay.

Even sans MACE/USN, there’s a world of F-35 users out there who likely have desperate needs for increased SOW inventory. If LM could make it cheap enough there would be a market.
 
Josh_TN said:
SDB or Baracuda 250, though there are range or warhead limitations with each.
Click to expand...

Or Spear, or Spice 250ER, or any of a number of SDB analogues.

This one definitely feels like a MACE candidate. The proportions, especially, do seem to argue for internal carried two-deep in the F-35 bays. In fact, it looks similar, but a little shorter than the first images in this thread. Tail has obviously been reworked so that there is less folding happening to fit an IWB.

 
raptor82 said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1895836515785232731
View: https://x.com/lockheedmartin/status/1895836515785232731?s=46&t=5THFve96Abhx7VANdlTzrg


MACE？
Click to expand...
MACE is now ACME.


Worth considering the original description of Project Carrerra (of which Speed Racer was a part) was to build modular multi mission air vehicle that was easy and cheap to produce but integrated specific sub-systems allowing for off board communication, weapon to weapon data-link/comms, SATCOM and being controlled by the F-35. For some of the more sophisticated payloads they were looking at $1+MM cost point. I suppose its easy enough to strip all that off for the kinetic variant to make it really cheap. If these are related efforts that is. We'll know more on/by Monday I suppose.
 

Attachments

  • AWS2025_LM_CM.png
    AWS2025_LM_CM.png
    307.5 KB · Views: 14
  • AWS2025_LM_CM2.png
    AWS2025_LM_CM2.png
    662.1 KB · Views: 13
  • LMSpeedRacer.jpeg
    LMSpeedRacer.jpeg
    128 KB · Views: 13
Last edited:
It is the case that not all platforms need the same price point. A handful of satcom enabled weapons with a handful of ESM equipped weapons could QB the whole strike of dumb HE carriers with an EO or IIR sensor, given a suitably light and inexpensive intra weapon datalink. Golden Horde has already experimented with is kind of connectivity.
 
Basically all the functions of LRASM can be disassociated into a number of lighter cheaper missiles that have a modest electronic and price component and a heavy relatively dumb HE thrower component. It doesn’t scale well for a single target but for an entire task force, it lowers the price points everywhere.
 
Josh_TN said:
It doesn’t scale well for a single target but for an entire task force, it lowers the price points everywhere.
Click to expand...
It does. If, that is, you have the amount of weapon carriers in the fight required to launch the increased number of weapons. More “weapons” committed per target demands that. This concept also works better for the Chinese since they will outnumber the US forces (air, naval and land) in theater. For US forces, it will always have to be a mix of high end capability and these type of lower end systems. The middle is what is likely to get swallowed up / disrupted and made redundant.
 
Last edited:
bring_it_on said:
It does. If, that is, you have the amount of weapon carriers in the fight required to launch the increased number of weapons. More “weapons” committed per target demands that. This concept also works better for the Chinese since they will outnumber the US forces (air, naval and land) in theater. For US forces, it will always have to be a mix of high end capability and these type of lower end systems. The middle is what is likely to get swallowed up / disrupted and made redundant.
Click to expand...

If an F-18 can carry ten, that’s a start.
 
Josh_TN said:
If an F-18 can carry ten, that’s a start.
Click to expand...
Right. Now account for launching 2-3x the number of low end weapons for each aimpoint that needs that. It gets expensive really fast (cost shifts from munition towards platforms procurement and O&S needed in the fight). Therefore, the high end stuff isn't going away anytime soon..or ever.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I mean 2 wide, 2 deep, and maybe tandem carriage if the weapons are short enough. Which would mean 8x SDB-sized weapons per bay.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and I want to be a Disney Princess. How about we stick to realistic budgets and the laws of physics? No one is crushing the external storage of an F-18 into a low RCS aircraft for any achievable amount of money.
 
bring_it_on said:
Right. Now account for launching 2-3x the number of low end weapons for each aimpoint that needs that. It gets expensive really fast (cost shifts from munition towards platforms procurement and O&S needed in the fight). Therefore, the high end stuff isn't going away anytime soon..or ever.
Click to expand...

I don’t know. MALD-J is like 200k. MALD-N cannot be dramatically more expensive, and you should easily carry ten under wings if you can carry ten mk83. Would MACE be much more than a step up? And if you have ten per airframe, you’re hitting pretty hard, if you can keep the cost per munition down.
 
Josh_TN said:
And if you have ten per airframe, you’re hitting pretty hard, if you can keep the cost per munition down.
Click to expand...
What does 'hard' mean here in terms of stowed kills? against what type of threats? I think these are not very useful capabilities by themselves. You need to orchestrate a much larger strike package given the lower Pk. But when mixed in as the 'mass' element along with higher end systems these can be very challenging to counter. This is where JADC2 and other efforts that stitch SA, C2 and allow you to sychnronize disaggregate capability really brings it home. Like mix these up with a package of HACM or HALO equipped bombers or fighters and now you can create a lot of problems. If you continue to rely on a strategy of trading one hardpoint for 2 or more (to accomplish the same mission) you are going to need more platforms (basically shifting cost from munitions to platforms).
 
bring_it_on said:
What does 'hard' mean here in terms of stowed kills? against what type of threats? I think these are not very useful capabilities by themselves. You need to orchestrate a much larger strike package given the lower Pk. But when mixed in as the 'mass' element along with higher end systems these can be very challenging to counter. This is where JADC2 and other efforts that stitch SA, C2 and allow you to sychnronize disaggregate capability really brings it home. Like mix these up with a package of HACM or HALO equipped bombers or fighters and now you can create a lot of problems. If you continue to rely on a strategy of trading one hardpoint for 2 or more (to accomplish the same mission) you are going to need more platforms (basically shifting cost from munitions to platforms).
Click to expand...

My personal opinion is that these kind of massed subsonic platforms don’t work well with high speed missiles due to the speed differential. It is absolutely clear which is which. But if you mix a couple hundred MALD in with a couple dozen LRASM or Tomahawk, everything looks the same, at least inside the several minutes you have to sort it out. Take that up a notch h and make almost every platform a bomb or at least a potential bomb, and you have a nearly hopeless defensive situation where the offense can throw ten weapons per aircraft and a couple dozen per ship. Put up a couple squadrons of that and see how that goes.
 
bring_it_on said:
MACE is now ACME.
Click to expand...

Are we sure? I didn't see any mention of MACE in this BAA, and the ACME description sounds different — talks about supersonic ramjets, no mention of fitting two per F-35 bay, etc.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom