Jump to content


Photo

Us Navy May Consider Adapting Sm-6 For A2A Use On Super Hornet


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#1 Special-K

Special-K

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 724 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Western New York State, USA
  • Interests:All things military, Shooting, Cycling, Hiking and Camping.

Posted 05 March 2018 - 1121 AM

https://www.realclea...m-6_113137.html

 

 

From the above link:

 

In the Navy’s recent budget request, the Navy finally funded the design an acquisition of conformal fuel tanks for the Super Hornet.  With the potential to extend the range of the Hornet with a low drag external fuel tank, the tanks can either expand the range of a Super Hornet or free up two high capacity weapons stations by replacing the two external tanks currently used on almost every flight.  One option would help to restore a long-range interception role that has been missing from the Navy since the retirement of the Tomcat in the 2000s.  With four capacity weapons stations available on the Super Hornet, the SM-6 Dual I SAM could be modified to serve as a long-range air to air missile, much like the Standard SM-1 was modified to serve as an anti-radiation during the Vietnam War.

..........

There are some additional benefits beyond providing a counter to the emerging long-range cruise missile bomber threat.  At first instance, the SM-6 would provide a much longer range air-to-air missile than the AIM-120D and help to bridge the gap between the AIM-120D and the longest ranged Chinese and Russian AAMs that are either in development or newly in service.  The SM-6 would also provide a more effective anti-ship weapon to the Super Hornet.  Notwithstanding, it is a smaller warhead than the Harpoon, the SM-6 provides a much larger kinetic punch than the subsonic AGM-84 Harpoon due to its Mach 4 speed, is more survivable against modern CIWS systems due to its high speed and has a longer range.  If the SM-6 were to be acquired in large quantities for airborne use, the per unit cost of the missiles would drop dramatically and allow the missile to be purchased in larger quantities for use in the original SAM role.  Additionally, the employment of the SM-6 on the Super Hornet would allow potentially allow for the Super Hornet to widen the engagement range of a carrier strike group in the BMD role. 

 

 

 

 

Thoughts/Opinions?

 

​It's certainly not unprecedented, with the use of the SM-1 during Vietnam, and the Iranian use of the HAWK.  The US military seems to be lacking in a real long range A2A missile right now, so I suspect this would potentially be welcome if they can make it work, and it would have export potential as well.  An additional application in the Anti-Ship or BMD role is also interesting, especially if it can be adapted for use on other platforms - F-15E, F-16, etc.  

Another possibility is adapting the ESSM, or it's latest variant that uses the AIM-120D front end. 

 

 

 

-K


  • 0

#2 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,735 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, New York City

Posted 05 March 2018 - 1211 PM

I'd have thought that it would be a really heavy load. The ESSM idea sounds like a better idea. The Block II I would think fairly easy to adapt to A2A.
  • 0

#3 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,872 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 05 March 2018 - 1212 PM

The USN does no such thing. It's an opinion piece on a potential combination.

 

It would be a counter-AEW munition, though you can counter AEW aircraft with a supersonic sprint and AIM-120D as well if you need to.

(I don't think AEW is really survivable against high end opponents.)


  • 0

#4 Calvinb1nav

Calvinb1nav

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 494 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lexington, SC
  • Interests:military and aviation history, wargaming, shooting, travel, geography

Posted 05 March 2018 - 1731 PM

I'd like to see them develop another ship-to-shore anti-radiation missile to take out air defenses like they did with the RGM-8 Talos in Vietnam. Such a weapon would be very useful.
  • 0

#5 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,213 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 05 March 2018 - 1948 PM

The SM-6 weighs 3,300 lb (1,500 kg), but a lot of that is the booster it would not need if air launched.  It's probably a 2000lb class weapon.


  • 0

#6 TOW-2

TOW-2

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 733 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 March 2018 - 2014 PM

I'd like to see them develop another ship-to-shore anti-radiation missile to take out air defenses like they did with the RGM-8 Talos in Vietnam. Such a weapon would be very useful.

 

Sidearm was pretty cool, but they shot all of them off and won't make any more (Sidewinder outfitted with an ARM seeker; sorry, not what you were really talking about, but it just sprang to mind).


  • 0

#7 Manic Moran

Manic Moran

    Mad Irish Tanking Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,488 posts
  • Interests:Blowing things up, scale modelling, wargaming.

Posted 05 March 2018 - 2305 PM

I'd like to see them develop another ship-to-shore anti-radiation missile to take out air defenses like they did with the RGM-8 Talos in Vietnam. Such a weapon would be very useful.

 

Not sure if it was ship to shore, or designed for use against emitting warships, but there was some messing about with Standard ARMs on floaty things about the same era.

 

121110008.jpg


  • 0

#8 bfng3569

bfng3569

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 115 posts

Posted 06 March 2018 - 1249 PM

add a handful to the P-8 Posedian or the air forces AWAC's.  that would be some serious standoff range.


  • 0

#9 Special-K

Special-K

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 724 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Western New York State, USA
  • Interests:All things military, Shooting, Cycling, Hiking and Camping.

Posted 07 March 2018 - 1556 PM

 

I'd like to see them develop another ship-to-shore anti-radiation missile to take out air defenses like they did with the RGM-8 Talos in Vietnam. Such a weapon would be very useful.

 

Sidearm was pretty cool, but they shot all of them off and won't make any more (Sidewinder outfitted with an ARM seeker; sorry, not what you were really talking about, but it just sprang to mind).

 

 

 

I wonder why we don't do this more often.  I would be inclined to think it would be a relatively simple thing to do, though wouldn't a Sidewinder based missile be rather short ranged compared to a Sparrow or AIM-120 derivative?  

 

 

 

-K


  • 0

#10 Special-K

Special-K

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 724 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Western New York State, USA
  • Interests:All things military, Shooting, Cycling, Hiking and Camping.

Posted 07 March 2018 - 1557 PM

add a handful to the P-8 Posedian or the air forces AWAC's.  that would be some serious standoff range.


Not only for the A2A role but in the anti-ship role as well.  

 

 

 

-K


  • 0

#11 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,447 posts

Posted 07 March 2018 - 1609 PM

 

 

I'd like to see them develop another ship-to-shore anti-radiation missile to take out air defenses like they did with the RGM-8 Talos in Vietnam. Such a weapon would be very useful.

 

Sidearm was pretty cool, but they shot all of them off and won't make any more (Sidewinder outfitted with an ARM seeker; sorry, not what you were really talking about, but it just sprang to mind).

 

 

 

I wonder why we don't do this more often.  I would be inclined to think it would be a relatively simple thing to do, though wouldn't a Sidewinder based missile be rather short ranged compared to a Sparrow or AIM-120 derivative?  

 

 

 

-K

 

AGM-87 Focus too


  • 0

#12 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,213 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 07 March 2018 - 1741 PM

 

 

I'd like to see them develop another ship-to-shore anti-radiation missile to take out air defenses like they did with the RGM-8 Talos in Vietnam. Such a weapon would be very useful.

 

Sidearm was pretty cool, but they shot all of them off and won't make any more (Sidewinder outfitted with an ARM seeker; sorry, not what you were really talking about, but it just sprang to mind).

 

 

 

I wonder why we don't do this more often.  I would be inclined to think it would be a relatively simple thing to do, though wouldn't a Sidewinder based missile be rather short ranged compared to a Sparrow or AIM-120 derivative?  

 

 

 

-K

 

 

Sidearm was meant to be carried by AH-1J attack helos in addition to their warload of 20mm ammo, 70mm rockets and TOW missiles. I would guess an AH-1J could carry two Sparrow derived ARMs and nothing else. Also the range of Sidearm was more than adequate to address the targets it was meant to take out - primarily Shilkas.


  • 0

#13 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,417 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 07 March 2018 - 1753 PM

add a handful to the P-8 Posedian or the air forces AWAC's.  that would be some serious standoff range.

C-5 GAlaxy with VLS cells angled forward/sideways with a bulge for clearance. 

Can an E-3 guide SM-6? 

That or a B747 ala the ALCM carrier. 

ats39557_B-747cruise.jpg


Edited by rmgill, 07 March 2018 - 1753 PM.

  • 0

#14 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,417 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 07 March 2018 - 1800 PM

I wonder why we don't do this more often.  I would be inclined to think it would be a relatively simple thing to do, though wouldn't a Sidewinder based missile be rather short ranged compared to a Sparrow or AIM-120 derivative?



We do it more than you realize.

AGM0-45 Shrike was an AIM-7 with a Passive radar homing guidance over the SARH of the normal AIM-7.

I think these were stop gaps over the more purpose build ARMs. AGM-88 is supposed to remember where the target's position was and still attempt to strike it rather than just go off target (GPS/INS/MMW active radar homing).

I've always thought the British ALARM was a nifty piece of kit with the boost to altitude, pop a chute and then loiter mode.
  • 0

#15 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,872 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 07 March 2018 - 1847 PM

Shrike was the Sparrow-based ARM with a choice of various narrowband passive radar seekers.

Standard ARM was a SM-1-based ARM that was excessively expensive and required a lot of paperwork and justifications be done when expended.

Sidearm was a Sidewinder-based narrowband ARM.

LASM was a concept for a Standard missile (IIRC this time SM-2)-based land attack missile, not introduced.

 

Armat was a French ARM based on Martel air/ground missile.

 

Russian passive radar "air to air missiles" may actually be of use as ARMs for air/ground use.

Their Kh-31 exists in anti-ship and ARM versions (thought he ARM version may be used against ships as well, as most ARMs).

 

E-2D Hawkeye was reported by USN to have provided firing solution for SM-6, so E-3D should be able to do so as well, assuming the software is up to the task.

 

Nobody needs dedicated ALCM bombers. It's long been proven that ALCMs can be launched with a pallet extracted from a flying transport aircraft through the rear ramp. It was even done with ICBMs.


  • 0

#16 Burncycle360

Burncycle360

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,270 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 08 March 2018 - 2357 PM


add a handful to the P-8 Posedian or the air forces AWAC's.  that would be some serious standoff range.


Not only for the A2A role but in the anti-ship role as well.  
 
 
 
-K

Each B-52 can carry 20 ALCM. A hypothetical anti-ship variant based on the AGM86C results in a 3,000 lbs class warhead with a ~700 mi range.

A wing of those would make a mess of any surface action group on the planet, so long as you knew where they were to target it! A one trick pony of course, it wouldn't make friendly naval fleets obsolete since they can do a bunch of other stuff, but I've always wondered about the possibilities if they air force wasn't arbitrarily restricted from playing with the navy on such matters.
  • 0

#17 Dawes

Dawes

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,078 posts

Posted 09 March 2018 - 0902 AM

Once upon a time, B-52's carried Harpoons.


  • 0

#18 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,735 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, New York City

Posted 09 March 2018 - 0924 AM

Each B-52 can carry 20 ALCM. A hypothetical anti-ship variant based on the AGM86C results in a 3,000 lbs class warhead with a ~700 mi range.

A wing of those would make a mess of any surface action group on the planet, so long as you knew where they were to target it! A one trick pony of course, it wouldn't make friendly naval fleets obsolete since they can do a bunch of other stuff, but I've always wondered about the possibilities if they air force wasn't arbitrarily restricted from playing with the navy on such matters.


AGM-158C will fulfill this role instead. IOC for B-1s is this year.
  • 0

#19 Sardaukar

Sardaukar

    Cynical Finnish Elk Eating Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,519 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Finland/now Israel
  • Interests:military, martial arts, wargames, literature

Posted 11 March 2018 - 0401 AM

Iranians did something like that with their F-14 and I-Hawk missiles as AAM.


  • 0

#20 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,213 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 11 March 2018 - 0912 AM

I'm guessing SAMs are less often adapted for air to air than AAMs to SAMs use due to the much more challenging environment on a high performance aircraft compared to a ground launcher.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users