Register here

Author Topic: AARGM / VFDR Missiles  (Read 23363 times)

Offline bring_it_on

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 982
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: AARGM / VFDR Missiles
« Reply #60 on: December 01, 2016, 10:16:14 am »

Courtesy Stephen Trimble
Old radar types never die; they just phased array - Unknown

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1327
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: AARGM / VFDR Missiles
« Reply #61 on: December 01, 2016, 11:42:23 am »

Courtesy Stephen Trimble

Good. So the hacks who lurk here won't get upset.

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1327
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: AARGM / VFDR Missiles
« Reply #62 on: January 05, 2017, 04:45:14 pm »
AARGM-ER Propulsion System (PS) Industry Day Announcement

https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DON/NAVAIR/N00019/N00019-17-NORFP-PMA-242-0083/listing.html/

Interesting Details (SRM only for the moment) and my highlights

Table 1: PS Program Parameters

Threshold (T) Objective (O)
Delivery of PS EDM production representative test articles prior to support DT&E flight tests prior to January 1st, 2020
Delivery of PS EDM production representative live and inert test articles to support D&E flight tests prior to October 1st, 2019
Delivery of fully qualified PS production units beginning prior to January 1st 2022
Delivery of fully qualified PS production units beginning prior to October 1st, 2021

PS APUC of less than $175K PS APUC of less than $150K

Table 2: PS Design Constraints

PS Performance Maximum achievable within the length and Diameter constraints below and
notional Thrust/Time profile provided in classified addendum.*

Total PS Length <94 inches in length (includes provisions for Tail Control Section packaging
around nozzle blast pipe, folding hangers and provisions for mounting 2 strakes).

PS Diameter The Propulsion Section will have a diameter between 11.5 and 13 inches.


Platform compatibility and induced environments • F/A-18E/F and E/A-18G
carriage and ejection launch, stations 3, 4, 8, and 9 **

• F-35C carriage and ejection launch, internal bay stations 4 and 8

• Propulsion Section will have MIL-STD-8591 compliant suspension lugs for missile suspension on the launch platform.
These may need to be folding to reduce missile in-flight  drag.

• Propulsion Section will have Cable ways for communication between the Guidance Computer and the Control Actuation System.

• Propulsion Section will accommodate a MIL-STD-1760 Aircraft-to-Store Communications Connection and associated cabling.
  Launcher Interface BRU-32 and BRU-68A (or adapters as necessary)

Operational Temperature Range -40 deg F to +160 deg F
PS to Front End Interface Interface Requirements Specification
PS to Tail Control Aft End Interface 10-inch to 15-inch long aft mounted Control Actuation System (CAS)
* Impulse defined for every 0.5 inches of length, within the given range.
** Assume the Navy's Next Generation Jammer is carried on the E/A-18G next to this PS
« Last Edit: January 05, 2017, 04:53:39 pm by marauder2048 »

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8772
Re: AARGM / VFDR Missiles
« Reply #63 on: January 05, 2017, 05:54:45 pm »
I see this and think, "no wonder China turns out copies of our stuff almost as fast as we do".  Whatever happened to the days of keeping details classified at least until they're in testing or something?
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline NeilChapman

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 605
  • Interested 3rd party
Re: AARGM / VFDR Missiles
« Reply #64 on: January 06, 2017, 08:06:14 am »
I see this and think, "no wonder China turns out copies of our stuff almost as fast as we do".  Whatever happened to the days of keeping details classified at least until they're in testing or something?

Brits had the same problem during the Napoleonic wars.  Come up with a solution to a problem and broadcast it to the world for the adversaries benefit.  We're doomed to repeat the same mistakes.

One example...
http://www.friendsofpurton.org.uk/Docs/Fells_Patent_Knees.pdf




Offline Arjen

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1845
  • It's turtles all the way down
Re: AARGM / VFDR Missiles
« Reply #65 on: January 06, 2017, 08:28:24 am »
Drifting off-topic: that is a very interesting document about a French invention from the late 18th century, later adopted by the East India Company and the Royal Navy.
Quote
Iron knees appear to have been first introduced in substantial numbers by the French Navy in the mid-18th century. They were a substitute for the usual ‘grown’ wooden crooks which were becoming scarce. They were, for example, found on the wreck of the French warship Invincible built in 1744 and lost off Portsmouth in 1758 (Quinn et al., 1998). Falconer in his Marine Dictionary specifically stated they were a French innovation (Falconer, 1780). Gabriel Snodgrass, surveyor to the East India Company between 1757 and 1794, appears to have been the first British proponent of the use of iron knees. Again, this probably arose from the difficulty in procuring supplies of suitable timber. Iron knees also offered superior strength and compactness. Snodgrass appeared to have strengthened some East Indiamen with iron knees retrospectively. However, on retiring he wrote a report in 1796 to the Company’s directors firmly advocating the use of iron knees and stanchions from new (Fincham, 1851). By 1810 Company ships were being built with iron knees, stanchions, breast hooks and crutches (Steel, 1823).

Plans of the East Indiaman Farquharson of 1820 in the National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, show she was fitted with iron hanging knees and horizontal ‘staple’ knees, which were fixed between two deck beams. Their use must have spread to other builders in this decade because the Shipowners’ Lloyd’s Register first included them in 1814 and their underwriting rivals did the same in the 1818 edition of their Register. The Royal Navy adopted the practice of retrospectively fitting iron knees to vessels strained by long periods enforcing the Blockade during the Napoleonic War. The systematic installation of ironwork into new ships began under the auspices of Sir Robert Seppings, the Navy’s chief surveyor from 1813 to 1832.
Not the Brits suffering from adversaries using a British invention, but the other way around.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2017, 08:33:12 am by Arjen »

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1327
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: AARGM / VFDR Missiles
« Reply #66 on: January 06, 2017, 12:01:21 pm »
I see this and think, "no wonder China turns out copies of our stuff almost as fast as we do".  Whatever happened to the days of keeping details classified at least until they're in testing or something?

Meh. It was going to be around JSOW size in any event to fit in the F-35 A/C bays
and biased towards SRMs given the Navy's investment in highly loaded grain designs.

Offline bring_it_on

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 982
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: AARGM / VFDR Missiles
« Reply #67 on: February 17, 2017, 02:54:59 am »
U.S. Navy Supporting Double-Range Orbital ATK AARGM


Quote
The U.S. Navy has begun meeting with rocket manufacturers to support Orbital ATK’s development of an extended-range Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM-ER) as it targets service entry by 2023.                                                                       
The weapon, adapted from the legacy Raytheon High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM), is designed to suppress or destroy enemy air defenses by homing in on radio frequency emitters, such as radar sites and control hubs. By adding an improved propulsion system with more space for fuel, the service will approximately double AARGM’s range from about 60 nm to more than 120 nm. That will keep its Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft farther from threatening weapons systems, such as the Russian S-400 and Chinese HQ-9, among others.

An added benefit will be internal carriage on the Lockheed MartinF-35C, thanks to smaller control surfaces. But the service confirms that the anticipated design being explored by Orbital ATK is still too large for the Marine Corps F-35B internal weapons bay. Instead, it can be carried externally on the short takeoff and vertical landing variant.

The plan being formulated by the Navy’s direct and time-sensitive strike weapons program office in partnership with Orbital ATK is based on a capability development document signed last June, Naval Air Systems Command tells Aviation Week....


Despite Raytheon’s heritage with the original HARM weapon and continued modernization of the Air Force’s AGM-88-series weapons, Orbital ATK has primacy with development of the front-end AARGM guidance section and modified control section that will be carried forward onto the extended-range version.

As such, the Navy has awarded a sole-source contract to Orbital ATK to figure out how to repackage the front end of the missile to make room for the larger, double-range rocket motor. The large control surfaces common with the HARM weapon that prevent internal carriage on the F-35 will be trimmed and moved aft of the weapon.

Old radar types never die; they just phased array - Unknown

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8772
Re: AARGM / VFDR Missiles
« Reply #68 on: February 17, 2017, 04:21:55 am »
U.S. Navy Supporting Double-Range Orbital ATK AARGM


Quote
The U.S. Navy has begun meeting with rocket manufacturers to support Orbital ATK’s development of an extended-range Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM-ER) as it targets service entry by 2023.                                                                       
The weapon, adapted from the legacy Raytheon High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM), is designed to suppress or destroy enemy air defenses by homing in on radio frequency emitters, such as radar sites and control hubs. By adding an improved propulsion system with more space for fuel, the service will approximately double AARGM’s range from about 60 nm to more than 120 nm. That will keep its Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft farther from threatening weapons systems, such as the Russian S-400 and Chinese HQ-9, among others.

An added benefit will be internal carriage on the Lockheed MartinF-35C, thanks to smaller control surfaces. But the service confirms that the anticipated design being explored by Orbital ATK is still too large for the Marine Corps F-35B internal weapons bay. Instead, it can be carried externally on the short takeoff and vertical landing variant.

The plan being formulated by the Navy’s direct and time-sensitive strike weapons program office in partnership with Orbital ATK is based on a capability development document signed last June, Naval Air Systems Command tells Aviation Week....


Despite Raytheon’s heritage with the original HARM weapon and continued modernization of the Air Force’s AGM-88-series weapons, Orbital ATK has primacy with development of the front-end AARGM guidance section and modified control section that will be carried forward onto the extended-range version.

As such, the Navy has awarded a sole-source contract to Orbital ATK to figure out how to repackage the front end of the missile to make room for the larger, double-range rocket motor. The large control surfaces common with the HARM weapon that prevent internal carriage on the F-35 will be trimmed and moved aft of the weapon.


I hope they don't cripple it by trying to shoehorn the thing into an F-35B. 
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline bring_it_on

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 982
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: AARGM / VFDR Missiles
« Reply #69 on: February 17, 2017, 04:24:24 am »
It isn't required to fit the F-35 B weapons bay. The best route there would probably be to develop a highly efficient low power Anti Radiation type seeker for an SDB II type munition. Could be very useful on the other two variants and the F-22 as well.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2017, 05:54:02 am by bring_it_on »
Old radar types never die; they just phased array - Unknown

Offline FighterJock

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 470
Re: AARGM / VFDR Missiles
« Reply #70 on: February 17, 2017, 07:28:36 am »
It isn't required to fit the F-35 B weapons bay. The best route there would probably be to develop a highly efficient low power Anti Radiation type seeker for an SDB II type munition. Could be very useful on the other two variants and the F-22 as well.

Quite right bring_it_on, I could see that happening. Also how about putting a GBU-15 style rocket pod onto the SDB 2 to further increase range?

Offline bring_it_on

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 982
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: AARGM / VFDR Missiles
« Reply #71 on: February 17, 2017, 08:08:40 am »
They are looking at that in the GBU-X series of weapons.
Old radar types never die; they just phased array - Unknown

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1327
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: AARGM / VFDR Missiles
« Reply #72 on: February 17, 2017, 11:17:58 am »
I hope they don't cripple it by trying to shoehorn the thing into an F-35B.

An AARGM-ER All-Up-Round would also chew up a large amount of weapons magazine volume on an LHA.

Offline bring_it_on

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 982
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: AARGM / VFDR Missiles
« Reply #73 on: March 18, 2017, 11:58:38 am »
...
Old radar types never die; they just phased array - Unknown