Register here

Author Topic: Standard Missile projects.  (Read 46456 times)

Offline GAU-8 Avenger

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 151
Standard Missile projects.
« on: September 03, 2009, 11:56:32 pm »
The Standard Missile family has grown to include a great number of variants over the years. I figured I would create this topic to discuss the designs and proposals based around the Standard Missile.

One program I have had a very difficult time finding any info on, is the Standard Missile 5. The only reference I could find to the SM5 was a mention of the missile as a weapon to destroy cruise missiles.  Can anybody shed some light on this design?

Another variant I am looking for details of is the AIM-97 Seekbat. Which was intended to be a long-range missile for the F-15 Eagle.


Offline Abraham Gubler

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3559
Re: Standard Missile projects.
« Reply #1 on: September 04, 2009, 12:44:45 am »
The SM-5 was the name given to the US Navy’s plan for an over-the-horizon, networked missile to leverage AEGIS CEC that would be targeted by E-2D Advanced Hawkeyes and would replace the SM-2(ER) Block IV. SM-3 is the upper tier BMD missile and SM-4 the cancelled RGM-165 Land Attack Standard Missile (LASM). The key to the whole SM-6 supplanting the SM-5 was the SM-2(ER) Block IVA (confused now?).

SM-2 Block IVA was to be a lower altitude BMD tier (terminal phase) to complement SM-3 that would also have an extended range AAW capability to replace Block IV. Block IVA was cancelled in 2001 and the Navy needed a gap fill so Raytheon proposed the SM-2 Block IV meets the AIM-120C-7 to create the RIM-174 Extended Range AAW Missile (ERAM) aka SM-6. SM-6 will have the over-the-horizon, networked capability of the SM-5 but will have the AMRAAM’s active seeker autonomous terminal interception rather than the E-2D supported solution of the SM-5. But don’t write off the SM-5 yet... it may re-emerge, especially if the threat start to field active seeker decoys.
"There is a tendency in our planning to confuse the unfamiliar with the improbable." Thomas Schelling

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11073
Re: Standard Missile projects.
« Reply #2 on: September 04, 2009, 06:22:24 am »
Thanks, I'd always wondered what SM-5 was.  Apparently they're going back and modifying the SM-2 Block IVs that were built to fill the role of the IVAs that were cancelled.  Any idea what these modifications are and do those modified missiles get a new designation? (SM-2 Block IVB?)
« Last Edit: September 04, 2009, 06:25:23 am by sferrin »
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11073
Re: Standard Missile projects.
« Reply #3 on: September 04, 2009, 06:27:06 am »
The Standard Missile family has grown to include a great number of variants over the years. I figured I would create this topic to discuss the designs and proposals based around the Standard Missile.

One program I have had a very difficult time finding any info on, is the Standard Missile 5. The only reference I could find to the SM5 was a mention of the missile as a weapon to destroy cruise missiles.  Can anybody shed some light on this design?

Another variant I am looking for details of is the AIM-97 Seekbat. Which was intended to be a long-range missile for the F-15 Eagle.



There's a picture floating around of an F-106 carrying a Standard missile of some sort in relation to either the Seekbat program or the Standard-based ASAT program.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline SOC

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1168
  • APA Contributor
    • IMINT & Analysis
Re: Standard Missile projects.
« Reply #4 on: September 04, 2009, 08:11:26 pm »
That picture is one of the Seekbat test rounds.

Here's soem AIM-97 info:

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-97.html

Offline Abraham Gubler

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3559
Re: Standard Missile projects.
« Reply #5 on: September 04, 2009, 10:24:47 pm »
Thanks, I'd always wondered what SM-5 was.  Apparently they're going back and modifying the SM-2 Block IVs that were built to fill the role of the IVAs that were cancelled.  Any idea what these modifications are and do those modified missiles get a new designation? (SM-2 Block IVB?)

SM-2 Block IV is basically SM-2 Extended Range, that is the SM-2 missile with the Mk 72 booster (same booster used on SM-3 and SM-6) sized for use in Mk 41 strike length VLS cells. It is only used on US Navy AEGIS Cruisers providing an extended range (within line of sight) air defence capability. It's formal designation is RIM-156. The Block IV modification you refer to is probably juse the same as the SM-2 Block IIIB (RIM-66 or unboosted SM-2MR) Missile Homing Improvement Program (MHIP) that adds a side mounted IR seeker for improved terminal engagement against missiles. Which is nothing like the BMD and over the horizon capability of the Block IVA.
"There is a tendency in our planning to confuse the unfamiliar with the improbable." Thomas Schelling

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11073
Re: Standard Missile projects.
« Reply #6 on: September 06, 2009, 05:55:03 am »
SM-2 Block IV is basically SM-2 Extended Range, that is the SM-2 missile with the Mk 72 booster (same booster used on SM-3 and SM-6) sized for use in Mk 41 strike length VLS cells. It is only used on US Navy AEGIS Cruisers providing an extended range (within line of sight) air defence capability. It's formal designation is RIM-156. The Block IV modification you refer to is probably juse the same as the SM-2 Block IIIB (RIM-66 or unboosted SM-2MR) Missile Homing Improvement Program (MHIP) that adds a side mounted IR seeker for improved terminal engagement against missiles. Which is nothing like the BMD and over the horizon capability of the Block IVA.

I'd thought the main difference between a Block IV and a IVA WAS the additional side-mounted IR seeker?  ???  And how would the IVA have OTH capability, as I understand it it was still a SAR missile (or was it's IR seeker sufficient for terminal guidance on it's own?)
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11073
Re: Standard Missile projects.
« Reply #7 on: September 11, 2009, 11:41:40 am »
Looks like the new SM-2 Block III varient with TVC will be called the "SM-2 Block IIIC" according to this weeks AvWeek.

"The centerpiece of the yet-to-be-funded SM-2 Block IIIC is a steering control upgrade—derived from the SM-6—the addition of jet-tab thrust vector control, improved guidance system and different autopilot. The thrust vector control is primarily aimed at enhancing short-range performance.

As a second step, the Navy and Raytheon are considering a dual-pulse rocket motor enhancement and introduction of more advanced guidance software, says Ron Shields, the company’s program manager. Shields says the upgrade program has already attracted international interest­—the SM-2 has a broad customer base, and many countries operating Block IIIAs would like to modernize them."

Hope it does get funded seeing how the -IIIB has been around for quite a while now.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Abraham Gubler

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3559
Re: Standard Missile projects.
« Reply #8 on: September 16, 2009, 03:23:38 pm »
I'd thought the main difference between a Block IV and a IVA WAS the additional side-mounted IR seeker?  ???  And how would the IVA have OTH capability, as I understand it it was still a SAR missile (or was it's IR seeker sufficient for terminal guidance on it's own?)

Sorry for the late reply, didn't notice your post.

The SM-2 Block IVA was not like the SM-2 Block IIIA which added the secondary side mounted IR seeker for improved terminal performance. The SM-2 Block IVA's IR seeker was a 'side looking' system able to provide interception guidance against ballistic missiles over an area 100 km by 50 km. So presumably its sensitivity was able to support independent detection and engagement of air targets over the Mk 99's illumination horizon. You can see from this picture just how much space the Block IVA’s IR seeker occupied.
"There is a tendency in our planning to confuse the unfamiliar with the improbable." Thomas Schelling

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8509
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot

Offline pathology_doc

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 789
Re: Standard Missile projects.
« Reply #10 on: August 19, 2014, 12:19:51 pm »
The SM-5 was the name given to the US Navy’s plan for an over-the-horizon, networked missile to leverage AEGIS CEC that would be targeted by E-2D Advanced Hawkeyes


Is this the concept that was also referred to as "Forward Pass"?

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2860
Re: Standard Missile projects.
« Reply #11 on: August 19, 2014, 12:53:07 pm »
"Forward pass" is a fairly generic term -- it's been used for various over-the-horizon concepts since the 1970s. 
 
SM-5 came about in conjunction with the Navy's Mountain Top Cruise Missile Defense ACTD.  Mountain Top got its name because they simulated the use of a future AEW&C aircraft with Standard Missile fire control capabilities by mounting an E-2-type radar, CEC systems, and a shipboard-type fire control radar on top of a mountain in Hawaii.  The idea was to have a missile (a modified SM-2 Block III in the tests, eventually SM-5 if it went operational) that could receive both mid-course and terminal guidance from an airborne platform rather than just the launching ship.  That turns out to be a very complicated task.  In the end, it was easier (or at least cheaper) to just put an active seeker on the missile and skip the airborne illumination aspect (hence SM-6, with an AMRAAM seeker).

Here's a nice technical paper on Mountain Top for more details.
http://techdigest.jhuapl.edu/TD/td1804/zinger.pdf
 
 
 
« Last Edit: August 19, 2014, 06:02:57 pm by TomS »

Offline Abraham Gubler

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3559
Re: Standard Missile projects.
« Reply #12 on: August 19, 2014, 05:34:26 pm »
Great post Tom. Thanks.
"There is a tendency in our planning to confuse the unfamiliar with the improbable." Thomas Schelling

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11073
Re: Standard Missile projects.
« Reply #13 on: August 19, 2014, 06:06:22 pm »

http://techdigest.jhuapl.edu/TD/td1804/zinger.pdf

Hmm. . .from the PDF:

"A modified form of forward pass emerged in the late
1970s to early 1980s during a series of “outer air battle”
studies, which addressed next-generation Navy battle
group air defense requirements against Soviet bombers
armed with long-range antiship cruise missiles. If the
bombers could be intercepted before they approached
to within range of launching their missiles at U.S.
ships, a critical new layer of defense would be provided.
This variant of forward pass featured a conceptual, longrange
ramjet missile that could be launched from an
Aegis cruiser
and flown toward a carrier-based surveillance
and fire control aircraft."



Maybe?   ???
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2860