Secret Projects > Missile Projects

ESSM / SLAMRAAM / rumors.

(1/1)

sferrin:
Was over on F-16.net today and a poster mentioned the following:

"I wonder if they have considered just using ESSM as a starting point for JDRADM? Raytheon appears to be doing a significant portion of the work needed to mate the AMRAAM seeker to ESSM as part of the SL-AMRAAM-ER project. And as you've said, an ESSM should fit in the same space as an AMRAAM in the F-22's bays.

It would be a significantly heavier solution. This would prevent it from carriage on some AAM-only stations on various aircraft.

Not ideal definitely, but might be far less costly than designing a new missile largely from scratch. It would also give you a lot more room for the warhead and ARM sensor (especially if you went to 10" diameter all the way)."


and somebody else:

"An AMRAAM seeker on the ESSM has been coined for quite a while under various monikers including "ASSM" -- Active Sea Sparrow Missile. "


Anybody know anything about these two projects?  (Personally I wonder if they've confused "SL-AMRAAM-ER" with the Surface Launch AMRAAM with a ten-inch booster which has nothing to do with ESSM.)

Trident:
It just sounds logical, especially for developing a new medium range SAM. One thing I've wondered is whether ESSM would need a new rocket motor with a different burn profile to become a true long-range AAM/ARM. I know that calling it short-ranged even in its current form is misleading, though. I do think a 39kg warhead with some fancy technology should be plenty, any larger and it may become a liability for the missile when used in the air-to-air role.

sferrin:

--- Quote from: Trident on June 23, 2007, 08:11:17 am ---It just sounds logical, especially for developing a new medium range SAM. One thing I've wondered is whether ESSM would need a new rocket motor with a different burn profile to become a true long-range AAM/ARM. I know that calling it short-ranged even in its current form is misleading, though. I do think a 39kg warhead with some fancy technology should be plenty, any larger and it may become a liability for the missile when used in the air-to-air role.

--- End quote ---

I've said so myself for years.  I just didn't know there were any programs to actually DO it.  (Cancelled or otherwise)

AGRA:
Follow this link for a picture I took of the SLAMRAAM-ER when it was unveiled by Raytheon at this year’s Salon le Bourget:

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c190/Blargon2002/Picture223.gif

SLAMRAAM-ER is the AIM-120 seeker head and missile data link added to the RIM-162 ESSM missile body with new tapered down fore body, from ESSM’s 10-inch to AMRAAM’s 7-inch diameters. With the ESSM’s rocket motor the SLAMRAAM-ER significantly extends the slant range of the AIM-120 in the ground based air defence application. This missile configuration (seeker/tdl/rocket) could easily be integrated onto an aircraft platform as it is already systems integrated and rail launched. It would just need a carry and ‘drop’ test campaign to proof it.

Fired from a Mach 1.0+ aircraft at 40,000 feet SLAMRAAM-ER should reach out to at least 300km. But at 620lb (280kg) a piece it would cut into your unit of fire by weight compared to AIM-120.

If you wanted even more range then you could air launch Block VI SM-2, aka SM-6. This is the AIM-120 seeker head and missile data link added to the SM-2 Block IV missile body, initial booster and missile data link. SM-1 was air launched in the Standard ARM configuration and there is no reason the latest versions couldn’t be. This missile would of course weigh in at 3,225 lb (1,466 kg) or 1,558 lb (708 kg) without the Mk74 booster. Air to air range for the boosted version would probably be over 1,000km and over 500km without.

Of course why would you do all this? Rocketing air to air missiles over long ranges has never been as hard as making sure they hit the target when they get there. Hence the demise of Phoenix and its proposed replacements.

I doubt Boeing’s JDRADM will utilise any of these Raytheon and ATK products. JDRADM’s requirement to replace both AMRAAM and SDBs capability at the flick of a switch would indicate an entirely new dual role rocket propellent and/or warhead.

PS This is my first post and this web forum is like finding a soulmate ;D

sferrin:
Where are you getting these ranges from as they sound extraordinarily high.  ESSM is generally stated as having a ground-launched range of 27nm.  You don't get a six-fold increase simply by putting it on an airplane.  Double is fairly typical for AAM-sized missiles (you wouldn't get double for an air-launched ICBM for example).

Hmmm.  In fact it looks like it's surface-launched range is even less than ESSM at 40 km vs 50km for ESSM. 

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/06/20/214940/raytheon-goes-for-grand-slam.html

Of course they need to stick this on an aircraft as it should fit in the F-22's bays (and no problem at all if carried externally by even an F-16).

Navigation

[0] Message Index

Go to full version