Boeing family of JDAMs

Ukraine is now using the 1000lb JDAM-ER, from Defense Updates:


Ukraine first received the 500 lbs JDAM-ER (Joint Direct Attack Munition-Extended Range) guided bombs in 2023, integrating them onto its fighter jets using specially designed pylons.
Click to expand...
The Ukrainian Air Force is now deploying GBU-63 based 1000 lbs JDAM-ERs against Russian forces, and newly surfaced footage provides the first concrete proof. The video captures a Ukrainian Su-27 Flanker releasing two of these precision-guided bombs. The video is from the 39th Tactical Aviation Brigade.
Click to expand...
This is bad news for Russia which has been hit with many attacks deep inside its territory in the last few weeks.The deployment of this heavier variant could greatly influence the battlefield, enabling Ukrainian forces to deliver more potent strikes against fortified Russian defenses.
Click to expand...
In this video, Defense Updates analyzes reports on Ukraine deploying GBU-63-based 1000 lb JDAM-ER against Russia.
Click to expand...
#defenseupdates #JDAM-ER #ukrainewar
Click to expand...
Chapters:
00:11 INTRODUCTION
02:05 JDAM OVERVIEW
04:27 GBU-63 based 1000 lb JDAM-ER
06:55 ANALYSIS
Click to expand...

I wonder when we'll see the 2000lb JDAM-ER variant see combat use?
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Last edited:
Defense Updates has just put another video concerning the QUICKSTRIKE:


US military’s quest for a relatively cheap but destructive anti ship weapon seems to be progressing well.
The U.S. Air Force has announced the successful test of a modified 500-pound-class GBU-38 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM), adapted for anti-ship roles under its Quicksink program.

Notably, the service had previously demonstrated a 2,000-pound-class Quicksink variant. This new lighter version could provide a more cost-effective option, allowing bombers and tactical aircraft to carry a greater number of munitions per sortie while retaining the ability to effectively target enemy vessels.

In this video, Defense Updates analyzes how latest QUICKSINK munition would enable US military take down adversary’s naval armada?
#defenseupdates #quicksink #usmilitary
Click to expand...
Chapters:
0:00 TITLE
00:11 INTRODUCTION
01:01 SPONSORSHIP - NordVPN
01:35 THE TEST
02:36 CONCEPT
04:30 ADVANTAGE AND DISADVANTAGE
06:52 ANALYSIS
Click to expand...
 
The sandbox has released a video concerning how a B-2A could carry up to 80 500lb Quickstrike JDAMs to sink a large number of warships:


Earlier this year, we discussed the Air Force Research Lab’s new 2,000-pound anti-ship bomb dubbed “Quicksink,” which sent an aircraft-carrier-sized target to the bottom of the Pacific with just a single shot last summer. Now, the U.S. Air Force is testing yet another similar weapon from its Stealth Bombers, a 500-pound version of the Quicksink, that could allow a single B-2 Spirit to engage as many as 80 smaller warships in just a single sortie.
Click to expand...

No doubt the very idea would be giving the planners in the PLA:N some serious heartburn just thinking about it;):D.

I imagine in the event of the PLA invading a flight of, say, ten B-2As come in releasing their Quicksand payloads saying "Say hello to my little friends";):D.
 
It is still a weapon that requires the launching aircraft to get perilously close to use. The next obvious step would be to add a wing kit…that would give you maybe 40 mi /60km of stand off, maybe more from 40,000 feet. Payload would suffer, but worth the extra range. Adoption of wing kits for GBU-38s in general seems like a good idea, especially for the B-2s and -21s. Raiders should have an even higher release altitude and potentially have SBRAs optimized for wing kits carriage - you could probably stack four mk82 based munitions vice five with the add on if the rack was specifically designed for it. Modest payload downgrade and extremely cheap add on that gives a great range increase and the ability to engage multiple widely spaced targets with a single release event.

If I were designing the B-21, I’d build it around GBU-38/39/53 capacity.
 
More like from 60000 ft and PJDAMs would be better for range.

That said don't forget how C-RAM had been saving allied bases on a regular basis against artillery strikes. The much slower JDAM bombs won't pose much of a problem against their more powerful and farther ranged 30mm guns. You got to drop at least a dozen on one target to get a hit.

Quickstrike is more for against pirates and or enforcing shipping blockade/embargo. That would hurt them more badly.
 
Has there been any news in regards to Boeing's PJADM proposal? Personally I think that the company should fund its' own demonstrator prototypes to show the USAF and USN what it could do, they do need inexpensive short-range cruise-missiles.
 
Last edited:
NMaude said:
Has there been any news in regards to Boeing's PJADM proposal? Personally I think that the company should fund its' on demonstrator prototypes to show the USAF and USN what it could do, they do need inexpensive short-range cruise-missiles.
Click to expand...

I think the problem is there is already a glut of inexpensive cruise missiles on the market. PJDAM only delivers more bang, since most of the other offerings are 500# class AUR, but for the majority of targets that’s enough.

I do not think PJDAM brings much to the table over say Barracuda 500 or CMMT.
 
Last edited:
Question for JDAM wing kits (AKA JDAM-ER): do these need purpose built JDAM kits, or is it just a software change to allow the rear fins to guide the bomb with wings?

Second question: does the bomb eject the wing kit short of the target then fall more vertical or does it wear the wings all the way in?
 
Josh_TN said:
I think the problem is there is already a glut of inexpensive cruise mission the market. PJDAM only delivers more bang, since most of the other offerings are 500# class AUR, but for the majority of targets that’s enough.
Click to expand...

Good points however I do think that Boeing should do a company-funded development programme so that they can test out their proposal in the real world and have it on hand ready to offer and put into production if the US DOD expresses interest in it.

Josh_TN said:
I do not think PJDAM brings much to the table over say Barracuda 500 or CMMT.
Click to expand...

Maybe so but the Ukrainian war has shown that for a high-intensity, long-durance war you need a LOT of cruise-missiles and other similar weapons, so in that situation I could see the US (If it's serious) about building up its' stockpiles massively there being business for all of the companies offering.

Josh_TN said:
Question for JDAM wing kits (AKA JDAM-ER): do these need purpose built JDAM kits
Click to expand...

The only difference that I can see between a regular JDAM and a JDAM-ER is that the regular JDAM has middy strakes while the JDAM-ER has the wing-kit (Which costs IIRC ~$10,000).

Josh_TN said:
or is it just a software change to allow the rear fins to guide the bomb with wings?
Click to expand...

I'd say it's just the same control-software but with different control-law constants to account for the wing-kit.

Josh_TN said:
Second question: does the bomb eject the wing kit short of the target then fall more vertical or does it wear the wings all the way in?
Click to expand...

As far as I can tell the wing-kit is rigidly fixed to the bomb-body. On the other hand if a standoff version of the GBU-57 is developed I can see it fitted with a jettison-able wing-kit which is released when it enters its terminal dive.
 
Defense Updates has just uploaded a video concerning the recent successful test of the JDAM-LR:


Earlier this month, the U.S. Navy carried out a successful demonstration of an advanced standoff strike capability designed to significantly increase the reach of its carrier-based fighter fleet. The test involved a new munition known as the GBU-75 Joint Direct Attack Munition Long Range (JDAM-LR), which was deployed from an F/A-18 Super Hornet during trials conducted over the Point Mugu Sea Range in California.​
Click to expand...
The JDAM-LR represents an evolution of the well-established JDAM family, transforming the traditional guided bomb into a cost-effective, precision-guided cruise weapon. It integrates the extended-range wing kit from the JDAM-ER—featuring deployable glide surfaces—with the addition of a compact turbojet propulsion system, enabling sustained powered flight and significantly greater stand-off distance.​
Click to expand...
In this video, Defense Updates analyzes how JDAM-LR is set to provide US military with cost effective long range strike option?
#defenseupdates #JDAM_LR #usnavy
Click to expand...
Chapters:
0:00 TITLE
00:11 INTRODUCTION
01:19 SPONSORSHIP - NordVPN
01:53 THE TEST
03:12 JDAM-LR OVERVIEW
05:29 JDAM-LR VARIANTS
07:23 ANALYSIS
Click to expand...
 
Forest Green said:
Looks like they're planning on replacing CBU-105 with a JDAM-based air burst weapon (P156):
Click to expand...
That doesn't make sense, unless there's a typo in the CBU number.
  • CBU-105 is the wind-corrected Sensor Fuzed Weapon. 100% anti-tank/anti-vehicle.
  • CBU-103 is the wind-corrected Combined Effects Munition.
  • CBU-104 is the wind-corrected GATOR mine carrier. (included for completeness)
  • (edit) CBU-107 is the wind-corrected Passive Attack Weapon, 3,705 steel and tungsten darts from 2" to 14" long
I think the CBU-103 would be the more likely weapon to be replaced by an airbursting JDAM.
 
Last edited:
The U.S. Air Force has committed $75 million to an initial production run of a jet-powered guided bomb that can fly more than 300 nautical miles, Boeing said Wednesday.

Boeing’s BSU-111/B Payload Delivery Unit is a wing-and-turbojet engine kit that converts a 500-pound Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) into a long-range JDAM (JDAM LR) dubbed the GBU-75. The result is a gravity bomb with the reach of a cruise missile.
Click to expand...

2GNCSA3MF5EQ7KKP5GBXMO74DE.jpg

Boeing JDAM with a Kratos engine - 300NM range

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...rst-production-contract-for-jet-powered-jdam/

@Mods: sorry for double posting (but isn't a pwrd JDAM a JDAM ?!)
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom