SiAW (Stand-in Attack Weapon)

[NMaude]

Other than the propes it wasn't for me.
The only image of a production model didn't show any folding mechanism:

View attachment 804863
While almost all clear launch still images were obviously photoshoped with a fake.

If you look carefully at the base of the fins you can see a folding mechanism similar to the one on the tail-fins of an SM-2/3/6.

 

[kqcke for you]

Other than the propes it wasn't for me.

This wasn't intended as an insult because we see the same with Atacms so it seemed obvious too me.

The only image of a production model didn't show any folding mechanism:

You mean the Concept Drawing
of LRPF? ^^

View attachment 804863
While almost all clear launch still images were obviously photoshoped with a fake.

No no they Just use stealth thats why we can't see them to reduce there launch signature xD

 

[bring_it_on]

Isn't this like obvious?

Yes. Should have been . I had seen the footage and completely forgotten about it.

 

[kqcke for you]

Air Force Seeks More Companies to Build Stand-in Attack Weapon

The Air Force wants more companies to produce an equivalent to the Stand-in Attack Weapon, used to destroy radars and high-value targets.

www.airandspaceforces.com

 

[joshjosh]

Is the current version of SiAW capable of ABM? Because...

Targeting:

• Advanced anti-radiation seeker with broad frequency coverage.
• Ability to target modern and advanced radar systems, including frequency-agile and low-probability-of-intercept (LPI) emitters.
• Ability to target modern ballistic threats, and other non-cooperative targets
• Precision navigation and guidance system (e.g., GPS/INS with anti-jamming capabilities).
• Potential for pre-emptive targeting capabilities.
• Ability to re-attack.

 

[Ronny]

Is the current version of SiAW capable of ABM? Because...

Targeting:

• Advanced anti-radiation seeker with broad frequency coverage.
• Ability to target modern and advanced radar systems, including frequency-agile and low-probability-of-intercept (LPI) emitters.
• Ability to target modern ballistic threats, and other non-cooperative targets
• Precision navigation and guidance system (e.g., GPS/INS with anti-jamming capabilities).
• Potential for pre-emptive targeting capabilities.
• Ability to re-attack.

Probably mean TEL and not Ballistic missile

 

[joshjosh]

Probably mean TEL and not Ballistic missile

A "modern ballistic threat and other non-cooperative target" means a ballistic missile on a TEL? Why specify "ballistic" then? It wouldn't matter what kind of missile is on the TEL. If someone told you, without context, that they were looking for a missile that can "target modern ballistic threats and other non-cooperative targets," I think you'd assume they're talking about an ABM interceptor. I just don't know how else to read it.

But for SiAW? Weird, right?

 

[Ronny]

A "modern ballistic threat and other non-cooperative target" means a ballistic missile on a TEL? Why specify "ballistic" then? It wouldn't matter what kind of missile is on the TEL. If someone told you, without context, that they were looking for a missile that can "target modern ballistic threats and other non-cooperative targets," I think you'd assume they're talking about an ABM interceptor. I just don't know how else to read it.

But for SiAW? Weird, right?

Ballistic probably opposed to common AARGM-ER target which are SAM. Non-cooperative target probably mean non emitting target in this context

 

[Josh_TN]

There’s no way SiAW has any significant ABM capabilities from purely a kinetic viewpoint

 

[Forest Green]

Probably mean TEL and not Ballistic missile

Makes sense, TEL spens more time erecting than entire BM boost phase several times over.