Raytheon AIM-424 Malice LRAAM

[Ronny]

That is dual grain, not dual pulse.

I’m pretty sure they called MK-104 dual thrust, and beside, dual grain will result in dual thrust

 

[NMaude]

I’m pretty sure they called MK-104 dual thrust, and beside, dual grain will result in dual thrust

Boost-sustain burn-profile.

 

[Solidus]

If anyone wanted more confirmation that the dual-stage thing is just speculation here on a podcast with both writers of the original AvWeek AIM-424 article they admit they don't know anything about it's propulsion besides it being a solid rocket motor.

 

[bring_it_on]

I just think for USN purposes extreme end game maneuverability does not matter.

It could well be that for the US Navy a long range weapon designed to defeat maneuverable targets at range, does not need to have great end game ability to defeat the said targets. Stranger things have turned out to be true. I still wouldn't bet on it. The Navy's released images and info/writeup does not anyway hint at that and the strange 'connect the dots' exercise vis-a-vis the USN vs USAF and USN is just too strange to comment on .

 

[NMaude]

Sandboxx recently uploaded a lengthy video about the AIM-424:

The United States Navy just unveiled what may be the longest-range air-to-air missile in the world, the AIM-424 Malice. This new weapon promises to give America the beyond-visual-range advantage over near-peer adversaries like China... So, let's run down what we know.

 

[bring_it_on]

Sandboxx recently uploaded a lengthy video about the AIM-424:

Probably a decent summary of the first four or so pages of this thread. Saves a lot of scrolling.

 

[Factor]

When did Raytheon say this? I can’t find it, and the maneuverability statement is only that the strakes allow it to “retain significant amounts of maneuverability even with its larger size compared to” AMRAAM and JATM, which is the same as more maneuverable.

Well, My understanding was some went problem, some News say "Specialized aerodynamic fins and strakes also enable the missile to retain significant amounts of maneuverability even with its larger size compared to the long-fielded Raytheon-built AIM-120 AMRAAM and in-development Lockheed Martin-built AIM-260 JATM."

 

[RadicalDisconnect]

Well, My understanding was some went problem, some News say "Specialized aerodynamic fins and strakes also enable the missile to retain significant amounts of maneuverability even with its larger size compared to the long-fielded Raytheon-built AIM-120 AMRAAM and in-development Lockheed Martin-built AIM-260 JATM."

Right but that verbiage isn’t clear if it’s the size being compared or maneuverability.

And anyways square-cube law is a thing, so all else being equal, a larger missile will need proportionally bigger control surface for same level on maneuverability.

 

[Ronny]

Right but that verbiage isn’t clear if it’s the size being compared or maneuverability.

And anyways square-cube law is a thing, so all else being equal, a larger missile will need proportionally bigger control surface for same level on maneuverability.

To be fair though, AIM-260 does seem to have smaller fin surface than AIM-424 even in proportional to its own body