AHM-4 Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile (HACM)

[bring_it_on]

The U.S. Air Force’s scramjet-powered Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile (HACM) has finally reached the flight test phase, with at least one “release” having been carried out so far over a range in Australia. ...

“The U.S. Air Force, in partnership with Australia, has conducted a flight test of the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile (HACM) as part of our continuous work to advance long-range strike capabilities,” an Air Force spokesperson confirmed to TWZ today. “This effort is part of the Southern Cross Integrated Flight Research Experiment (SCIFiRE), a collaborative agreement built on more than 15 years of partnership between our two nations.”

https://www.twz.com/air/first-relea...e-has-happened-over-a-test-range-in-australia

 

[Ronny]

I hope we get to see its speed/range and shape soon

 

[EmoBirb]

It will be interesting to see if, when and to whom the US/AUS may export the missile. I could see several F-15 and arguably some P-8A users being interested in this system.

 

[bring_it_on]

I hope we get to see its speed/range and shape soon

They still have not revealed what the two HAWC systems looked like. And they've already concluded that effort and are about to wrap up its follow on MOHAWK while initiating that effort's follow on.

But at some point, as this system goes into production and limited initial service there will have to be some pictures of F-15EX etc carrying it externally.

 

[Sferrin]

They still have not revealed what the two HAWC systems looked like. And they've already concluded that effort and are about to wrap up its follow on MOHAWK while initiating that effort's follow on.

But at some point, as this system goes into production and limited initial service there will have to be some pictures of F-15EX etc carrying it externally.

Wait, I thought we were talking about HACM? Are MOHAWK and HACM the same thing? Or is HACM the follow on to MOHAWK?

 

[bring_it_on]

Wait, I thought we were talking about HACM? Are MOHAWK and HACM the same thing? Or is HACM the follow on to MOHAWK?

HAWC was the tech development / demonstration program that fed the HACM program which is a weapon system meant to be operationalized. DARPA-AFRL HAWC concluded and transitioned to MOHAWC (More HAWC) which explored additional things (I believe envelope expansion for scramjets) with the existing HAWC performers. DARPA is now planning to transition from MOHAWC to its follow on scramjet program - Next Generation Hypersonic Cruise Missile (NGHCM). Meanwhile, it has not shared publicly images of the two scramjet cruisers it flew under HAWC.

 

[Ronny]

They still have not revealed what the two HAWC systems looked like. And they've already concluded that effort and are about to wrap up its follow on MOHAWK while initiating that effort's follow on.

But at some point, as this system goes into production and limited initial service there will have to be some pictures of F-15EX etc carrying it externally.

I wonder if we eventually see F-18 and F-35 carry it

 

[Sferrin]

HAWC was the tech development / demonstration program that fed the HACM program which is a weapon system meant to be operationalized. DARPA-AFRL HAWC concluded and transitioned to MOHAWC (More HAWC) which explored additional things (I believe envelope expansion for scramjets) with the existing HAWC performers. DARPA is now planning to transition from MOHAWC to its follow on scramjet program - Next Generation Hypersonic Cruise Missile (NGHCM). Meanwhile, it has not shared publicly images of the two scramjet cruisers it flew under HAWC.

HAWC (DARPA) ---> HACM (DoW)
HAWC (DARPA) ---> MOHAWC (DARPA) ---> NGHCM (DARPA)
(That about right?)

I wonder if one of the two designs went to HACM and the other continued development under DARPA or if they killed one outright and did an "Emergency Capability", taking a snapshot of the surviving design for the DoW, and then kept developing it further under DARPA.

 

[bring_it_on]

HAWC (DARPA) ---> HACM (DoW)
HAWC (DARPA) ---> MOHAWC (DARPA) ---> NGHCM (DARPA)
(That about right?)

I wonder if one of the two designs went to HACM and the other continued development under DARPA or if they killed one outright and did an "Emergency Capability", taking a snapshot of the surviving design for the DoW, and then kept developing it further under DARPA.

Yes, that's correct.

 

[Lc89]

Could they also integrate RDEs (rotating detonation engine) in the future?

 

[Sferrin]

Yes, that's correct.

Your office look like this?

 

[Josh_TN]

I wonder if we eventually see F-18 and F-35 carry it

F-18 is a threshold aircraft I believe for the RAAF.

 

[Josh_TN]

Could they also integrate RDEs (rotating detonation engine) in the future?

That would fundamentally change the design and likely is a separate program. One of the big advantages of RDE is that the annular combustion chamber is much more compact compared to a standard scramjet like X-51 (and presumably HACM). It would change the entire layout of the missile to something completely different.

 

[Josh_TN]

Your office look like this?
View attachment 825462

i mean, it is pretty straight forward: HAWC was the tech demonstration involving two competing companies and HACM was the actual program of record down selected to one of those companies. DARPA then decided there was more data that could be acquired from flight testing the demonstrators and continued the program. At some point that will feed into the next generation of scramjets.

 

[opkilo]

Considering this program was roughly planned in parallel with LRHW, I have concerns about affordability.. though it'll actually have a warhead in the hundreds of lbs. (IIRC 300+?) unlike Blackbeard of LRHW(?).

 

[bring_it_on]

Considering this program was roughly planned in parallel with LRHW,

No it was not. LRHW has nothing to do with it at all. HACM traces its origin to a two part collaboration between DARPA and USAF to develop and demonstrate next generation hypersonic technologies. The two efforts were Tactical Boost Glide (TBG) and HAWC. TBG led to ARRW transition and HAWC to the HACM. HACM is expected to be substantially less expensive than the $10-15 Million ARRW.

In fact, the USAF decided to ditch its LRHW connection (HCSW) in favor of investing in the TBG and HAWC derivatives (ARRW and HACM) both of which being substantially more affordable on a per unit basis.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTIB4uWxpnI

 

[Josh_TN]

Considering this program was roughly planned in parallel with LRHW, I have concerns about affordability.. though it'll actually have a warhead in the hundreds of lbs. (IIRC 300+?) unlike Blackbeard of LRHW(?).

I have no idea what the warhead size is, but from an affordability standpoint scramjets require far less exotic materials because they accelerate up to hypersonic speeds and then stay there, where as boost/gliders have to undergo terrific acceleration and extremely high burnout speeds only to steadily lose velocity there after. An air launched scramjet needs a fraction of the solid rocket fuel a ground launched system, and the scramjet itself is 3D printed with almost no moving parts and JP-7 as a fuel.

Most estimates for HACM expense per round are in the mid millions of dollars, which would be fairly competitive with LRASM or SM-6.

 

[Josh_TN]

Also Blackbeard does have a 95# warhead and I believe somewhere someone posted the LRHW warhead size as well - I believe it also is quite small, but non zero.

In any case, HACM is an unrelated technology and program compare to either of those things; the only commonality is that they all fly fast.

 

[bring_it_on]

HACM and ARRW are on the extreme end of survivability relative to other high speed options (like ALBM's etc). They trade payload for speed and survivability and thus are limited to their specific target set which is also in part driven by their cost. The USAF has an ALBM program that I think may look to trade survivability for cost and payload. Weapons like the Blackbeard trade survivability (relative to other currently funded high speed systems), payload, and perhaps even range for cost. But it retains some level of speed within its kinetic limitations.

The 'high speed' being the common denominator across this portfolio.