AGM-86

AN/AWW-14(V)

ACCESS: Granted
Senior Member
Joined
18 May 2019
Messages
636
Reaction score
1,570
attachment.php


A staple of the Air Force's long-range strike portfolio has come to the end of the road. The AGM-86C/D Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missile (CALCM), the non-nuclear sibling of the AGB-86B that remains in service as the backbone of the B-52's nuclear strike mission, is being put rest after decades of service. The last download of these missiles from a B-52H occurred at Barksdale AFB on November 20th, 2019, marking the final end to the weapon's service.


EKJ9aBeU8AAlTvb.jpg:large
EKJ9aBfUwAAZwe5.jpg:large
 
Last edited:
I think the total remaining inventory is 100 or less anyway, compared to 5000+ AGM-158 A/B.
 
The LRASM production is rather miniscule. USAF's total buy is only 400 ish, and I think only around 10% of that has been delivered. That said I think I mistook the number the USAF planned to purchase vs total current inventory. But the USAF still has well over two thousand units of A/B versions, and production of the A has ceased in favor of the B, with something like 2000+ 158As and a planned inventory of ~3000 B's, plus LRASMs. Additionally there is apparently a 'D' version entering production soon that has improvements to the shape and wings to extend range, and possibly an 'XL' version will purchased as well.
 
Northrop Grumman System Corp., Salt Lake City, Utah, has been awarded a $135,000,000 contract for remanufacturing efforts in support of the air launch cruise missile inertial navigation element. Work encompasses the disassembly, cleaning, inspection, maintenance, re-assembly, testing and finishing actions as required to return the end item to a like-new condition. Work will be predominantly performed in Salt Lake City, Utah, and is expected to be completed Sept. 3, 2034.

 
The little known ZAGM-86A. This is the missile that basically explains why a B-1B's bomb bays are too short for the AGM-86B/C/D. It was scrapped for having too short a range... then there was TASSM (also scrapped)... and then the JASSM was developed. :rolleyes:


deliveryService


3077047746_cca6f3e5f7_b.jpg


34173-1aaf048eccb0882b3eb079308dfb0ca1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Slightly OT, is the LRSO requirements public in anyway? Broadly speaking about all I can tell about the AGM-86B replacement is that it is thought to have a longer range and an updated W80 (mod 4).
 
Slightly OT, is the LRSO requirements public in anyway? Broadly speaking about all I can tell about the AGM-86B replacement is that it is thought to have a longer range and an updated W80 (mod 4).
Probably coated in the same stuff as the B-21.
 

Attachments

  • s-l1600 (24).jpg
    s-l1600 (24).jpg
    180.9 KB · Views: 76
  • s-l1600 (25).jpg
    s-l1600 (25).jpg
    182.5 KB · Views: 48
  • s-l1600 (26).jpg
    s-l1600 (26).jpg
    164.3 KB · Views: 54
  • s-l1600 (27).jpg
    s-l1600 (27).jpg
    208.1 KB · Views: 57
  • s-l1600 (28).jpg
    s-l1600 (28).jpg
    221.5 KB · Views: 57
  • s-l1600 (29).jpg
    s-l1600 (29).jpg
    277.4 KB · Views: 60
  • s-l1600 (30).jpg
    s-l1600 (30).jpg
    334.6 KB · Views: 61
  • s-l1600 (31).jpg
    s-l1600 (31).jpg
    239.8 KB · Views: 61
when I first read that I thought you'd bought an actual AGM-86;):D.
While I'm all in favor of arming yourself as you see fit, that's a bit out of my price range. And being a subject of the State of Illinois, I doubt they'd let me have one. And even if they did... I'd have to register the damn thing, then the first time some jackhole invades a town under a paraglider they'd use that registration to come and confiscate it.

Although the idea of modifying one with retractable gear and a prone-pilot cockpit to turn it into a daily flyer seems appealing for some reason. I bet the AOA on landing is sporty.
 
While I'm all in favor of arming yourself as you see fit, that's a bit out of my price range. And being a subject of the State of Illinois, I doubt they'd let me have one. And even if they did... I'd have to register the damn thing, then the first time some jackhole invades a town under a paraglider they'd use that registration to come and confiscate it.

Although the idea of modifying one with retractable gear and a prone-pilot cockpit to turn it into a daily flyer seems appealing for some reason. I bet the AOA on landing is sporty.
You know, you can fix that problem, right?
 
Question on AGM-86. Missile threat states a 3,000lb warhead, but the whole thing only weighed <4,000lb???

 
Question on AGM-86. Missile threat states a 3,000lb warhead, but the whole thing only weighed <4,000lb???


It depends on the variant, but the CALCM warhead was approximately 1000 pounds.
 
It depends on the variant, but the CALCM warhead was approximately 1000 pounds.

The USAF fact sheet says "3000-lb class" but this is likely giving the warhead equivalence, not weight. Factor in an REF substantially better than 1, improved warhead casing design, smart fuzing, etc. and you get the effect of a notional 3000-lb bomb in a much smaller package.

 
Last edited:
Question on AGM-86. Missile threat states a 3,000lb warhead, but the whole thing only weighed <4,000lb???


Warhead is W80, probably like 500 lbs or less. An entire B-61-7 is like 750 lbs. conventional conversions of the ALCM had ~1000lb warheads and reduced range compared to the strategic version.

EDIT: the entire weapon is 3000# class, not the warhead. The JASSM is 2000# class with a 1000# class warhead.
 
Question on AGM-86. Missile threat states a 3,000lb warhead, but the whole thing only weighed <4,000lb???

I could not find any mention of "3000lb warhead" in the link you provided .....

Anyway, your question has been answered (correctly) by all the posts above mine .....
 
I could not find any mention of "3000lb warhead" in the link you provided .....
1,360kg (AGM-86C Block 1).

1705319253514.png

Also echoed here and on wiki.

 
1,360kg (AGM-86C Block 1).

View attachment 717271

Also echoed here and on wiki.


Ah, this helps, noting that the launch weight for the C models is significantly higher than for the nuke version.
 
AGM-86B cast aluminium structure, AvWeek 10 Dec 1979. Note 'forks' for the warhead.
 

Attachments

  • AGM-86B_structure_AvWeek_19791210_024.JPEG
    AGM-86B_structure_AvWeek_19791210_024.JPEG
    222.5 KB · Views: 63
I was not expecting that much to be big cast chunks.

I never really thought about it but if you'd asked me how the AGM-86's fuselage was constructed before I read this thread I would've said it was a riveted semi-monocoque structure aka "Stressed Skin".
 
I never really thought about it but if you'd asked me how the AGM-86's fuselage was constructed before I read this thread I would've said it was a riveted semi-monocoque structure aka "Stressed Skin".
That's exactly what I was expecting. Stressed skin with a couple big longerons to carry the warhead and mount on the pylons.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom