AIM-7 Sparrow

To confuse things further, I see a 1984 reference in a Congressional hearing to AIM-7N being requested as a retrofit to USANG F-4Ds (along with AIM-9L and some bombing accuracy updates). Could be a typo for AIM-7M, however.

Now you're giving me an idea for an espionage satire (a serious one, not a slapstick comedy) in which months of time and many assets, human and material, are wasted to learn the truth about a new weapon that only existed on paper because someone mistyped something.
I'm certain this has happened in real life.
Oh, so am I. Art imitates life as well as the other way around.
 
To confuse things further, I see a 1984 reference in a Congressional hearing to AIM-7N being requested as a retrofit to USANG F-4Ds (along with AIM-9L and some bombing accuracy updates). Could be a typo for AIM-7M, however.
Also interesting to read that the F-4D fleet could have served beyond 1991 had the Cold War kept going. 700 out of 1700 planes in the ANG were F-4s…
 
I wonder if their was ever any consideration for an air to air ESSM?

I can't see any technical reason why not however the problem is that the ESSM uses a semi-active seeker.

The Block II has an active seeker:

"The ESSM Block 2’s active seeker will support terminal engagement without the launch ship’s target illumination radars."

See:

Raytheon set to build more RIM-162 ESSM Block 2 shipboard missiles that offer increased maneuverability
 
In addition a number of F-16 operators are bared from buying AMRAAM (Iraq, Egypt) and are stuck with AIM-7M
 
In addition a number of F-16 operators are bared from buying AMRAAM (Iraq, Egypt) and are stuck with AIM-7M

Good point! However BAe could dust off the Skyflash 2 active-seeker design, update it and put into production and mount in an ESSM airframe.
 
I wonder if their was ever any consideration for an air to air ESSM?
Sort of, back in the early 2000s there was a proposal for the AIM-120D, which was intended to include a propulsion upgrade, could be mated to the ESSM motor and aft section. Other options considered were a six inch longer motor, a dual pulse motor, or air breathing options. However Iraq and Afghanistan were consuming all the money, and many programs were forced to sacrifice capabilities to make funds available for those wars—the AIM-120D being one of countless examples of this happening.

This proposal however lives today in the form of AMRAAM-ER for NASAMS, which Raytheon is now offering to modify into an air launched weapon as a competitor to Meteor and AIM-260.
 
I wonder if their was ever any consideration for an air to air ESSM?
Sort of, back in the early 2000s there was a proposal for the AIM-120D, which was intended to include a propulsion upgrade, could be mated to the ESSM motor and aft section. Other options considered were a six inch longer motor, a dual pulse motor, or air breathing options. However Iraq and Afghanistan were consuming all the money, and many programs were forced to sacrifice capabilities to make funds available for those wars—the AIM-120D being one of countless examples of this happening.

This proposal however lives today in the form of AMRAAM-ER for NASAMS, which Raytheon is now offering to modify into an air launched weapon as a competitor to Meteor and AIM-260.
Supposedly, a ramjet-powered AMRAAM was tested in Operation Desert Storm, has this ever been proven/disproved?

"during the 90-91 Gulf War.A squadron Of USAF F-15C were deployed during the 90-91 Gulf War, with a ramjet powered variant of Raytheon AMRAAM and were responsible for a number of Iraqi combat aircraft kills. These kills were later described as "successful engagements by other non-classified missile systems". According to US Military sources these weapons were supplied in "quantity" even though they were officially only "test items"."

See:

 
"during the 90-91 Gulf War.A squadron Of USAF F-15C were deployed during the 90-91 Gulf War, with a ramjet powered variant of Raytheon AMRAAM and were responsible for a number of Iraqi combat aircraft kills. These kills were later described as "successful engagements by other non-classified missile systems". According to US Military sources these weapons were supplied in "quantity" even though they were officially only "test items"."
This is the first time I've heard of this. As far as I know the AIM-120A wasn't quite ready for combat deployment. If Sadaam had invaded Kuwait in 1991 instead by the time operation Desert Storm came around we would've seen the AMRAAM used in combat.
 
"during the 90-91 Gulf War.A squadron Of USAF F-15C were deployed during the 90-91 Gulf War, with a ramjet powered variant of Raytheon AMRAAM and were responsible for a number of Iraqi combat aircraft kills. These kills were later described as "successful engagements by other non-classified missile systems". According to US Military sources these weapons were supplied in "quantity" even though they were officially only "test items"."
This is the first time I've heard of this. As far as I know the AIM-120A wasn't quite ready for combat deployment. If Sadaam had invaded Kuwait in 1991 instead by the time operation Desert Storm came around we would've seen the AMRAAM used in combat.
I heard this years ago too and can't remember if it was ever verified.
 
"during the 90-91 Gulf War.A squadron Of USAF F-15C were deployed during the 90-91 Gulf War, with a ramjet powered variant of Raytheon AMRAAM and were responsible for a number of Iraqi combat aircraft kills. These kills were later described as "successful engagements by other non-classified missile systems". According to US Military sources these weapons were supplied in "quantity" even though they were officially only "test items"."
This is the first time I've heard of this. As far as I know the AIM-120A wasn't quite ready for combat deployment. If Sadaam had invaded Kuwait in 1991 instead by the time operation Desert Storm came around we would've seen the AMRAAM used in combat.
AMRAAM was used for anti scud duty in the Gulf War





The 33rd had their missiles delivered in late 1988 and where flying with them by spring 1989




 
AMRAAM was used for anti scud duty in the Gulf War

I thought that that was MIM-104 Patriot's job. I recall seeing in aviation magazines at the time that there were still some teething problems with the LRIP AMRAAMs when being deployed so that the AIM-7M was used instead (IIRC at least one AIM-7R was fired).
 
AMRAAM was used for anti scud duty in the Gulf War

I thought that that was MIM-104 Patriot's job. I recall seeing in aviation magazines at the time that there were still some teething problems with the LRIP AMRAAMs when being deployed so that the AIM-7M was used instead (IIRC at least one AIM-7R was fired).
The Issue with the LRIP missiles was them having a shorter time between failure then expected in captive carry tests. which in several of the documents posted shows wasn’t an issue in the real world. This is pre ioc so the missiles where only to be used if thhe need arised as sceen in this 1988 defense authorization

https://books.google.com/books?id=H...=onepage&q=amraam low rate production&f=false

As for AIM-7R I always thought it was a mid 90s missile so it’s need to me.
 
How many airforces are still using the AIM-7P and is it still being used by the US?
 

Attachments

  • 309FC947-86AE-4E9A-8917-5620A4D2A286.jpeg
    309FC947-86AE-4E9A-8917-5620A4D2A286.jpeg
    33.6 KB · Views: 135
IIRC I think at least one AIM-7R was fired during operation Desert Storm.
Global security claims three missiles RIM-7R/AIM-7R were first test fired in the mid 90s and AIM-7R began as a project in 1989. If they were used it could have possibly been provisional hardware given a live fire test in a real war zone. AIM-7R is a modified AIM-7P. The F-15 was qualified to carry AIM-7P but never did operationally. That leaves the F-14 and F-18. The Tomcat’s only till in the Gulf war was done with AIM-9, though I believe it might have fired at Mig-25 and simply missed, I’m not sure what it would have fired. The Hornet killed some Mig-21s with Aim-7, but I’m unsure if they used AIM-7M or P. You would have to look into accounts of the engagements and I don’t have them.
 
The package will for the first time include radar-guided Sea Sparrow anti-air missiles, which can be launched from the sea or on land to intercept aircraft or cruise missiles. In a bit of battlefield innovation, the Ukrainian military has managed to tweak its existing Soviet-era BUK launchers to fire the Sea Sparrow, two people familiar with the matter said.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/05/biden-ukraine-bradley-vehicles-tanks-00076549
I can't think of anywhere else to post this.
Are any of you knowledgeable enough to speculate as to how this was accomplished?
 
Are any of you knowledgeable enough to speculate as to how this was accomplished?

The Ukrainians were able to modify their SA-11/17/27 launchers to fire Sea Sparrows? Impressive and while the Ukrainians have some good engineers they no doubt had technical help* from Raytheon.

*The same technical help that enabled the Ukrainians to fire AGM-88s from their MiG-29s.
 
The Ukrainians were able to modify their SA-11/17/27 launchers to fire Sea Sparrows?
That's what's being claimed. It's pretty wild if true, and I am absolutely looking forward to seeing some Sparrows sitting on Buk TELARs.
Something like this?
raytheon_essm_PELICAN_2k12_kub_modernized_MSPO_2012.jpg



 
While the ESSM would be a good choice I wouldn't be surprised at all if they were RIM-7M/Ps.
 
Last edited:
Either way a Sparrow is bout 1000 pounds lighter then a Buk and half the size.

Thats for both the 7s and 165s.

So they will fit... easily ish on the Launcher.

Guiding is another issue.

Especially since I believe they use different Frequency BANDS. Like pretty yhe Sparrows are X band and the Buks are I/H band...
 
Either way a Sparrow is bout 1000 pounds lighter then a Buk and half the size.

Both the RIM-7 and the ESSM (Especially the RIM-7) are significantly lighter than the SA-6 Gainful.

Guiding is another issue.

Especially since I believe they use different Frequency BANDS. Like pretty yhe Sparrows are X band and the Buks are I/H band...

I'd say that Raytheon will either likely modify the SA-6's illumination radar to the right band or it will replace it with some form of the Hawk high-power illuminator radar.
 
To confuse things further, I see a 1984 reference in a Congressional hearing to AIM-7N being requested as a retrofit to USANG F-4Ds (along with AIM-9L and some bombing accuracy updates). Could be a typo for AIM-7M, however.

Now you're giving me an idea for an espionage satire (a serious one, not a slapstick comedy) in which months of time and many assets, human and material, are wasted to learn the truth about a new weapon that only existed on paper because someone mistyped something.

ROTFL. Exactly the kind of Cold War idiocy I'm cramming my TL with. Bottom line: don't you ever underestimate the Murphy Law unnerving knack to make insane-stupid coincidences happen.

Case in point: the Teneriffe air disaster, 1977. Worst air disaster ever. I can guarantee the Murphy Law was there in strength, all day long. Playing havoc with hazard, orchestrating stupid, insane coincidences - until The Grand Finale, late in the afternoon: when two 747s slammed into each other and left 583 poor souls burned to cinder. It was a textbook case of Murphy Law insanity cranked past 11.

And don't start ME on the whys the Soviets decided to build Buran a day of 1974....
 
Last edited:
Case in point: the Teneriffe air disaster, 1977. Worst air disaster ever. I can guarantee the Murphy Law was there in strength, all day long. Playing havoc with hazard, orchestrating stupid, insane coincidences - until The Grand Finale, late in the afternoon: when two 747s slammed into each other and left 583 poor souls burned to cinder.
I used to be into reading intensely about air disasters. I know the case very well. It was the swiss-cheese model of failure; coincidences lining up as holes one after another until the disaster went through. Murphy's law as I understand it usually applies to a single, critical failure.
 
Reuters article on the Bradley’s and Sea sparrow.

 
I would expect more complex work tho as Buk is generation ahead of Kub and each TEL has R (radar) element in it. They have to make the 9S35 to do CW illumination for the Sparrow and also work on launch envelopes too because well Sparrow is not 9M38.
 
Are any of you knowledgeable enough to speculate as to how this was accomplished?

The Ukrainians were able to modify their SA-11/17/27 launchers to fire Sea Sparrows?

No, it's a commercial kit that was developed by Raytheon back in the late 2000's for some Polish Army requirement. It was shown at Eurosatory MSPO in Kielce in 2012 IIRC.


The Ukrainian homebuilt modifications are far cruder than Sparrow slinging Kub. That's beyond their capability in terms of time, but I suppose if given a few years they could do it just fine, it's just not something that can be whipped up in like 4 or 5 months by the indigenous industry from nothing. Most likely it will be Raytheon directing the integration of the ESSM kit and modification of the vehicles using spare parts they brought along from America, in Poland, with Polish industry support, and then sending them back to Ukraine.

So no, the Ukrainians do nothing in this case, except provide the launchers to be modified into a system over a decade old.
 
Last edited:
Some nice pics of previous Kub SA-6/Sparrow-Aspide marriage attempts




What are the odds that the Czech Republic will put this system into production for the Ukrainian army?

On another note how many RIM-7M/Ps were manufactured?
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom