Current US hypersonic weapons projects. (General)

This one is simple enough, not complex like scramjet and hypersonic boost glider. Hopefully they can do it

Do you have a link to the details? The Wikipedia doesn't appear to have anything.
 
Do you have a link to the details? The Wikipedia doesn't appear to have anything.
My guess is basically a PrSM with chines, attachment points and a 350lb warhead instead of a 200lb one. Theoretically it could manage ~1,000km from a high altitude supersonic launch off an F-15EX or similar. At 4m long it should fit internally in F-35A and Cs and maybe F-22s?

1712756940125.png

When you look at the big picture integration between that capability and the US Space Force GMTI capability, it's pretty game changing. Certainly wouldn't like to be a SAM radar operator.

Six per F-35 looks cool. An F-15EX must be able to carry a bunch.
And therein lies the real beauty. It isn't a huge 1 shot per aircraft missile.
 
Last edited:
There may be 4 flight test of TBG (air launch).

According to previous budget, Raytheon and lockheed both have made 2 test vehicle.

TBG will end by 2024, no idea whether Navy or airforce will consider to transit it from RD to formal weapon development, especially TBG is contiuous to develop Navy variant which can be compatible with MK41 VLS.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20240410-221407.png
    Screenshot_20240410-221407.png
    533.6 KB · Views: 26
TBG FY2021-2024

FY2021-2022 seems like vehicle1 occur captive carriage flight testing fail but they fix the problem and return to flight test (see fy2022 document).

Second TBG performer refer to raytheon, which raytheon claim their winged glider is more advanced:


"... Meanwhile, Raytheon continues to develop its version of a winged glider under the TBG program as an alternative to Lockheed’s AGM-183A ARRW. The company’s goal is not to deliver a “me-too” version of the Lockheed design but something even more capable.

“We focused on capabilities that we don’t believe ARRW has,” Bussing says. “So I would look at Raytheon’s TBG solution as maybe the ARRW-2.” ..."
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20240410-221407.png
    Screenshot_20240410-221407.png
    533.6 KB · Views: 14
  • img-17127601158525b63645844337766a2b331d00a88734772f6811874c8a4a73026e4cd5b8b1ea6.jpg
    img-17127601158525b63645844337766a2b331d00a88734772f6811874c8a4a73026e4cd5b8b1ea6.jpg
    355.2 KB · Views: 6
  • img-17127600935559c34fe5777afe6463d89e4f5c648bacc78d02094972b5d754c6bab32adc33023.jpg
    img-17127600935559c34fe5777afe6463d89e4f5c648bacc78d02094972b5d754c6bab32adc33023.jpg
    196.5 KB · Views: 6
  • img-1712760072507e3d904975f7bd4582b6a4731db4ab6ae2cf5e15ccf98a0f3440a2ba8098079a3.jpg
    img-1712760072507e3d904975f7bd4582b6a4731db4ab6ae2cf5e15ccf98a0f3440a2ba8098079a3.jpg
    145.2 KB · Views: 5
  • img-1712760048543fc2bc198c838c56cca1204a1c1a2e25211079411e8cdf18a311554ba900561d9.jpg
    img-1712760048543fc2bc198c838c56cca1204a1c1a2e25211079411e8cdf18a311554ba900561d9.jpg
    341.7 KB · Views: 38
Six per F-35 looks cool. An F-15EX must be able to carry a bunch.
But AARGM-ER could be carried 10 per F-35 (8 external+2 internal).

Is that mean LM's SiAW proposal is heavier than NG?
 

Attachments

  • img-17127613632852c910634c14e894d98550e83c1a1d748d783e2d54924c1b8fb77c59b523b0dc2.jpg
    img-17127613632852c910634c14e894d98550e83c1a1d748d783e2d54924c1b8fb77c59b523b0dc2.jpg
    134.7 KB · Views: 53
This one is simple enough, not complex like scramjet and hypersonic boost glider. Hopefully they can do it

They can do it; the question is whether anyone wants to buy it. It seems to fill a space already occupied by SiAW in terms of size and capability, though perhaps with more speed and range. It does look more or less like an air launched PrSM, and given that Incr 2 has a terminal seeker that can work against ships, the idea should work well enough were anyone to want to pay for it.
 
They can do it; the question is whether anyone wants to buy it. It seems to fill a space already occupied by SiAW in terms of size and capability, though perhaps with more speed and range. It does look more or less like an air launched PrSM, and given that Incr 2 has a terminal seeker that can work against ships, the idea should work well enough were anyone to want to pay for it.
Commonality with the PrSM (if we're correct) should also reduce the production costs of both missiles.
 
that mean LM's SiAW proposal is heavier than NG?
Probaly. AARGM-ER only has 68% of the diameter of PrSM and this could be made even longer to 4.1m from 3.96m. well a higher diameter is also possible to around ~450-480mm but it looks not that fat (atleast as fat as a MK.84 or JSM).

Edit:
Lockheed's old Video for SiAW which only Shows the launch of the missile.
View: https://youtu.be/bqGzt64U-i4?si=TjdrDXrP1AJPAFS5
 
Last edited:
RUMINT is describing this as "ready to cook," so I'm interested to see what we hear next. LM doesn't burn it's own cash without reason.

It may well be that it gets bought as a way of diversifying the production of munitions, even if it has a lot of overlap with SiAM. USAF is trying to stockpile as many PGMs and AAMs as it can in light of how exhausting the Ukraine war has been on everyone’s inventories. AGM-158 production is expanding and programs like ERAM (or USN MACE) seek to add faster to produce, lower cost weapons. We shall see.

Did not LM also produce a SiAM concept? They might simply have carried on development even after losing the contract.
 
USAF is trying to stockpile as many PGMs and AAMs as it can in light of how exhausting the Ukraine war has been on everyone’s inventories.

So the USAF is going back to Cold War levels of munitions production and stockpiling?
 
Did not LM also produce a SiAM concept? They might simply have carried on development even after losing the contract.

I've lost track. Do you mean SiAW, or is SiAM something different? If SiAW, there is a video just a couple of post up about LM's concept.
 
„Osterhoudt described the Mako, which is powered by a solid-fuel rocket motor, as “the missile of 13s.” This reflects the missile’s dimensions — 13 feet long and 13 inches in diameter — as well as its weight of 1,300 pounds, including a 130-pound warhead.....
And when I say the next steps, it’s Preliminary Design Review Technology Readiness Level (TR) 6 or above.“
https://www.twz.com/air/the-lowdown-on-lockheeds-newly-revealed-mako-hypersonic-missile
 
Air-launched PrSM makes sense, just like the AS-24 Killjoy. Might explain ARRW being cancelled as well if you have a smaller missile that can do the same mission from a larger variety of platforms.
 
„Osterhoudt described the Mako, which is powered by a solid-fuel rocket motor, as “the missile of 13s.” This reflects the missile’s dimensions — 13 feet long and 13 inches in diameter — as well as its weight of 1,300 pounds, including a 130-pound warhead.....
And when I say the next steps, it’s Preliminary Design Review Technology Readiness Level (TR) 6 or above.“
https://www.twz.com/air/the-lowdown-on-lockheeds-newly-revealed-mako-hypersonic-missile
"PDR". So they have the challenge coins and powerpoints nailed. I am shocked. Shocked I tell you.
 
Air-launched PrSM makes sense, just like the AS-24 Killjoy. Might explain ARRW being cancelled as well if you have a smaller missile that can do the same mission from a larger variety of platforms.

It would not be anything like ARRW in terms of range or speed. It is essentially a different flavor of SiAW.

ARRW was probably cancelled because it was too expensive, serviced a niche use case (likely limited to static,soft targets), and was limited to B-52s which would likely already be over tasked.
 
Last edited:
Yes. Would be interresting to now if a Booster small enough to fit to make it achieve air launched capabilitys.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom