• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Lockheed Martin CUDA Air-to-Air Missile

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
6
FY18 looks like tough but it could be worked into the FY19 request.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
216

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
6
I think the concept of using a family to cover the entire mission set is actually a smart decision from a development stand point..

The Supersonic Testbed Risk Reduction (SSTRR) represents work on a future weapon in the same size class as the AIM-120 Amraam. The company is carrying out trade studies involving air-breathing and rocket propulsion, including multi-pulse motors, hit-to-kill technology and different guidance technologies. “Everyone wants everything,” a Lockheed Martin engineer explains. “If everyone in the room is crying, we’ve got it about right.”

On show for the first time at AFA is a model of Lockheed Martin’s Cuda, a so-called “Halfraam” weapon about half as long as an Amraam and compact enough to fit six missiles into each bay of the F-35 or F-22. Cuda draws on the hit-to-kill technology used on the PAC-3 missile, is designed to have a radar seeker and has both movable tails and forward attitude control motors for high agility. The company is not disclosing Cuda’s design range, but one variation of the concept is a two-stage missile with a similar total length to Amraam, presumably with the goal of covering a wide range envelope with a single missile design.
http://aviationweek.com/awin/lockheed-reveals-new-air-launched-missile-concepts

It would be interesting to see how Raytheon approaches this since they have their very successful AMRAAM program to sustain and to ensure that any successor covers their entire customer base, not all of which would be operating 5th generation aircraft. They are working on a 3 year DOD funded CUDA like concept as well. The Israel also has a Hit to Kill missile in their future based on the Stunner and that would no doubt be something that they look to integrate with the F-35.

Interestingly, asking for an AMRAAM replacement seems to be fashionable for outgoing ACC bosses. I remember General Hostage echoing similar sentiments close to his retirement. So far the USAF and USN have successfully pushed it down the road. The 2030 study does inspire some confidence that they'll finally pick up from where the T3 left off more so now that with the Aim-9XII, and the Aim-120D online they have very little in terms of a Program of record for something in the 2020's (besides the Aim-9X Blk II+) .

The Meteor program is already exploring plans to switch to an AESA seeker to better cover the A2G mission so it seems quite likely that by 2030, the European partner nations could build something that is similar to the JDRADM in concept if not capability and given that F-35 integration would have occurred by then, it would put serious pressure on the US OEM's if they want to stay competitive. A faster, more maneuverable missile that addresses magazine depth is a great way to maintain an edge, at least on 5th generation platforms.
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
8,654
Reaction score
105
sferrin said:
George Allegrezza said:
Hawk Carlisle (one of the greatest general's names ever) says next-gen AAM soon to be a program of record:

http://www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Pages/2016/July%202016/July%2012%202016/NEXTAAM.aspx
Seems a little muddled. He says they need an AIM-120 replacement but also that it needs to be smaller. I don't think CUDA was ever planned to have AIM-120D range. Maybe CUDA and a 2-stage variant? ???
With all the talk lately of advanced nano-energetics maybe future AMRAAM with have longer legs and CUDA with have AMRAAM range??
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
6
Recent comments by Tim Cahill, Vice-President, Air and Missile Defense Systems, Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control to Jane's Defence Weekly (Feb.2017).


CUDA is at an earlier stage of development, but it is coming along "really well", Cahill noted. "It is defined, modelled, and we are now working hard on the prototype airframes and on the seeker concepts," he said. As the threats become more complex, Cahill added, having highly manoeuvrable hit-to-kill systems in a smaller profile will prove particularly valuable, especially at close range.

"All of our hit-to-kill developments leverage the basic PAC-3 technology and capability - that combination of seeker technology, advanced attitude control systems, and robust airframe that can turn on a dime and follow a rapidly manoeuvering target - and optimise that combination in a smaller profile," Cahill explained. "With CUDA, you're talking about a PAC-3 capability with a front-end sensor the size of a coffee cup; with MHTK it's even smaller. So we're essentially taking the PAC-3 capability and miniaturising it across all of this range of interceptors."
 

thefrecklepuny

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 19, 2008
Messages
61
Reaction score
1
bobbymike said:
sferrin said:
George Allegrezza said:
Hawk Carlisle (one of the greatest general's names ever) says next-gen AAM soon to be a program of record:

http://www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Pages/2016/July%202016/July%2012%202016/NEXTAAM.aspx
Seems a little muddled. He says they need an AIM-120 replacement but also that it needs to be smaller. I don't think CUDA was ever planned to have AIM-120D range. Maybe CUDA and a 2-stage variant? ???
With all the talk lately of advanced nano-energetics maybe future AMRAAM with have longer legs and CUDA with have AMRAAM range??
Perhaps make it modular with plug-in fuel and rocket modules?
 

lantinian

Inspired
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
495
Reaction score
2
Website
www.lantinian.blogspot.com
It's sound like a smart idea if there are two missiles (AMRAAM size and Halframm) and all they differ by is the amount of rocket fuel, however I don't thinks it's practical.

IMHO, creating 2 unique missiles is the best approach

A long range weapon (like the one the Russians and Chinese have) also has a big warhead as I doubt you can take down an AWAKS with a single hit to kill missile. I also believe the flight / maneuvering profile of both missiles will be different requiring a different propulsion and flight controls.

I do think it would make sence for both missiles to have A2G capability

I am curious, in the case of F-22 if there are any proposals to somehow fit 2 CUDA class weapons into each side bay
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
6
I wonder what sort of altitudes, ranges and profiles we can expect if we bring back the plan for an ALHTK with a focus on providing longer ranged networked attack options from legacy aircraft further behind. It is still a sub 1000 lb. 11 inch diameter interceptor with a dual pulse motor and a versatile seeker. It already comes with an X band data link and is already in volume production.
 

Attachments

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
216
AWESOME. Now if they just come up with a variant with a booster with an OAL about the same as AIM-120. :eek:
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
8,654
Reaction score
105
sferrin said:
AWESOME. Now if they just come up with a variant with a booster with an OAL about the same as AIM-120. :eek:
There has been some advances in energetics here's hoping they get to AMRAAM range in a smaller package.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
216
It's behind a paywall anyway (that even a standard AvWeek subscription login doesn't get past :'( ).
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
6
Cuda Lockheed's M-SHORAD tested :

Lockheed Martin conducts initial flight test of new M-SHORAD Future Interceptor

Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control on 14 November conducted a successful initial ballistic flight test of its new M-SHORAD Future Interceptor from a Stryker Maneuver SHORAD Launcher (MSL) at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico.

The M-SHORAD Future Interceptor leverages Lockheed Martin and government technology investment in a 6 ft-class hit-to-kill interceptor designed to defeat unmanned aircraft systems (UASs), fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft, and cruise missiles.

"The 5 inch diameter interceptor fits in the same envelope as the AGM-114L Longbow Hellfire missile currently being integrated on the MSL for the US Army's Stryker-based interim manoeuvre SHORAD [short-range air-defence] capability, and provides significantly more range and manoeuvrability," a Lockheed Martin spokesperson told Jane's .

"The internally funded test objectives were to demonstrate key technologies, vehicle stability, and range. The Interceptor performance matched our predictions," the spokesperson said.

"The driver for this development is how to address air-breathing threats for US Army manoeuvre forces beyond its current Stinger/Stryker capability," Tim Cahill, Vice President, Integrated Air and Missile Defense, at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control told Jane's . "We've designed a medium-size hit-to-kill for what we believe will be the [US] Army's range requirement for an M-SHORAD missile. The imperative of M-SHORAD is range and capability in the size of a missile that is manageable and affordable; Stinger is performance limited, other missiles are too long. So I believe it should be a hit-to-kill missile for M-SHORAD, and we will follow the PAC-3 MSE formula for both future land and sea applications," he added.

Lockheed Martin has not disclosed additional specific detail on the M-SHORAD Future Interceptor, including its interception range, weight, and homing guidance.
 

Attachments

Dragon029

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
668
Reaction score
25
Is there any chance that they're using the CUDA mock-up just to give a conceptual idea of what they're aiming to build? Or seeing as they've performed a flight test, would that indicate that CUDA really is being developed (perhaps as different design variants) for both M-SHORAD and SACM? I imagine that if they're able to use the same or a very similar missile in both programs this could accelerate development by providing two channels of funding.
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
6
There is a chance although the image I have posted is from the full version of the Jane's article. I believe it was taken at AUSA 2018. Given the AvWeek article stating that they are being funded by the USAF for CUDA demonstrations, it makes sense for Lockheed to internally test it for the M-SHORAD mission given its size and the fact that it would be very well suited for the role. It could also possibly allow them to put the missile in production (if selected) earlier given that M-SHORAD investment is being increased by the Army.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,010
Reaction score
32
The comment about fitting in the same dimensiknal envelope as Longbow Hellfire also raises the potential to use this on LCS using modified VL Hellfire launcher.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
216
Moose said:
The comment about fitting in the same dimensiknal envelope as Longbow Hellfire also raises the potential to use this on LCS using modified VL Hellfire launcher.
Interesting that the diameter is only 5". I'd thought the general consensus was that it was 6".
 

dumpster4

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Messages
8
Reaction score
3
sferrin said:
AWESOME. Now if they just come up with a variant with a booster with an OAL about the same as AIM-120. :eek:
"The company is not disclosing Cuda’s design range, but one variation of the concept is a two-stage
missile with a similar total length to Amraam, presumably with the goal of covering a wide range
envelope with a single missile design."

See:

http://aviationweek.com/awin/lockheed-reveals-new-air-launched-missile-concepts


Sounds similar to the LREW:

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/15692/the-pentagon-is-quietly-developing-an-next-generation-long-range-air-to-air-missile
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
6
The USAF LREW study contract was awarded to Raytheon though under the Agile Acquisition Program effort (of which LREW was one award) contracts were awarded to Lockheed, MBDA, Aerojet for a whole host of programs ( not linked to LREW).
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
6
lastdingo said:
I doubt a hit-to-kill missile can be trusted against cruise missiles. They're really small targets.

For the point defense mission, I'd say let them demonstrate effectiveness just as the IDF let the Stunner prove itself out against cruise missiles during trials. A lot has likely happened in terms of advancements when it comes to HTK since the PAC-3 was developed. It is also possible that they arrive to some sort of LE like solution and not go with an end product that is completely devoid of a warhead.
 

litzj

BLOG : http://jaesan-aero.blogspot.com/
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
207
Reaction score
2
Website
jaesan-aero.blogspot.com
lastdingo said:
I doubt a hit-to-kill missile can be trusted against cruise missiles. They're really small targets.
relatively less maneuverable cruise missile is easier than jet fighters,

though these are smaller than the jets
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
6
I guess out in the open (area defense) they tend to stress sensors and seekers, particularly so when they are flying really low. However, for M-SHORAD and SHORAD the use case is probably at short tactical ranges and leveraging capable short-medium range radars so that is less of an issue.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
216
lastdingo said:
I doubt a hit-to-kill missile can be trusted against cruise missiles. They're really small targets.
They're quite a bit larger than an RV, which they've been hitting with HTK weapons for decades.

PAC-3 vs cruise missile 17 years ago:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGWyBTWfZGE

PAC-3 vs manuevering Pershing II RV

https://youtu.be/cmjxQM2I7JU
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
216
"Roper notes that he wanted a program to come out every three years. “We would never get relief on schedule. We would trade performance to hold to schedule. And I love that idea for the Air Force,” he said.

The fiscal 2020 budget proposal seeks to usher in a new era of long-range high-speed missiles. A $10.5 billion plan to develop a series of prototypes for hypersonic boost-glide vehicles has captured most of the attention, but the budget submittal also proposes introducing a wide range of new air- and ground-launched missiles.

A portion of the classified NGAD program has been devoted to developing new weapons to augment the capabilities of existing air interceptor missiles such as the AIM-120C/D and AIM-9X. In fiscal 2020, the Air Force wants to launch the first “scaled flight demonstrations” for a new generation of air-launched weapons, including miniature self-defense munitions and “multishot” air-to-air weapons.

The latter was formerly known as the Small Advanced Counter-air Missile (SACM), but has been renamed within the Air Force Research Laboratory as the Counter-Air Science and Technology (CAST) program. While SACM was focused on developing a missile half the size of the AIM-120 but with similar range, CAST takes a broader approach. Under CAST, the same technology that enables AIM-120-like range in a vehicle half the size can produce a weapon with double the range in a similar form factor."


https://aviationweek.com/defense/us-defense-budget-proposal-favors-next-gen-over-current-production
 
Top