Long Range Engagement Weapon (LREW)

[flateric]

...

 

[bobbymike]

Great find sir!

Do you have the whole OSD Emerging Tech budget doc? Thanks

 

[Sferrin]

Wonder why they're using canards instead of a CUDA-like thruster arrangement. ???

 

[TomS]

Wonder why they're using canards instead of a CUDA-like thruster arrangement. ???

Looks almost exactly like the Excalibur canard section. Maybe it's just a case of the artist recycling existing graphics elements, not representing the specific design, which is still classified.

 

[Sferrin]

Wonder why they're using canards instead of a CUDA-like thruster arrangement. ???

Looks almost exactly like the Excalibur canard section.

Made me think of this:

 

[Hood]

Apparently that image was shown in a presentation last April by Chuck Perkins, the principal deputy to the assistant secretary of defense for research and engineering.
Flight are assuming that it was an unclassified concept image rather than an actual LREW design study.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/new-long-range-missile-project-emerges-in-us-budget-442816/

 

[Sferrin]

I would expect something more like CUDA with a booster, making the full assembly about the size of AIM-120.

 

[flateric]

Apparently that image was shown in a presentation last April by Chuck Perkins, the principal deputy to the assistant secretary of defense for research and engineering.
Flight are assuming that it was an unclassified concept image rather than an actual LREW design study.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/new-long-range-missile-project-emerges-in-us-budget-442816/

Probably that's why Perkins presentation is attached in the first message of the topic (which actually have initiated publication at Flight site), and image is labeled as 'LREW concept art'.

 

[marauder2048]

Apparently that image was shown in a presentation last April by Chuck Perkins, the principal deputy to the assistant secretary of defense for research and engineering.
Flight are assuming that it was an unclassified concept image rather than an actual LREW design study.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/new-long-range-missile-project-emerges-in-us-budget-442816/

Probably that's why Perkins presentation is attached in the first message of the topic (which actually have initiated publication at Flight site), and image is labeled as 'LREW concept art'.

The number of trade publications/outlets/hacks who shamelessly lift postings and analysis from this site without attribution is appalling.

One did PM me out of apparent guilt. You know who you are.

 

[flateric]

In this case there's no problem with Trimble as I shared discovery with him.

 

[marauder2048]

In this case there's no problem with Trimble as I shared discovery with him.

And proper attribution on Trimble's part would have made your sharing clear and
obviated the need for this discussion

 

[flateric]

Oh, I'm already too old for that wannabefamous stuff.

 

[marauder2048]

Oh, I'm already too old for that wannabefamous stuff.

Now we just need to get the people taking without attribution to feel the same way!

 

[flateric]

Do you have the whole OSD Emerging Tech budget doc? Thanks

http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/FY2018/budget_justification/pdfs/03_RDT_and_E/OSD_0400_PB_18_Justification_Book_Final.pdf

 

[stealthflanker]

Wonder why they're using canards instead of a CUDA-like thruster arrangement. ???

more room for motor maybe ?

 

[litzj]

Is that revive of AIM-152?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/29/AIM-152_AAAM.svg/310px-AIM-152_AAAM.svg.png

 

[SpudmanWP]

Is that revive of AIM-152?

I hope so.

 

[Sferrin]

I wonder how many of those they could have stuffed into an F-22. :'(

 

[SpudmanWP]

I did a napkin-analysis once and found that 7-8 could fit in each of the F-22's bays for a total of 14-16.

If they made a short-booster version as an Aim-9 replacement then 2-3 could fit in each Aim-9 bay.

Yeah, that much.

My calculations were based on that they are tube launched, can be packed in tight, can be stacked in two layers, and were planned to be launched via a tilting bed method (F-14 center-line plan).

 

[bring_it_on]

Length-wise, that might be a challenge. A 14ft length missile (168") would be more viable, though I suspect that the USN weapons bays will be long enough for that weapon as-is, since they'd have been sized for SM-6.

Though, modern technology would allow for a smaller seeker section to help keep the rocket motor length.

If you are not going for a 15-17 ft. length you don't really have much incentive to exceed the 11.5-13 inch diameter 13-13.5 ft. length and dimensions of the AARGM-ER/SiAW and MAKO class weapons . AARGM-ER now an operational form factor with a committed production run in the thousands. SiAW/AARGM-ER fits on F-35. MAKO which is slightly smaller (13 ft length vs 13.4 ft) in length but slightly larger in diameter (13 inches) also fits F-22A. I would start by leveraging the production plant and supply chain of AARGM-ER and seeing what seeker and other design elements can be added and make design changes while staying compliant with IWB fit. This is a digitally designed weapon so this is precisely the iterative development the technology lends itself to.

Also, Northrop Grumman recently posted media showing an air-breathing AARGM-ER / SiAW in a very similar form factor to the current weapon (certainly smaller than the bulkier air-breathing anti ship weapon they've shown in the past). An air to air optimized missile with those dimensions would be pretty cool as well. We also don't know what the post MTA 'enduring' SiAW would look like. It certainly won't be AARGM-ER with a new fuze and warhead if one goes by expected fly-away unit cost (2.5 times that of interim modified AARGM-ER AF is buying).