Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 49

Thread: Call me crazy... Air Launched SM-6?

  1. #16
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Vis-a-vi an incoming supersonic/hypersonic missile? Chaff and flares are cheaper, easier, and more than a one shot wonder and you save room for all the other gear you need for EW and battle management.
    Chimo

  2. #17
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Defense Professional
    Albany Rifles's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Apr 07
    Location
    Prince George, VA
    Posts
    9,114
    Holy Shit, Stitch!!!!

    What, a Nike-Hercules wasn't available?
    “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
    Mark Twain

  3. #18
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    9,124
    I think you guys have the range of SM-6 way off when air launched.

    That motor/rocket is designed to get it from stationary at sea level to altitude at XX MPH. Launched from a plane you are already traveling a couple hundred MPH and at altitude (or close to it).

    Its going to go way further.
    Human Scum. Proud Never Trumper

  4. #19
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Oct 06
    Posts
    788
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Grape View Post
    I think you guys have the range of SM-6 way off when air launched.

    That motor/rocket is designed to get it from stationary at sea level to altitude at XX MPH. Launched from a plane you are already traveling a couple hundred MPH and at altitude (or close to it).

    Its going to go way further.
    SM6 is listed at 3300 pounds... how far can an AWAC's see....? And at that weight... how many could you conceivably carry.....?

  5. #20
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,434
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Grape View Post
    I think you guys have the range of SM-6 way off when air launched.

    That motor/rocket is designed to get it from stationary at sea level to altitude at XX MPH. Launched from a plane you are already traveling a couple hundred MPH and at altitude (or close to it).

    Its going to go way further.
    I suspect that an air launched version would omit the booster segment to cut down on weight since the missile wouldn't be starting at sea level. I'm not sure how high and fast an SM-6 is going when the booster typically cuts out. From the videos I can find it appears the booster burns out at only a couple thousand feet, although the missile appears to be moving quite fast already. It could be that launching from 40,000 feet even without the booster increases the range dramatically.

    As mentioned previously, something with a ducted rocket/ramjet à la Meteor can buy you 400km range with similar top speed in a much smaller and lighter package. Still, I suspect that type of design sacrifices acceleration in order to achieve longevity, and would suffer accordingly at shorter ranged engagements. The SM-6 is a BIG bird to hang off of anything carrier launched. I think a P-8 could probably handle it sans booster though.

  6. #21
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,434
    Quote Originally Posted by bfng3569 View Post
    SM6 is listed at 3300 pounds... how far can an AWAC's see....? And at that weight... how many could you conceivably carry.....?
    A big chunk of that weight is the 1570 lb MK-72 solid booster, which could probably be omitted if it is being air launched.

    Name:  SM-6_141026_03.jpg
Views: 3242
Size:  967.7 KB

    If used in concert with forward stealthed platforms, the missile launcher doesn't have to see all that far, it only has to hand the missile off to friendlies closer to the action.
    Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 25 Mar 16, at 15:34.

  7. #22
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Oct 06
    Posts
    788
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    A big chunk of that weight is the 1570 lb MK-72 solid booster, which could probably be omitted if it is being air launched.

    Name:  SM-6_141026_03.jpg
Views: 3242
Size:  967.7 KB

    If used in concert with forward stealthed platforms, the missile launcher doesn't have to see all that far, it only has to hand the missile off to friendlies closer to the action.
    I guess part of what I was thinking though would be the long stand off range it could provide. Strap some to an awacs or P8 (or a B52 or B1 etc...) and be able to engage a target at long range instead of having to put that asset out forward

    If it were a stealthy platform out in front of an awacs pretty far the amraam or similar would work assuming the ranges wouldn be shorter.

    Having an air borne platform with long loiter time just cruising around doing its thing with the ability to engage a target at 300-400 km's... it's an existing and tested weapon, attaching to another existing and tested platform... I would think there could be a lot of bang for the buck so to speak (limited testing and development cost?)

    But obviously i could be way off there and I have no real knowledge of the actual engineering and testing required or the real feasibility... just a thought.
    Last edited by bfng3569; 25 Mar 16, at 17:06.

  8. #23
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,818
    Is this range necessary? Is it practical? Would it be practical for every single infantry squad to have 1 guy carrying a rifle in either 50 BMG or 336 Lapua?
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  9. #24
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Oct 06
    Posts
    788
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Is this range necessary? Is it practical? Would it be practical for every single infantry squad to have 1 guy carrying a rifle in either 50 BMG or 336 Lapua?
    Soooo... I'm gonna say you don't think so?

    Practical I can't answer.

    Necessary... I can't answer either.

    Is the B-21 necessary? The F35? The ddg1000? The Ford class?

    I keep hearing terms like dispersed lethality and force multipliers and projection etc etc being used a lot.

    I'd really like to hear your thoughts on the downfall for something like this? Cost vs capability?

    Using an infantry squad for comparison seems extremely off base.

  10. #25
    Senior Contributor Stitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    14 Nov 06
    Location
    Patterson, CA
    Posts
    3,080
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Is this range necessary? Is it practical? Would it be practical for every single infantry squad to have 1 guy carrying a rifle in either 50 BMG or 336 Lapua?
    The .50-cal is probably overkill for the majority of situations, especially considering how heavy the gun and the ammo are for that thing. I could see the .336 Lapua being standard issue; give one Designated Marksman an Accuracy International AXMC or a Barrett 98B, and call it good.
    "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

  11. #26
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    9,124
    Think of this in the anti-AWACS role.

    F-22 or stealthy UCAV gets close enough to get a bearing and good range swag on the enemy AWACS. Transmits that info through CEC. Far away, a loitering big plane launches a couple of SM-6.

    Enemy doesn't know its being targeted until SM-6 pops on its radar for final adjustments.

    F-22 doesn't have to risk being detected getting close enough for a shot. Or being spotted when the doors open to launch a 120.

    The threat of this capability pushes the enemys AWACS further to the rear. Which cuts down their detection/response time


    Gunnut. Infantry doesn't need a .50cal at the squad level. They have a radio. And with that, they can kill anything out as far as their eyes can see.
    Human Scum. Proud Never Trumper

  12. #27
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Defense Professional
    Albany Rifles's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Apr 07
    Location
    Prince George, VA
    Posts
    9,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Grape View Post
    Gunnut. Infantry doesn't need a .50cal at the squad level. They have a radio. And with that, they can kill anything out as far as their eyes can see.
    Gunny, admit it. You got a little chubby when you wrote that, didn't you?
    “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
    Mark Twain

  13. #28
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    I did not need that image in my head.
    Chimo

  14. #29
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    9,124
    Quote Originally Posted by Albany Rifles View Post
    Gunny, admit it. You got a little chubby when you wrote that, didn't you?
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers
    I did not need that image in my head.

    Got a BIG chubby when I wrote that.

    Col, Do I need to post pics of SWNBN to get that image out of your head?
    Human Scum. Proud Never Trumper

  15. #30
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Wouldn't work. I just got an image with you having a big chubby eagerly posting her pics.
    Chimo

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Don't call Reds terrorists, call them 'CNN'
    By troung in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 13 Jan 11,, 04:57
  2. Why cant Harpoons be vertically launched?
    By chakos in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 25 Apr 09,, 12:24
  3. First Iranian satellite launched
    By Ironduke in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 13 Feb 08,, 21:13
  4. UFOs in Chicago, and you call us floridians crazy
    By Gun Grape in forum International Economy
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 16 Jan 07,, 14:25
  5. Discovery Launched
    By bigross86 in forum World Affairs Board Pub
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05 Jul 06,, 14:30

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •