Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    so I go into a thread/sub-forum that I usually don't go into, and...............this happens.

    this is like the anti-chubby to end all anti-chubbies.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

    Comment


    • #32
      Sorry...my bad.

      And I think I need a brain rake....or a cold shower.
      “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
      Mark Twain

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
        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.
        Very good point. I hadn't thought of that. But wouldn't this still be a very niche weapon? We need a large platform with long loitering capability to employ this AWACS-whacker. If we use a bomber, that means the bomber won't be....bombing stuff. We could use older F-15s. But do they have some kind of weight concerns with bringing back unused missiles in the 2000lb range?
        "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
          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?
          Wait....what....gunny has a big chubbie for SWNBN?
          "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
            Sorry...my bad.
            I was going to blame Yeller.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by gunnut View Post
              Very good point. I hadn't thought of that. But wouldn't this still be a very niche weapon? We need a large platform with long loitering capability to employ this AWACS-whacker. If we use a bomber, that means the bomber won't be....bombing stuff. We could use older F-15s. But do they have some kind of weight concerns with bringing back unused missiles in the 2000lb range?
              F-15s may be able to handle 2000 lbs of weight on some of their inboard ordnance stations, but I think you'll need a larger aircraft to handle the size of those suckers. Nobody likes dragging 22 ft long missiles on the ground.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                I was going to blame Yeller.
                You're blaming Yeller for your chubbie?
                Chimo

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                  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.
                  Would the SM-6's RCS be big enough to be picked up at a distance range by a modern AEWC though?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                    You're blaming Yeller for your chubbie?
                    This thread is SO off-topic . . .
                    "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

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Skywatcher View Post
                      Would the SM-6's RCS be big enough to be picked up at a distance range by a modern AEWC though?
                      Probably; it's got the same guidance system as an AMRAAM, so it's active radar would probably be fairly easy to detect.
                      "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

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Stitch View Post
                        Probably; it's got the same guidance system as an AMRAAM, so it's active radar would probably be fairly easy to detect.
                        AMRAAM and SM6 both have datalinks. They would not go active until they are close, by which point it would be too late.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by citanon View Post
                          AMRAAM and SM6 both have datalinks. They would not go active until they are close, by which point it would be too late.
                          On that note.

                          The US has already run tests with the SM missile and the F-35 fighter-bomber, in which an SM missile has been fired from a ship but with no target identified. An F-35 in flight took control of the missile in midair, and then as the missile proceeded downrange, handed control of that missile to another F-35. Thus you could imagine a small, hardened launcher on an island popping up a missile and flinging it way into China, where it gets vectored on to target by a stealthy F-35.
                          Link

                          We are doing experimentation today with the F-35. … We’re capturing data and we’re determining whether or not we can actually close that fire control loop. That is a huge huge thing for our future. You look at other sensors that are out there that allow us to do other missions like the anti-surface mode with [Standard Missile]-6, being able to shoot far and take out surface targets – that’s pretty cool stuff.”
                          Link

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Folks, just a reminder.....OPSEC.
                            “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
                            Mark Twain

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Stitch View Post
                              This thread is SO off-topic . . .
                              Notice I had nothing to do with it.
                              "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by gunnut View Post
                                Notice I had nothing to do with it.
                                For once . . .
                                "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

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X