The US Navy received long-range air-to-air missiles

21
The US Navy received long-range air-to-air missiles

Photos of F/A-18E/F Super Hornet aircraft with a new type of weapon have appeared on the Internet. The new missile program and its implementation could mark a scientific and technological revolution in the fight against air targets... and even more.

According to The War Zone, the AIM-174B is a new air-to-air missile. Its appearance marks a significant increase in the capabilities of the US Navy in the fight against air targets, although the use of a new weapons may go beyond the air sphere. The missile, also known as the SM-6 ALC (Air-Launched Configuration), has officially entered service with the US Navy, Naval News has confirmed.



The weapon, photographed by aerial spotters during the RIMPAC 2024 maneuvers, has not yet been officially announced. The sudden appearance of a new weapon without a pre-presented development program in the press remains largely a mystery. This reflects well the ability of the United States to conduct secret programs and the ability of Americans to avoid leaking information to the press when necessary. There are many signs that the F/A-18 aircraft will be equipped with weapons that could radically change the balance of power in the Pacific.

As can be seen from photographs published on social networks, the missile is suspended on the underwing pylon of the BRU-32B/A type of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. A few years ago, visually similar weapons were spotted underneath another aircraft of this type. However, that rocket was painted orange, which could mean that it was just an experimental product, a mass-size model, or maybe even a flying target.

AF/A-18E Super Hornet with VFA-113 on board military USS Carl Vinson with a DATM-174B training missile during exercises at RIMPAC 2024.

All three F/A-18E/F VFA CVW-2 are assigned to the air wing of the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson and, apparently, received the AIM-174B missile launcher.

In recent weeks, the new missiles have been seen in gray with a white nose cone, which is typical of the production air-to-air missiles adopted by the US Air Force and Navy. The rocket's glider is also visible in great detail in the photographs. On its body there is an eloquent marking DATM-174B. The abbreviation means that the missile is special, test, the usual designation for a combat missile is AIM-174B. At the RIMPAC exercises, F/A-18E/F fighters were also seen carrying missiles with the designation NAIM-174B suspended on underwing pylons, with the prefix N indicating modifications for special tests when a return to the original configuration is not planned.

The type number in the missile's designation "174" and the geometric and aerodynamic exterior of the missile's airframe reveal the mystery of the weapon's origin. RIM-174B is the designation for the ship-to-air missile, also known in the US Navy as the SM-6 (Standard Missile-6) Block IA. In the US Navy, it is used to combat aerodynamic and ballistic targets, and also has limited capabilities for attacking surface targets. The AIM-174 is a variant of the SM-6, adapted for use on combat aircraft.

A rocket modified for air launches can use the altitude and speed of its launch vehicle as launch conditions. For this reason, it lacks the Mk 72 solid rocket launch booster used in the original RIM-174B variant, launched from the ship's Mk 41 vertical launch system (VLS).

The AIM-174B missile without the Mk 72 booster weighs 1 lb ± 890 lb (14 kg ± 857 kg). The missile's flight speed at the final part of the trajectory can reach Mach 6 (3,5 m/s) when intercepting air targets, aerodynamic and ballistic at altitudes up to 1 feet (050 meters) or Mach 110 (000 m/s) when striking ground and surface targets at a range of 34 nautical miles (000 km).

The missile has an active radar seeker from the AIM -120 AMRAAM air-to-air missile for targeting the target in the final part of the flight path, but, unlike AMRAAM, it is not equipped with an inertial system as the main one for controlling the missile in the initial and middle part of the flight path, but a programmable GPS navigation system, which is more accurate and allows you to do without a radio altimeter when attacking surface and ground targets in flight at low and ultra-low altitudes.

And instead of a corrective radio command system, like AMRAAM, a network correction system, Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC), is used. At the declared flight ranges of 370–460 km, radio command systems are dead as corrective systems, regardless of the operating frequency range.

Another key difference between the CEC system and hopelessly outdated radio command systems is the ability to receive corrective commands from other more knowledgeable target designation sources, from F-35 aircraft patrolling in the area of ​​​​the expected target location, AWACS aircraft and Boeing E-3 Sentry or ships equipped Aegis combat system.

Brand New Features


It seems that as a result of this modification, the weapon does not lose its aerodynamic parameters, including launch range. In this regard, an air-launched missile may even outperform its prototype, a ship-based missile. Considering that estimates of the launch range of the "traditional" ship-launched RIM-174B range from 240 to 460 km, this means that the AIM-174B may be the longest-range air-to-air missile in its class, surpassing the Russian R-37 (AA -13 Axehead in NATO nomenclature), Chinese PL-15 (CH-AA-10 Abaddon) or European Meteor.

Apparently, in a relatively simple way, without the need to launch new production lines, since the AIM-174B uses the technology of the proven production SM-6 missile with high performance, the Americans took the shortest path, which will allow them to quite quickly create a new type of weapon with high tactical capabilities. technical characteristics and be at the forefront of global competition.

This is important because Russian, Chinese and European competitors have succeeded in creating longer-range air-to-air missiles, and the Americans seem to be lagging behind in this segment. Their 5th generation aircraft, thanks to the reduced effective surface for reflecting radar waves, can, in their opinion, quietly approach the enemy and be the first to open fire with AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles. One might get the impression that this is enough for them.

However, in recent years the situation has changed. It turned out that Washington is not able to replace its entire fleet of fighters with 5th generation aircraft, so it will rely on 4th generation aircraft for many years to come. Such aircraft not only remain in US service, but also continue to be produced today (F-15EX Eagle II, F/A-18E/F Super Hornet).

To effectively use them to gain air superiority, it was necessary to create a weapon for them that could hit the enemy from a safe distance. Aircraft without stealth features have certain advantages that their younger 5th generation counterparts do not have. These include, among other things, a high payload: for the F-15EX it is 15 tons, for the F/A-18E/F this value is 8 tons, as well as large restrictions on the weight and size characteristics of missiles in the internal compartments and on the external sling for the F -35 A/B/C. Stealth fighters such as the F-35 are not in themselves a barrier to the development of longer-range weapons, but their weapons bays do not allow the use of large air-to-air missiles anyway.

Will the AIM-174 be the successor to the AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles in service with the US Navy?

The answer is definitely no.

First, a program is currently underway to acquire a completely different air-to-air missile that will replace existing medium-range weapons. The AIM-260 JATM (Joint Advanced Tactical Missile) is a dedicated missile with a range approximately twice that of the AMRAAM. This weapon should be similar to the AIM-120 in size and weight (length - 3,65 m, starting weight - 162 kg), and also be suspended under the same pylons as its predecessors. It will also fit into the weapons bays of 5th generation fighters.

In this context, the AIM-174B will become a more specialized weapon with a significantly longer range. It also appears that such a large missile will be used for missions typical of interceptors such as the once famous F-14 Tomcat, equipped with AIM-54 Phoenix missiles.

Due to its dimensions and weight, the missile length is about 6,5 m, the launch weight is about 860 kg, the AIM-174B will be used to destroy mainly large and valuable targets, such as: strategic bombers, cruise missile carriers, early warning aircraft, reconnaissance aircraft or tanker aircraft. Meanwhile, the newest AIM-260 missile will be used primarily to combat tactical aviation enemy, that is, in the role that AMRAAM plays today.

The US Navy confirms that "the new missile, officially known as AIM-174, has been operationally deployed and is the longest-range air-to-air missile ever deployed" (Navy news, navalnewscom, July 5, 2024).

Like the classic SM-6, the AIM-174B could also find limited use against surface and ground targets. The mass of the SM-6 high-explosive fragmentation warhead is 64 kg. This is a lot for an anti-aircraft missile, but relatively little for a weapon designed to attack surface and ground targets.

However, this may not be as big a problem as it seems at first glance, because the very high speed of the rocket at the final stage of its trajectory gives it enormous kinetic energy. Therefore, it is possible that, in addition to its main role in combating the most valuable air targets, the AIM-174B will receive additional tasks in combating ground targets.

Multipurpose weapon


The United States appears to be working on a promising and very advanced long-range all-purpose missile that could have a major impact on the future battlefield, especially in the European and Pacific theaters and potential wars against Russia and China. The new missile could allow Super Hornets to effectively defend their own fleet (aircraft carrier groups) from anti-ship, cruise and ballistic missiles, as well as to strike our ships and the ships of the allied Chinese fleet, as well as ground targets - for example, deployed air defense systems.

Re-equipping multi-role fighters such as the F/A-18E/F with the AIM-174B missile will make them interceptors that will follow in the footsteps of the legendary F-14 Tomcat and at the same time become many times more versatile. There are many indications that Super Hornets will be able to engage enemy aircraft without the risk of getting within range of their weapons.

It should be remembered that the SM-6 is one of the main weapons of American ships equipped with the AEGIS system, i.e. the US Navy's anti-aircraft and anti-missile shield. There is no doubt that the AIM-174B missile will be capable of operating in a network-centric environment, like its anti-aircraft counterpart RIM-174B (SM-6 Block Ia).

It's hard to miss the potential of a long-range air-to-air missile that can be targeted by any aircraft, such as an F-35C Lightning II or E-2D Advanced Hawkeye airborne early warning aircraft, or a ship equipped with a high-powered radar, such as a destroyer. like "Arleigh Burke". In many cases, this may even be necessary, since the AIM-174B's current intended range exceeds the capabilities of the AN/APG-79 airborne radar used in the latest Super Hornets.

Although the US Navy has officially confirmed the adoption of the AIM-174, a similar step from the US Air Force should not be expected. There are two reasons for this.

Firstly, the Standard family of missiles have been in service with the US Navy for almost six decades - the first version of the RIM-66 Standard MR was put into service in 1967! And in the US Air Force they are a foreign body.

Secondly, the US Air Force has several missile programs of its own, such as the long-range weapons program marketed by RTX (formerly Raytheon Technologies).

A separate issue is the readiness of new weapons for production.

While the JATM missile has been officially coded AIM-260, which could mean it will soon enter service, the same cannot be said for other types of long-range weapons being developed for the US Air Force. The AIM-174B could be an interesting alternative in the special missions weapons segment, especially since the F-15EX seems to be an ideal carrier for a weapon of this size and capability.

Moreover, like the US Navy, the US Air Force plans to integrate 4th and 5th generation fighters to take advantage of the payload of the former and the stealth and situational awareness of the latter. For this reason, it cannot be ruled out that the aviation modification of the SM-6 will eventually be installed on the F-15EX Eagle II fighter.

I do not share the wild enthusiasm of Western experts about this missile. Yes, its control and guidance system is innovative, one might even say revolutionary.

The airframe of the missile is based on the old "pre-revolutionary" SM-2 RIM-174B. Its engine produces 4000 pounds (1800 kilograms) of thrust and runs for 30 seconds. This means that only during the first 30 seconds of flight the rocket accelerates, and then, during the autonomous portion of the trajectory (AUT), which does not exceed 30 kilometers, it continues to move due to the accumulated kinetic energy. However, the speed of the rocket slows down due to braking in dense layers of the atmosphere, and the engine remains turned off.

What speed will the missile have when approaching a target, for example, a surface ship at a distance of 400–460 kilometers? It's a difficult question. Perhaps the speed will be 160 or even 180 meters per second. Will the ship's air defense system be able to effectively counter such a threat? This is certainly an interesting question.
21 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -9
    15 July 2024 05: 54
    There are many signs that the F/A-18 aircraft will be equipped with weapons that could radically change the balance of power in the Pacific.

    Well, finally! One interceptor missile on an outdated model aircraft - and it’s immediately “radical.” But what about the R-37, which was put into service in 2014?
    1. +3
      15 July 2024 06: 17
      Since when did the Super Hornet become an obsolete aircraft? With your logic, the Su-30 and Su-35 are also outdated aircraft, because most ordinary users cannot distinguish them from the Su-27, originally from the 80s of the last century.
      And regarding the topic, how many people have analogues of the R-37 and the new US aim 174 missile? If you take off your rose-colored glasses, then the US counterpart on paper seems to look like our best rocket.
      In general, it feels like the author watched one blogger, he had a stream 2 days ago and there was a topic about this rocket.
      1. -5
        15 July 2024 06: 25
        Su-30 and Su-35 are the same outdated aircraft, because most ordinary users they are indistinguishable from the Su-27

        Sorry, but I did not catch the depth of your thought.
        1. +2
          15 July 2024 06: 33
          Depth of thought, since when is the Super Hornet an obsolete aircraft?
          Or it will be news to you that there is simply an f-18 Hornet and an f-18 Super Hornet. They are similar in appearance, although they differ noticeably in some ways. Like our Su-27 with its younger brothers Su-30 and Su-35.
          1. +3
            15 July 2024 07: 43
            Like our Su-27 with its younger brothers Su-30 and Su-35.

            Even more different. In fact, these are different planes. The Superhornet is larger and one and a half times heavier than the Hornet (14.5 tons of dry weight versus 10.5 tons for the Hornet). There is only a visual similarity.
    2. +1
      15 July 2024 13: 46
      The latest versions of the f18 have an AFAR radar with an anti-aircraft gun based on gallium nitride, a technology that is not available to us and, apparently, will not be available for a long time. So the modernized F18 is a very modern car.
  2. +1
    15 July 2024 07: 23
    This means that only during the first 30 seconds of flight the rocket accelerates, and then, during the autonomous portion of the trajectory (AUT), which does not exceed 30 kilometers, it continues to move due to the accumulated kinetic energy. However, the speed of the rocket slows down due to braking in dense layers of the atmosphere, and the engine remains turned off.

    What speed will the missile have when approaching a target, for example, a surface ship at a distance of 400–460 kilometers? It's a difficult question. Perhaps the speed will be 160 or even 180 meters per second. Will the ship's air defense system be able to effectively counter such a threat? This is certainly an interesting question.


    Thanks for the interesting article, Sergey!
    It's interesting to argue about ballistics. If you shoot along a flat trajectory, everything is correct. But this is not required for long-range weapons. So, when launched from the stratosphere at a high elevation angle, the rocket is able to cover a much greater distance due to flight in almost airless space (remember the Parisian Colossal cannon). And the target’s speed will be appropriate. And if the second, lagging missile, instead of a warhead, carries a guidance radar, actually from subspace, then a very formidable weapon can turn out. But the platform in the form of the F/A-18E/F is rather weak in terms of payload/height. They would have to have a reincarnation of the F-14, or they would have to “kill” the F-15.
    1. +2
      15 July 2024 12: 01
      Quote: Victor Leningradets
      They would have to have a reincarnation of the F-14, or they would have to “kill” the F-15.

      After 20 years of using a standardized carrier-based aircraft? Most likely, they will develop the “Super-duper Hornet” F/A-18SD for the new RVV. smile
      "Hornet" is the dream of "aviation admirals" since WWII - a single carrier-based fighter-bomber that can do everything.
      There is no place in such an air group for an aircraft with the characteristics of the SB2C-4. TVM-3 can only be used until fighter-bombers can carry torpedoes. Pound for pound, plane for plane, place for place, no aircraft can be as effective in the strike role as the F6F-5 or F4U-1D.
      © Admiral McCain (grandfather of the odious senator).

      There is no need to form three types of air wings for each aircraft, there is no need to compile a strike of five types of vehicles with different performance characteristics each time, there is no need to fill the hangar with machines, and then use only part of them, because, for example, in the current situation, more are needed fighters than attack aircraft.
      1. -2
        15 July 2024 12: 31
        Everything would be fine, but the Super Hornet doesn’t work as an over-the-horizon air defense platform. Especially against the Chinese J-15 and our Su-33.
        The Chinese ultra-long-range air defense missile, like our 40N6, looks more serious during a stratospheric launch, although there is still work to be done, but for them it’s not there yet.
    2. 0
      15 July 2024 14: 08
      Victor. Good afternoon thanks. A small mistake in the article - the article itself was written 10 days ago, the last paragraph was written three days ago. It contains the abbreviation OUT, but I didn’t give the decoding, I was in a hurry, I didn’t notice. The corrector guys themselves deciphered it a little incorrectly - there is not an Autonomous Section of the Trajectory, but an Active Section of the Trajectory. My bad, I was in a hurry.
      Now, as for the rocket itself, its airframe, the 174th, is quite ancient, from 1967, essentially it is the SM-2 “Standard-2”, only with a modern control and guidance system. It only has aerodynamic control surfaces (rudders); it is not equipped with a gas-dynamic control belt. Hence its limited capabilities; it cannot fly above 34 km. Please note that most long-range air defense systems from the S-200 to more or less modern ones have a ceiling of 34-35 km precisely for this reason. So its entire flight takes place in dense layers of the atmosphere, yet the rocket is both formally and physically a missile launcher. 160-180 m/s - I’m still optimistic, in reality it’s probably less and much less.
      The SM-6 was created to replace the SM-2; with the removal of the latter from service, the American fleet will remain defenseless from the threat from the air. The SM-3 is not capable of operating for aerodynamic air targets in principle. Only at ballistic and altitudes above 100 miles (160 km). "Bleeding nose" needed a replacement. So they concocted a new weapon from an old rocket and a new control system...
      1. +1
        15 July 2024 15: 36
        Thanks for the explanation, however, if in mechanics and aerodynamics they are now not a cake, then in electronics they are not at all Biden. It is possible to leave the guidance section only for diving, which, of course, will reduce the final speed of the missile and reduce the likelihood of capture (the latter is insignificant), but will sharply reduce the flight time and reduce the likelihood of the target leaving the affected area (especially the SBC).
        So it is interesting to simulate both trajectories for a target located at a distance of about 300 km when a launch is detected at the same distance.
        1. +2
          15 July 2024 15: 55
          Once upon a time, the W-2 SBCh with a power of 81 kt was specially developed for the SM-1 to destroy group air targets, but the program was closed back in 1988. Nowadays a regular 140-pound OFBC costs (contains 75 pounds of tritonal (about 33 kg)).
  3. -1
    15 July 2024 07: 31
    Quote: Victor Leningradets
    This means that only during the first 30 seconds of flight the rocket accelerates, and then, during the autonomous portion of the trajectory (AUT), which does not exceed 30 kilometers, it continues to move due to the accumulated kinetic energy. However, the speed of the rocket slows down due to braking in dense layers of the atmosphere, and the engine remains turned off.

    What speed will the missile have when approaching a target, for example, a surface ship at a distance of 400–460 kilometers? It's a difficult question. Perhaps the speed will be 160 or even 180 meters per second. Will the ship's air defense system be able to effectively counter such a threat? This is certainly an interesting question.


    Thanks for the interesting article, Sergey!
    It's interesting to argue about ballistics. If you shoot along a flat trajectory, everything is correct. But this is not required for long-range weapons. So, when launched from the stratosphere at a high elevation angle, the rocket is able to cover a much greater distance due to flight in almost airless space (remember the Parisian Colossal cannon). And the target’s speed will be appropriate. And if the second, lagging missile, instead of a warhead, carries a guidance radar, actually from subspace, then a very formidable weapon can turn out. But the platform in the form of the F/A-18E/F is rather weak in terms of payload/height. They would have to have a reincarnation of the F-14, or they would have to “kill” the F-15.

    They should have a reincarnation of the F-14 - tap your tongue, otherwise give them an idea.
    Although you have to give them credit, the F-14 was incredibly cool at the time.
    1. +1
      15 July 2024 07: 36
      They should have a reincarnation of the F-14 - tap your tongue, otherwise give them an idea.
      Although you have to give them credit, the F-14 was incredibly cool at the time.


      I am a contemporary of the F-14 fighter, and I remember my enemy well. Telling Americans is a waste of time. They see everything without us and know how to solve problems. I won’t say now, but then yes.
  4. +1
    15 July 2024 18: 17
    Given that estimates of the launch range of the "traditional" ship-launched RIM-174B range from 240 to 460 km, this means that the AIM-174B may or may not be the longest-range air-to-air missile in its class. it will be 240 km.
  5. 0
    15 July 2024 19: 10
    I do not share the wild enthusiasm of Western experts about this missile...
    So am I. Against ships - complete garbage, with a weak warhead and no engine on approach, against air defense - no speed on approach, no reaction time, against cruise missiles at long range - also ridiculous, without an engine, what maneuverability will there be. This is a missile defense missile, that is, it is designed for a little over 30 seconds of active life; making it into a long-range one is only out of despair.
    I think so. They understand that they have already screwed everyone over long-range air missiles and decided to put together at least something and promote it (they are experts at this, the Chinese still have time to study and study before them).
    1. 0
      16 July 2024 04: 30
      Quote: Conjurer
      Against ships - complete garbage, with a weak warhead and no engine on approach

      In principle, I agree with your opinion, I’ll just add that this is at the maximum range, somewhat closer, and the energy and maneuverability will be different.
  6. 0
    17 July 2024 18: 34
    As I understand it, the missile is one of the means of new detection and target designation, which can control several missiles launched from different places and retarget them in the process... of course it’s interesting, but how technically it’s all done - via wired Internet, or whoever they called and sent???
    ..
  7. 0
    23 August 2024 00: 03
  8. 0
    25 August 2024 02: 14
    Questions
    to Sergei Ketonov:

    The airframe of the missile is based on the old "pre-revolutionary" SM-2 RIM-174B. Its engine produces 4000 pounds (1800 kilograms) of thrust and runs for 30 seconds.

    How accurate is this data?
    Let’s imagine that a rocket is launched at maximum range, from a height of 11 km and at a speed of 0.9M, then after launch it should create a trajectory inclination angle of ~45°, we will assume that its average weight due to fuel burnout at this stage of the trajectory is ~600 kg . We will (roughly) assume that it accelerates with a longitudinal overload of 1800/600 = 3g = 29.8 m/s². This means that its speed at the end of the active section of the trajectory (taking into account the speed of the carrier at the time of launch) will be (roughly, air resistance is neglected) 265+29.8*30 = 265+894 = 1159 m/s. After this, the engine turns off due to fuel exhaustion and then the rocket flies by inertia, traveling horizontally for about 12 km and rising to an additional altitude of 12 km, for a total altitude of 23 km. And then it flies like a body thrown at an angle of 45° to the horizon with an initial speed of 1159 m/s. And it will fly to a distance of only 137 km plus another 20 kilometers due to a dive from the initial reference altitude of 23 km, let it be 160 km. NOT ENOUGH! So it won’t cover the stated 460 km... am
    It is necessary to clarify the initial data: either the traction is not the same, or the engine operating time is different...
    https://foxford.ru/wiki/fizika/dvizhenie-tela-broshennogo-pod-uglom-k-gorizontu?ysclid=m08p790ohh872731738&utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fyandex.ru%2F
    This means that only during the first 30 seconds of flight the rocket accelerates, and then, during the autonomous portion of the trajectory (AUT), which does not exceed 30 kilometers...

    ?? Is this phrase completely incomprehensible?
    it continues to move due to the accumulated kinetic energy. However, the speed of the rocket slows down due to braking in dense layers of the atmosphere, and the engine remains switched off.

    At the end of the active section it will already be at an altitude of 23 km, and keep moving up, reaching an altitude of 23+34 = 57 km at its apogee. At an altitude of 23 km, the density of air is approximately 22 times less than that of the earth, and at an altitude of 57 km it is less dense than that of the earth by 2740 times...
    https://files.stroyinf.ru/Data2/1/4294823/4294823872.pdf
  9. 0
    13 September 2024 17: 07
    Why is the F-18 shown in the photo as the carrier of these missiles? Why are these missiles not tied to carriers that are much more important for the US now, primarily the SU-24MR or, at worst, the F-16?