It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Raytheon has a Peregrine

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 05:57 AM
link   
I'm surprised a thread on this hasn't appeared already. It appears that Raytheon has been hard at work developing an internally funded missile program that promises to deliver AMRAAM or better range, combined with AIM-9X maneuverability in a package that's half the size of an AIM-120 and half the cost. And with a tri-mode seeker as minimum and rapid production using 3D printing techniques. It could basically double or even triple the missile load out on some platforms. An F-35 could probably carry at least 8 internally and god knows what the big rack F-15 variants could haul, 24 minimum I would think possibly more. FG Raytheon Peregrine article

I can also see another potential use that could be quite interesting if its adapted for use. Currently the US Army is looking to field a new long range precision missile FG US Army missile article. If you look at the specs it requires a survivable and high speed weapon that has a t least a 30km range, it also cannot weigh more than 200lbs with its container(90 odd kg's). Given the Peregrine is optimized for short to medium range air to air where maneuverability is key and therefore survivable, it only weighs 150lbs, and has a tri-mode seeker, it might well fit the bill for use on UAV's, Apache and whatever FVL follows on from it. There is probably no reason why it couldn't be adapted for Naval defence on vessels down to a fairly small size in a multi box configuration either as has been done with various adapted air to air missiles like Sparrow in the past.




posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: thebozeian

the trend to make smaller missiles screams to me they are going to be using 'something' as a missile truck.

MALD's and new missiles will be a potent mix, so the more you can deploy the better.

speaking of MALD look at this new UK EW drone

link



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 08:23 AM
link   
a reply to: thebozeian

What's interesting to me, and has been downplayed and overlooked by just about everyone, is the fact that it's half the size of AMRAAM, but is described as "AMRAAM range or longer".

According to the press release it'll be 6 for the F-35.
edit on 9/18/2019 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
The size, performance kinematics and cost as well as the rapid appearance of it is what stood out to me too. Clearly someone has been working on some advanced propulsion systems/propellants as the artwork depiction is nothing new in terms of layout. As for F-35 load out of a notional Peregrine weapon, Raytheon's executive who was quoted in the article said it would at least double an F-35A or C load out. It mentioned the Sidekick ejector rack as increasing current capability to 6. But I guess we dont really know yet at this point. Suffice to say though that this would clearly increase internal as well as external carry capacity which can only be a good thing.

edit on 18-9-2019 by thebozeian because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 10:37 AM
link   
a reply to: thebozeian

Most of what I've seen says the F-35 will go to 6, which is the same as with Sidekick, but just about anything added internally will be a huge boost. If it's 8, that would be even better. I'd love to see what they changed about the propellant and motor.



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Well, it could be 8 on the 35. Jsut put up a coupl billion in dvelopment & integration!

Whats the point of this program? SACM and JATM would complement each other nicley in the future.



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Yeah was looking at the specs and its going to be interesting to see how many they can cram into the -22 given the logistics if they can get 2-4 more it will be a coup IMHO

If they can put a few more on the 5th gens internally it would really address the biggest Achilles heels those have and thats internal carriage.


edit on 9/18/19 by FredT because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

The point is to have a missile that could be fielded potentially ten years sooner, and give the same flexibility.
edit on 9/18/2019 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: thebozeian

Most of what I've seen says the F-35 will go to 6, which is the same as with Sidekick, but just about anything added internally will be a huge boost. If it's 8, that would be even better. I'd love to see what they changed about the propellant and motor.

I don’t have any inside information on this new missile, but one can infer a few things about the design just from the information presented.

First of all, because this missile is quite a bit smaller than the AMRAAM, that means its warhead has to be quite a bit smaller. Because the warhead is smaller, that must mean that Raytheon is pretty convinced that they can get the terminal error down to a lot better number than with the AMRAAM. For long range intercepts, they can do this with a combination of two factors. First, I think they probably use a flight profile like the AIM-54 Phoenix; they quickly climb to high altitude (≈ 85 Kft) and cruise at conditions that are much more aerodynamically efficient during the flyout. That gives them the range. The long thin body strakes arranged in a cruciform layout suggest this flight profile. For the terminal game, they then come down onto the top of the target at high speed and high q, where they have much superior aerodynamic maneuvering capability, compared to the target. Raytheon says the missile has Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and that would also help improve the terminal accuracy, if used in combination.

At shorter ranges and lower altitudes, where there is not enough time to use a lofted trajectory, the missile will be less aerodynamically efficient (lower L/D) but that’s OK from the range standpoint, since it doesn’t have to fly as far. The poorer L/D at lower altitudes means poorer aerodynamic maneuvering in the terminal game but again, this can be compensated for with TVC.

Since they would probably want to have the ability for TVC in the terminal game, no matter what, I can imagine that they might use a multi-pulse solid rocket grain (one for boost, one for cruise, one for the end game).

Because this missile is smaller in every dimension than the AMRAAM (including the diameter) that suggests that they had to shrink the avionics package accordingly, including all the sensors. In my experience, Raytheon is very good at that. Perhaps they went to higher frequencies for the RF components?



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: 1947boomer

For terminal error, they're using a tri-mode sensor system. Even switching between them would see an improvement in the terminal phase. If they're running all three at once, that could prove very interesting for the terminal phase and pk numbers.
edit on 9/18/2019 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

edit on 9/18/2019 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 07:41 PM
link   
In regards to the size, this has been talked about for a while with the reps. “4th gen wants a missile that has ludicrous everything, but you limit 4th gen due to fielding a missile small enough to fit into 5th gen.”

Good to see they started talking out loud about it and the 260.



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: 1947boomer
I don’t think it’ll save gas for an end game maneuver. The thrust vectoring is for the initial “9X-like maneuverability”. IMHO



posted on Sep, 18 2019 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Just poking around the various articles rumors etc.

hit to kill. Makes sense given the tech that exists today and you can devote more space to propulsion

As noted the tri mode seeker for various denied environments

Data link for mid course updates

New propulsion means perhaps far better chemistry and higher energy density etc . Which means that they could apply the same concepts to an 12 foot AMRAMM missile and rival some fo the Russian designs in terms of range



posted on Sep, 19 2019 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT

I think the long-range vision is that this pops in for the AMRAAM and AIM-9X Blk III (cancelled), and a clean sheet LREW/AIM-260 takes over the longer range engagements.

Right now, the -9X does not fit internally within the F-35 bays, and that is potentially problematic.

If you replace both with Peregrines, and add a new LRAAM for air-to-air missions, you're in a good spot. Two, maybe four(?) Peregrines and a couple JDAMS is an expansion of capability over twin AMRAAM carriage.

I'd be surprised if this is a pure hit-to-kill weapon, but it's possible. It seems likely enough that they are sufficiently confident to substantially shrink the warhead size/weight. Maybe from 40lbs to the ~15 lb range.

You've got stresses on the airframe that are going to be larger with the longer body of the AMRAAM, so there may not be a way to lighten it substantially from it's current configuration -- particularly if your new propulsion system results in even higher speeds at the terminal phase. Also, not just weight changes, but where the weight is along the CoG, probably limits you. If you are constantly needing control input during the lob to keep you pointy-end forward, that's a lot of drag burning up your range and end-game kinetic state. So I'm not sure how much you're going to be able to squeeze out of it. If you're changing the motor, the airframe, the seeker, the warhead, etc, all at one time to squeeze out range, you might as well go cleansheet with the new AIM-260 or LREW.



Where this gets really interesting is if they decide to modify Peregrine's software to support a secondary ground attack role a la the Sidewinder coupled with the AMRAAM datalink, and then... And since you don't need to retain the same kinetic energy in that role, the range could be quite staggering.

If you can get eight in the F-35 bay and have a high-performance AAM/ASM with ARH/SARH/PRH and IH capability along with the data link, well, you've really got something...



posted on Sep, 19 2019 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Going a step farther, I imagine at 2/3's the length of a Sidewinder and 1/2 that of a Slammer, you could probably pack a bundle inside a Raider or Bone... Or just squeeze in a handful while carrying other weapons. Probably small enough to open up some opportunities with MQ-whatever platform as well.
Though, again, if it gets any sort of air-to-ground/surface capability, simply loading a bundle makes for interesting possibilities operations -wise. Imagine a sea control flight over the South China Seas with two Raiders stuffed to the gills -- with or without a datalink taking advantage of other assets in the area to be your eyes. You don't have to sink a ship to make it ineffective.



posted on Sep, 19 2019 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

The only problem with the Bone or Buff acting as a missile truck (of which I am a huge fan of BTW) is that for it to work, you need significant range so as not to hold the carrier aircraft at risk.

Alot of the Russian/Chicom designs with the increase in range seem to be geared at attacking the USAF's weakest link that being the C3I / Tanker assets which could come at risk. The Novator KS-172 with a notional range of 400km would easily hold those two assets at risk. A Buff would be also be at risk and perhaps a Bone reconfigured as an A model may be able to turn tail and out run but its ?????



posted on Sep, 19 2019 @ 11:26 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT
You'd obviously use the legacy platforms for long range strike weapons and the Raider for the AtA realm.

Also, the missile is one thing, a robust OODA loop to effectivley use it in an engagement is quite another.



posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 03:42 AM
link   
What sort of warhead are they using?



posted on Sep, 20 2019 @ 07:27 AM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

Where this gets really interesting is if they decide to modify Peregrine's software to support a secondary ground attack role a la the Sidewinder coupled with the AMRAAM datalink, and then... And since you don't need to retain the same kinetic energy in that role, the range could be quite staggering.
...

Though, again, if it gets any sort of air-to-ground/surface capability, simply loading a bundle makes for interesting possibilities operations -wise. Imagine a sea control flight over the South China Seas with two Raiders stuffed to the gills -- with or without a data link taking advantage of other assets in the area to be your eyes. You don't have to sink a ship to make it ineffective.

Exactly, that's why I mentioned it in the OP. Its not just the A2A aspect here that's interesting. It could also fit the US Army's requirement for a precision missile that has greater range than Hellfire, and be usable in both an air launched or surface launched configuration in naval use. If it does indeed have a hit to kill capability it wont need a large warhead, and as you mentioned you dont need to sink or kill to scratch an asset from being effective in combat.
Edit: I was just reading an article in FG about the XQ-58 Valkyrie when I saw this quote from the president of Kratos's unmanned division,

Speaking hypothetically about future capabilities, Fendley also says the recently unveiled Raytheon Peregrine, a half-sized, medium-range, air-to-air missile, could be carried in the XQ-58A’s weapons bay. The Lockheed Martin Cuda might be another air-to-air missile candidate, he says...
The UAV’s weapons bay is sized to carry four small diameter bombs, but could fit at least two Peregrine-sized air-to-air missiles, says Fendley. Adding air-to-air missiles to the XQ-58A would help fulfill one of its envisioned roles as an escort wingman for manned aircraft such as the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lighting II or Boeing Super Hornet F/A-18E/F.
Seems someone is thinking along the same lines as us RR.
FG XQ-58 article


edit on 20-9-2019 by thebozeian because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
9

log in

join