New NCAD AIM-120 Has ASAT Capability Then Some

How interesting, and the original linked article was just in time to be noticed on April 1st................ Hmmmmm


The Winged Wombat

The specific energy content of rocket engines has not changed much over the years - as I have pointed out, NASA are going back to a slightly modified Saturn for their next-gen heavy lifter.



I have also pointed out the AMRAAM is around 8 times lighter than the 1980s era ASAT missile, and has around 10 times less internal volume.




There is simply NO WAY that solid or liquid fueled boosters have 8-10 times the specific energy as 20 years ago. I cannot be any more clear on this - it is simply not possible.


The reduced weight of the missile will make things a little easier for the AMRAAM motor (as opposed to the ASAT motor) - but that benefit drops off extremely swiftly with higher altitudes - indeed the benefit has mostly fizzled out by the time the thing is off the a/c rails

[edit on 2/4/08 by kilcoo316]

[edit on 2/4/08 by kilcoo316]

I think we've reached a discussion saturation on whether the AIM-120D ER etc. can shoot down objects that either orbit in or transit through LEO altitudes.

Lets get more specific.

I have here below a SRBM ballistic profile. Let direct our discussion to this profile:
www.bharat-rakshak.com...

On a separate note, could the KS-172 AAM-L be used in a similar role?

Yeah, thats definitely possible, throughout almost all stages of the flight envelope I'd think (except terminal maybe).




Probably better for it, as its simply much bigger than the AMRAAM.

For that matter you may need to include the now defunct AIM-54.

Or perhaps if we are getting into speculation land.

What about the AIM-47 Falcon fired from the YF-12 at mach 3.2 and 74000 feet? Its a much larger missile with more range and being fired from a higher and faster platform?

Yeap, why not.


The Phoenix followed a semi-ballistic arc anyway did it not?

That's not the only thing that matters, the seeker, control system and several other systems have to be optimized and tested for an anti missile role? Also, what is the status of this that Russian missile?

reply to post by WestPoint23

---

Oh, its pretty much dead to the world, I assure you

reply to post by Daedalus3

---

Except india are using it now

Indeed, but that doesn't change the basic fact the bigger missile is far more suited to the role.

You can dance around that all day, but for the task in hand, there simply no substitute for size.




Hence why the USAF have investigated modified patriots (PAC-3s) on F-15s for the theatre missile defense role. They are around 2 times larger than AMRAAM (and that is still too small for the ASAT role IMO).

The use of the THAAD missile has also been considered, and it weighs near a tonne - thats getting up there to a proper sized ASAT killer.





No idea. But that is not wholly relevant to the question asked.

reply to post by kilcoo316

---

If the USAF wanted a quick and proper ASAT missile they could always modify the SM-3 for air launch. If it can reach the type of performance from sea level that it does is should be just fine when launched with some speed and altitude.

Indeed, I was almost writing SM-3 instead of PAC-3 in that post




Its a very big missile though, bigger than the ASAT, at 1.5 tonnes and 6.5ish metres.


It would never fit inside an F-22, that is for sure, but the wing pylons are stressed for 600 gallon tanks, so should be able to take a 1.5 tonne missile.

Each pylon on the Raptor was cleared and tested for 5,000 Lb loads so it should be able to carry two, even the F-35 would be able to carry it, hypothetically.

Heres a picture of the proposed system. Click on the picture to see the full version

Just as a side note this weeks AWST has this very article on the ASAT capacity on it.

reply to post by FredT

---

Can you provide us with some information from it?

reply to post by WestPoint23

---

DOH! Just realized its the same article.

Nevermind.... Nothing to see here

[edit on 4/11/08 by FredT]