AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missile (AMRAAM replacement)

New and old developments in aviation technology.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3495
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post21 Jun 2019, 16:38

wolfpak wrote:Would they use a 2-stage design on a rapid acquisition program? They're allowing only one year for flight test so to me it seems that they would go with proven technology. Has there been a 2-stage air to air missile flight tested? Wonder if they have an aircraft designed to carry it as well? Sounds like William Ropers vision of procurement.


If the 2017 report by Trimble was accurate, it was already two years into development back then...
Offline

wolfpak

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 145
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post21 Jun 2019, 19:36

In the Aerospace Daily article by Trimble he says that a Joint AF/Navy program office awarded the contract to Lockheed in 2017. Was there a study that preceded that contract?
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3495
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post21 Jun 2019, 19:48

wolfpak wrote:In the Aerospace Daily article by Trimble he says that a Joint AF/Navy program office awarded the contract to Lockheed in 2017. Was there a study that preceded that contract?


Recommend you read it again — (link courtesy of citanon above)

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... et-442816/

“The existence of a two-year-old project to develop a new air-to-air missile capable of intercepting targets at great distances has emerged in US budget documents....Though funded for more than two years, the LREW project had escaped notice in an obscure budget line item for an OSD account named “emerging capabilities technology development”, which is mostly reserved for small electronic warfare projects.”
Offline

wolfpak

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 145
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post22 Jun 2019, 01:53

Here is the relevant text from the Aerospace Daily article:

"The disclosure, during a June 20 interview with Aerospace DAILY on the sidelines of Life Cycle Industry Days here, reveals a major initiative that had been cloaked in secrecy for more than two years.
A joint Air Force/Navy program office awarded Lockheed the contract in 2017 after a competitive acquisition phase, Genatempo said. "
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3495
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post22 Jun 2019, 01:59

wolfpak wrote:Here is the relevant text from the Aerospace Daily article:

"The disclosure, during a June 20 interview with Aerospace DAILY on the sidelines of Life Cycle Industry Days here, reveals a major initiative that had been cloaked in secrecy for more than two years.
A joint Air Force/Navy program office awarded Lockheed the contract in 2017 after a competitive acquisition phase, Genatempo said. "


The Trimble article (and quotes) that I posted is/are from 2017. What are we missing here?
Offline

disconnectedradical

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1056
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post22 Jun 2019, 07:27

According to all the sources, AIM-260 is not the same as LREW.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5804
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post22 Jun 2019, 13:17

disconnectedradical wrote:According to all the sources, AIM-260 is not the same as LREW.


As the thread title says, it's not the LREW but the JATM. It could be that one morphed into the other though. LREW started development in 2015 and was first discussed openly in 2017. AIM-260 apparently got started two years ago.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

wolfpak

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 145
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post22 Jun 2019, 16:28

quicksilver I misinterpreted your post. Did not realize it referred to an article from 2017. In addition to that the information on the timing of the start of LREW muddies the water. So L-M got a contract in 2017 for the AIM-260 but were working on it probably in a competitive environment or as the LREW prior to that date?
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3495
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post22 Jun 2019, 17:24

wolfpak wrote:quicksilver I misinterpreted your post. Did not realize it referred to an article from 2017. In addition to that the information on the timing of the start of LREW muddies the water. So L-M got a contract in 2017 for the AIM-260 but were working on it probably in a competitive environment or as the LREW prior to that date?


It’s possible, but I don’t know. Someone earlier raised the matter of delivering a capability in a couple years (as in how does that all get done in 2 years). My sense is that these days companies spend a lot more money ahead of contract award to mature the designs they will propose. If the reporting is accurate, some of that appears to happen behind the curtain in black world.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 27394
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post28 Jun 2019, 12:47

Podcast: The Long Road to AIM-260, the U.S.’s Newest Missile
27 Jun 2019 Jen DiMascio, Lee Hudson and Steve Trimble

"Over many years, the Air Force quietly developed a missile that is compatible with the AIM-120’s form factor but has a much longer range."

Source: https://aviationweek.com/defense/podcas ... st-missile
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4015
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post28 Jun 2019, 13:20

Maybe this is going to be something like Israeli (with US help) Stunner missile, but maybe with no or much smaller first stage. Having both IIR and active seeker along with sensor fusion would be pretty nice in very long range missile. With AESA seeker it could also have far superior passive targeting against jammers and radars. Of course there are many options for longer range like wider diameter, ramjet engine, multi-stage rocket (like in Stunner) and hit-to-kill technology without significant warhead. It will be very interesting to see what kind of missile this will be...
Offline
User avatar

Dragon029

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1393
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 07:13

Unread post28 Jun 2019, 13:59

We do have confirmation that it definitely won't be an air-breathing missile, which is interesting and gives a little insight into how it might be designed. The fact that Lockheed seems to be rather confident of its HTK tech with near-identical M-SHORAD and SACM proposals makes me think that we'll see a similar front-end (but hopefully with a dual mode seeker) to CUDA.
Offline

tank-top

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 52
  • Joined: 06 Jul 2018, 02:28

Unread post01 Jul 2019, 23:56

What if it’s designed to be carried by the B-21 raider and can be much longer?
Offline
User avatar

Dragon029

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1393
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 07:13

Unread post02 Jul 2019, 00:54

Hypothetically; then you'd get a much longer range. If we're talking for real though, then the first post of this thread explicitly states that it's designed to fit inside the F-22 and is intended to directly replace the AMRAAM.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8712
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14
  • Warnings: 2

Unread post02 Jul 2019, 01:15

What does the AIM-260 look like???
PreviousNext

Return to Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests