No long range missiles for USN

[LoBlo]

I remember reading a $1million plus dollar price tag as well somewhere, but I can't remeber where. It may be that GlobalSecurity is the one that's mistaken.

Its just curious that a successor have less speed AND less range than its predessor. I can't think of a another weapon system evolution that has ever showed this trend...:hmm: Especially when "air superiority" is the ultimate goal. One would think that the less closing maneuvers neccessary the more "air superiority" would result.

Then again, I've heard stories of the USN and its systems acquistion policies... they can be somewhat confounded by political implications (favortism toward certain builders, congressional bias, etc) as well as archiac thinking. No doubt some of those factors probably come into play with funding/developing billion dollar acquistion programs.

[Wim Libaers]

Less speed and range, OK. But a more modern radar (OK, so they could have upgraded that instead of making the AMRAAM), and more agile (more likely to hit those things that are in range). Phoenix was mostly for not very manueverable targets.

The smaller size and cost are advantages too, having more weapons and being able to carry more of them at the same time is useful.

Finally, if the need for a long-range missile does arise in the next few years, the US has European allies working on such a missile (Meteor, with a ramjet engine that is supposed to give it high speed (Mach 4) and full manueverability during most of its flight), and it's planned to be mostly compatible with AMRAAM, with modifications to fit it in the F-35. Not ready yet, but they're making progress. http://www.janes.com/aerospace/milit...0515_1_n.shtml Raytheon had an AMRAAM variant proposal too (FMRAAM).

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by LoBlo

Its just curious that a successor have less speed AND less range than its predessor. I can't think of a another weapon system evolution that has ever showed this trend...:hmm:

The AIM-120 is a replacment for the AIM-7 not the AIM-54. The long range AIM-120 isn't filling the shoes of the AIM-54 its making new shoes. The AIM-54 was to take out Backfires the AIM-120 is going to be for taking out smaller more agile ASM launching fighter bombers.

Let's face it...it's all overkill. Just look at all the conflicts in the last 2 decades...even going further back. Air conflicts have been the biggest pushover for Western airforces. And it looks like the trend is going to continue.
The US (and Western powers) are so far in front in terms of fighter technology, any country wanting to take them on is pure suicidal. Even the old F15 has never been shot down (by an enemy fighter), imagine the F22...

Not for nothing we have the SuperHornet...less emphasis on fighter more on attack.

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by Kurushio

Let's face it...it's all overkill. Just look at all the conflicts in the last 2 decades...even going further back. Air conflicts have been the biggest pushover for Western airforces. And it looks like the trend is going to continue.
The US (and Western powers) are so far in front in terms of fighter technology, any country wanting to take them on is pure suicidal. Even the old F15 has never been shot down (by an enemy fighter), imagine the F22...

Not for nothing we have the SuperHornet...less emphasis on fighter more on attack.

Serbs downed an F117 Stealth Fighter.
U-2 spyplanes were downed by SA-2 missiles (one over the soviet union, and one over cuba).
During the Vietnam War, american fighter and bomber squadrons were shot down.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by goldorak

Serbs downed an F117 Stealth Fighter.
U-2 spyplanes were downed by SA-2 missiles (one over the soviet union, and one over cuba).
During the Vietnam War, american fighter and bomber squadrons were shot down.

What he ment was aside from Vietnam and 1 F/A-18 in the Gulf War (1991) no USAF/USN/USMC combat aircraft has been downed in Air to Air combat in the last 50 years.

Originally Posted by goldorak

Serbs downed an F117 Stealth Fighter.
U-2 spyplanes were downed by SA-2 missiles (one over the soviet union, and one over cuba).
During the Vietnam War, american fighter and bomber squadrons were shot down.

As TLAM said, if you read properly, you would have noted I was referring to air-to-air combat. Isn't that what this topic is about? The Phoenix etc?

Though goldorak...you keep on harping on about that F117 that got shot down by Serbs. You do realise the F117 isn't invisible to radar, right? Fact remains that out of thousands of sorties, they have still lost only 1 of these planes. That's not bad any way you put it.

Now with the U2 you are talking about SOVIET forces...i.e. the only other superpower which could realistically threaten the US, now defunct. You missed the whole point of my post because I meant AFTER the Cold War, i.e. NOW.

The Vietnam war is the same, considering the Vietnamese were using Soviet technology.

Hope this clears some stuff up...

[LuftWolf]

Though goldorak...you keep on harping on about that F117 that got shot down by Serbs. You do realise the F117 isn't invisible to radar, right? Fact remains that out of thousands of sorties, they have still lost only 1 of these planes. That's not bad any way you put it.

Except that I believe this F117 was shot down with a stopwatch and small arms... it's not INVISIBLE to the eye, that's the biggest problem.

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by LuftWolf

Except that I believe this F117 was shot down with a stopwatch and small arms... it's not INVISIBLE to the eye, that's the biggest problem.

Well stated like that, its the problem of all stealth aircrafts isn't it ?

Originally Posted by LuftWolf

Except that I believe this F117 was shot down with a stopwatch and small arms... it's not INVISIBLE to the eye, that's the biggest problem.

No, it was shot down by a radar controlled SAM battery. Or so it seems...though the F/A117 is pretty much invisible at night...it's black. And these things primarily fly night sorties...also think the one in Serbia was shot down in the dark. Which pretty much negates small arms and a stopwatch.

[SeaQueen]

Originally Posted by Kurushio

Though goldorak...you keep on harping on about that F117 that got shot down by Serbs. You do realise the F117 isn't invisible to radar, right? Fact remains that out of thousands of sorties, they have still lost only 1 of these planes. That's not bad any way you put it.

I always think it's entertaining how people outside of the US seem to set their expectations of what American technology can do artificially high, and then when it fails to live up to their artificially high expectations, they claim it's no good at all. Bottom line: Serbia ran out of bridges really fast.

And then they try to copy it...

It's like we got all the creative engineers and everyone else is just jealous.

I think the F-117's record is even more impressive considering that it was designed before I was born.

Originally Posted by SeaQueen

I always think it's entertaining how people outside of the US seem to set their expectations of what American technology can do artificially high, and then when it fails to live up to their artificially high expectations, they claim it's no good at all. Bottom line: Serbia ran out of bridges really fast.

And then they try to copy it...

It's like we got all the creative engineers and everyone else is just jealous.

I think the F-117's record is even more impressive considering that it was designed before I was born.

And that's putting it mildly. I've been in a discussion with both Serbs and Kosovon/Albanian fighters who were there. Every Serb blames the US Airforce (or the Kosovon Airforce as they refer to it) as the only factor for pulling back to pre-war borders. The only reason the Kosovons weren't massacred is because of the US Airforce...their words.

[timmyg00]

Originally Posted by LoBlo

Its just curious that a successor have less speed AND less range than its predessor. I can't think of a another weapon system evolution that has ever showed this trend...

I can think of one example; I recently completed reading U.S. Submarines Since 1945 (An Illustrated Design History) by Norman Friedman (ISBN 1557502609), which details some concerns over the loss of speed between the Permit class and Sturgeon class SSNs.

I know that has absolutely nothing to do with AAMs, but you rang a bell, so I had to answer the door...

TG