Im not sure if range is the main problem or US doesnt wanna sell Aim-260 to any export customer soon.
But my money is on second one.
Anyway, IIRC US develop AIM-174 but for USAF. So…
Seems like they dont know which way they should follow, typical US move tbh.
I think they need both Aim-260 and LRAAM. But…
They certainly need better missile considering initial production of Aim-260 will be quite low while AMRAAM-AXE share many components that regular Amraam has, this way they will not suffer on short stock.
Yeah. Even ESSM upscaled AMRAAM guidance section, so you already have mass motor production, mass electronic production. It have small and folding fins and you can put it in F22 and F35 weapon bays… Lower drag(?)
Jettisonable JVC if you need…
Raytheon spending their own money to continue development of another missile upgrade initiative is unrelated. As far as I am concerned, Raytheon may be developing it primarily for export or as a low-risk secondary initiative should AIM-260 be cancelled (though I find that incredibly unlikely at this point).
That is not the line of thinking, you are putting words in others mouths.
Raytheon developing AMRAAM-AXE =/= U.S. Government is investing in AMRAAM-AXE. Their private developments do not indicate a range issue.
1 Trillion Dollars military budget will fit
Yes, ofc, but on one side Navy already have AIM-174, so AF should just buy AIM-174 too?..
We’ll find out more in the future with Aim-120E. Maybe.
The airforce already has their own long range missile program in development with lockheed martin but that is its’ own thing. They will utilize AIM-260 and AIM-120D and that is all they need for the time being. Long range ordnance isn’t necessary when you have stealth fighters that can just get closer, so bridging the gap is not super important at the moment.
Hell yea. if the AIM-260 is not up to the AIM-174B long range shots, then yea, which i doubt it will. My guess is that they will not do that and a variant of the AIM-120E will be the bridge between the AIM-9X and the AIM-260, cause i imagine the AIM-260 won’t be really maneuverable at close range, if it has thrust vectoring tho…
The opposite is true, testing teams call it the honey badger because it is so lethal.
at close range?
this?
Air Force buying a Navy AAM based on a Navy SAM? sure
The appearance of a missile may not always fully reflect its maneuvering characteristics or other characteristics. Look at ASRAAM.
2 Likes
or AIM-95
cause thrust vectoring. That’s why I’ve mentioned that capability
same same thrust vectoring
Actually Navy and STRATCOM.
But anyway. They can buy.
It doesn’t have TVC.
1 Like