What-ifs and maybes: AIM-9C derivatives

Machinery of War Discussion
,
1

Generally, we understand 9C as an evolution to AIM-9B as a response to USAF and USN grievances on how dogwater 9B are and the fact that this missile was found out by soviet and transformed into K-13. This also walked side by side with AIM-9D where 9C program got cut off prematurely after failure after failures even before Raytheon or GE can fix the SARH seeker on the missile.

This makes me think, if US stick through with “One frame two seeker” approach with their missile like Soviet does with Apex and Alamo, where both have 2 variants with different seeker instead of just “radar slaving” that still need heat lock, would the sidewinder truly put a foot down in missile market, bar long range AAM?

2

AIM-7B would also like to have a what ifs
the name is Sparrow II

3

wait, 7B as in sparrow with IR Seeker?

4

i think its a SARH but i need to check again
no its ARH actually

5

oh no, it was an ARH sparrow, not even IR.

1 Like
6

There was plan to add IR seeker to sparrow it seems.

AIM-7R was to add an infrared homing seeker to an otherwise unchanged AIM-7P Block II. A general wind-down of the budget led to it being cancelled in 1997."

will look for source on this one.

7

yeah looks like it

8

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/budget/fy1997/dot-e/navy/97rim7r.html

I think we need to dig deeper into this.

9

i wonder it would be a mix between SARH and IR if it lose lock then it would use IR function

10

nein that is not a good sources but starter ig

11

There’s not much point in a short-range radar missile, which is why both the AIM-9C and R-3R were the last of their kind. So if we’re comparing to the R-23/24/27 and others, it’s more accurate to discuss the potential of an IR Sparrow. Like the AIM-7R which was never produced because it was too expensive and the AIM-120 offered far better performance.

12

Imagine Radar R-73 though

13

That would be contrary to the entire design philosophy of the R-73. It’s a small, lightweight, extremely agile dogfight missile with high OBS. A SARH seeker would dramatically reduce launch angles, increase reaction time and remove the fire-and-forgrt capabilities that a dogfight missile needs. An ARH seeker meanwhile would be prohibitively large and heavy, impossible to provide the same seeker performance in a package lightweight enough to maintain the required agility.

Overall radar missiles are great for long-range whole IR are great for short-range. Soviet and Russian interception doctrine dictates launching an IR missile followed by a radar one to increase the PoK, so they made both IR and radar long-range missiles. Though this is being phased out- R-27Ts and ETs are used less and less often, and there aren’t IR versions of the R-77 or R-37 as modern radar missiles simply outrange any IR seeker by too far for them to be worth developing.
Meanwhile NATO doctrine investS more resources into increasing the PoK of a single radar missile, meaning IR versions of radar missiles would be superfluous.

14

Why does this reminds me of the sidewinder with the sparrow motor
257268-1e0227a915d4d197b2c04f9f115e4bbe
257269-d9f6a86e7850e28e84b2582172b451c5

15

that looked like a paveway gone wrong.

16

So I did some digging, and right now all I can conclude is that the AIM-7R physically existed and final prototypes were tested, flight performance is likely to be identical to AIM-7M, but I can’t find details on its seeker.

“APPROVED NAVY TRAINING SYSTEM PLAN FOR THE AIM-7M/P SPARROW MISSILE SYSTEM N88-NTSP-A-50-8008C/A MAY 1998” says that

“Training requirements for the AIM/RIM-7R were removed because the program was suspended following completion of its Operational Evaluation (OPEVAL).”

and

“The AIM/RIM-7R was the latest Sparrow new development, but the program was halted in the first quarter of FY97 following completion of its DT/OT program.”

This indicates that finalised prototypes of the AIM-7R underwent testing, so performance data should exist somewhere (that somewhere doesn’t seem to be the internet).

Additionally, Force 2001, A Program Guide to the U.S. Navy and Uses of DARPA Materials Sciences Technology in DoD Systems. and many other sources all indicate that the AIM-7R seeker (or at least the IR component) was part of the Missile Homing Improvement Program, which was also applied to the SM-2 Block IIIB, which did enter service, so if data exists on that we can assume it to be the same as the AIM-7R (however, it seems that the SM-2 Block IIIB’s IR seeker is mounted differently).

Artillery, Missiles & Military Transport (20th Century Military Series) by Christopher Chant goes into a bit more detail. It says that the IR seeker is derived from the Sidewinder (model not specified).

According to Chant, the IR seeker is activated first and attempts to acquire a lock. If IR lock is not achieved, it goes into SARH mode until IR lock is acquired.

Finally, pictures of the seeker:
aim7p1
aim7p2
These come from this site: http://sistemasdearmas.com.br/aam/aim7sparrow.html
AIM-7P
And this comes from here: View topic - "Dual mode" Sparrow? • F-16.net. Apparently it’s from a book but I can’t find it online. It’s also mislabeled as a AIM-7P which definitely was not dual mode.
Basically the tiny window at the tip is supposed to be the IR seeker.

Then there’re these two photos:
Imgur
Imgur

But this seeker is much larger than the previous images, so I’m not sure if this is a different prototype, or an entirely different missile. Alternatively, it could be that the earlier images are wrong and this is the actual AIM-7R. These two photos actually seem a bit more credible since these are mounted on a F-4 for testing while the prior ones seem like models, and if the seeker is adapted from the Sidewinder this does seem a bit more true to the dimensions, but this arrangement seems like it would substantially disrupt the SARH guidance, so maybe this is a purely IR version of the Sparrow?

1 Like
17

This seems like a fairly succesful program, if they can mount 9M IRCCM on this model alone surely it could help the missile big time by making it a competitor to 27ET. What happened in 1994 that some seemingly very crucial program got the slash anyway? this IR Sparrow looked like a very well made solution to provide allies that doesn’t want to waste radar missile but want to eliminate target before they enter WVR a product.

18

The most commonly stated reason was budget cuts. The program was initiated in 1991 when the Soviet Union collapsed, so funds would’ve been dwindling throughout its development. I suppose a big factor was also the maturation of the AIM-120, with the AIM-120B entering service in 1994 and AIM-120C entering service in 1996 (coinciding with the AIM-7R’s cancellation). Despite being several times more expensive than the Sparrow, both would’ve been immensely more effective than the AIM-7R as they didn’t require hard lock for midcourse guidance and would perform better in adverse weather (unless the AIM-7R had the IOG and datalink used on the AIM-7P). Since I couldn’t find any detailed test reports, it’s also plausible that the interference between the IR sensor in front and the radar seeker behind it resulted in reduced reliability or radar lock range.