This missile could be a game changer, especially if there was a stealth platform large enough to carry several internally. But, hear me out, I said this on here before. What if the Orca XLUUV could deploy the SM6 system autonomously from behind enemy lines?
Also the Tomcat could launch the Phoenix from a data point given to them by a Hawkeye/AWACS. The missile didn’t activate its own radar until it approached the no-escape zone. At that point it was free falling in a ballistic arc at speeds approaching or exceeding the requirement for hypersonic flight.
Well one former POTUS was nearly assassinated and the other just stepped down from seeking re-election. Wouldn’t be surprised if some of this might be a small signal to world leaders not to try anything during our internal domestic troubles.
5 carriers that are a sitting duck in modern drone warfare, not to mention missiles. What we see happening in the Black Sea the Russian Black Sea fleet would be happening to our vessels in the pacific on steroids
unrelated there was a few admirals at Submarine Rotational Force-West in fremantle in the news, checking the progress of the sub base. they said next month a US sub tender will be in fremantle with a Virginia for their first go at maintenance. that australian sailors were on 6 US subs and that they are ahead of time with the buildings. GO AUKUS!!!!! and just to the american and uk people, we in australia thank you all from the bottom of our hearts for the chance to be able to defend ourselves. thanks
@@oldfrend at one stage they were looking at a Japanese class. it would have needed to refuel after a trip from Fremantle to Darwin. i was shaking my head.
The Navy lost range when they retired the F14s for the FA18s in both combat radius and weapon range. The loss of weapon range is now being rectified - but the combat radius of the 18's is still shorter than that of the 14's. One improvement is that the 18s have 11 hardpoints vs 14's 8 hardpoints. Also, you need these new weapons in quantity (which will help to bring down unit co$t$). With the increase in weapon range, this will also take some of the pressure on the Burke's limited number of vertical tubes (and also their new weapons loadout using 2 weapons per cell) with the retirement of the Ticos. This will significantly help with the Winchester exhaustion - and their having to retire to base to reload (which brings up foward deployment of support/reload/repair ships - which need additional weapon inventories for reloading).
It has nothing to do with that. The number is just a coincidence. The designation for the ship-launched version of the SM-6 is the "RIM-174". Because this is the new air-to-air version of the same missile, the designation was changed from "RIM-174" (the "R" stands for "Surface Ship-Launched") to "AIM-174" (the "A" stands for "Air-Launched").
I like it. I second that. Shall we put it to a vote? All those in favor of adopting the name “Phoenix II” for the AIM-174 missile say AYE; those opposed, say NAY. 😂
One thing to note about the claim from the DoD, is they specified fast, agile, alert, and defensive fighter targets would be engaged at 130nm. This means the max range of the missile is likely much farther against targets like refuelers or AWACS units
@D00MerJohn likely closer to 250 given the motor is the same as an SM-6, so as long as the plane can fire the missile at the same or greater figures the booster achieves in the VLS variant, the range should be similar or greater I should think
@@nicazer if the booster only gets the missile up to say Mach 2 at 20,000 feet- I'd think a plane launching at 35,000-40,000 feet at Mach 1.4 would be close enough
@@Dan-xo9ly This is why I think the F-18F will have a long life in USN alongside F-35C, as there're still capabilities and missions that only the two seater F-18 possess and can perform. F-35 on the other hand is limited to it's internal weapons bay if they want to maintain stealth.
@@joshuabrook-harding978the issue with these missiles is their length : they must fit on the underbelly of the carrier aircraft. there are longer than bombs and can be somewhat « unbalanced » (the front heavier than the rear, or the other way), meaning that they cannot be carried from their centerline, but offset to the front or rear. The front wheel, in particular can be in the way, or it can affect aerodynamics.
We know from the Iran x Iraq war that the aim-54 was a fantastic munition that was very effective when deployed in it's doctrine of BVR air denial/ air superiority. It turns out that pairing a powerful tool with compatible rules of engagement makes for a winning combination.
@@XerrolAvengerII I’m sure you heard the story about one Phoenix taking out three Migs. lol There’s an interview with that pilot floating around somewhere on RUclips.
Advance F-35s can remain stealthed, and, use their superior sensors & data-link capability to send targeting info back to Hornet "missile trucks" that are loitering outside of the engagement area.
Yeah this is very similar to the air force using their F22s and F35s to provide targeting for the F15EX missile trucks. Wonder if the air force might pickup some of these AIM-174s for their Eagle fleet.
Should be possible to tie these into CEC. Which opens a whole *universe* of "spotter" platforms, including a "synthetic" firing "lock" where no actual fire control radars are illuminating the target - just multiple "not fire control quality" tracks that can be combined into "fire control quality" position and track, and then relayed via data link to the missile to get it close enough to go bulldog at the last few seconds.
C-5 Galaxy missile trucks would be awesome. Probably be able to put AESA radar panels all over it, but could datalink from a forward aircraft if needed. Drop out 150 of these and blot out the skies (and the USA's wallet, probably).
JFYI @Subbrief. The Phoenix (AIM-54A and AIM54-C) were intended for use on fighter aircraft. It was a part of the standard attack timeline (See Ward Carrol's video on the F-14 BVR Timeline) to utilize the AIM-54 against fighter aircraft with a high success rate (over 70%). In addition, the iranians utilized the AIM54 against fighter sized aircraft multiple times, including the only time multiple aircraft were downed by a single missile (3 Mirage F1s in close formation were all destroyed by 1 AIM-54). While it wasn't a perfect missile by todays standards, it could be used against fighter aircraft in many scenarios.
I think the 1960's Standard ARM gives some good insight into mounting a surface to air missile on an aircraft. The first version had few modifications other than mounting a signal seeking warhead, later versions got rocket engines designed for air launch and thus more range.
Is it confirmed that PL-15 and 17 doesn't have datalink for collaborative targeting? I remember a US airforce general commenting on using an AWAC to guide PL-15 has him worried. Especially for PL-17, it doesn't make much sense to me that this capability would be missing.
The export version of the PL-15 is stated having two way data links, i am not sure if the missile can be data linked from a 3rd source directly but if the plane firing it have data fusion from the AWACS it can guide it without using its own radar.
Yup. The folks on the internet, trolls and supporters alike don't know all that is going on inside the DoD. Their job is to defend the country and not necessarily keeping keyboard warriors up to date. - Good video.
You'd be amazed how much you get with open-source intel. It just takes time and a ton of data to piece together things as oppose to finding someone to just tell you.
@@rh906 Agree. There is so much that folks can figure out a lot if they put the work in. However, having only some of the relevant information can make folks think they know more than they really do and can come to wrong conclusions. Folks don't know what they don't know. The information could be mostly correct as well as the thought logic, but the conclusions could still be wrong. Which being wrong is okay as long as folks are open to correction.
There's a common misconception that the RIM/AIM-174 uses an AMRAAM seeker. Its actually a significantly larger and higher output seeker that is more or less a scaled up AIM-120 seeker not the actual AIM-120 seeker.
Greetings from Spain . Now all that is left is for PATRIOT to be integrated into aircraft to have total versatility in missiles. Can you imagine the SM-6, PATRIOT integrated into the B-1 and B-21...
Look up the AL-HTK or Air-launched Hit-to-Kill. They tested a PAC-3 a while back, I believe it was the CRI version and not the MSE. I wonder where they are with integrating PAC-3 MSE on ships though, I hope it's at least dual-packed
Just gimme a NARC Beacon- "hey, see the little sticky guy attached to your butt? Well he's going to invite *ALL* the other missiles to the party, whether you like it or not!"
The AIM-174B Standard Missile 6 Air Launched Configuration, which is the air-launched variant of the SM-6 missile, has a reported range of: - Over 150 nautical miles (278 km) against air targets - Over 200 nautical miles (370 km) against surface targets Some sources suggest that the AIM-174B may have an even longer range, potentially up to: - 250-300 nautical miles (463-556 km) or more against air targets - 300-350 nautical miles (556-648 km) or more against surface targets
AIM-54 + AIM-120 = AIM-174... Coincidence!? Yes. It is, yes. But it's still cool. Now I'm wondering if these could, under circumstances in which it might be useful, also be launched of the Super Hornet's wing with a booster? What kind of range & velocity could these reach, and how devastating could they be, especially by having an F-35 or F-22, or even B-21, much closer to target which could take over targeting for a "boosted" AIM-174B in the last 50nmi or so?
@@janizzkar The 174 isn't homage to the Phoenix, its just a coincidence. In fact, the 174 is almost twice the size and its parent, the RIM-66/67 is older than the Phoenix. The 174's development can be traced back to the RIM-2, then RIM-67, RIM-156, and then the RIM-174... Back when I was serving 15 years ago, it was a joke about strapping a RIM-66 on a jet, but the damn thing was just to big... Best part is this missile probably climbs up to +70-80,000 feet in the launch phase before ballistically leading its target, an adversary might never know the missile was launched until it goes pitbull a few miles out at Mach Jesus.
@@janizzkar I mean, it really is a coincidence though, even though it's still an awesome one. The official Navy designation for the original ship-launched missile is RIM-174 ERAM, which is what it had been for years before there was any planning (at least that we know of) for an air-launched version with the AMRAAM seeker. SM-6 is just the short-hand standard missile designation, and AIM-174 is just the re-designation of the original RIM-174. Still, a cool coincidence.
The radar is not good enough to home at such large distances, at a distance even the amraam isn't exactly fire and forget. The missile needs guided some distance before it can effectively guide itself or else it can be evaded pretty easily. Having awacs guide the missile is a massive advantage for air to air since you get to turn and run first.
8:43 There is evidence that Russia has that capability and is using it in Ukrainian right now. The "Russian equivalent" to the AIM-174B is the R-37M (also called "RVV BD") with the important difference that it is "Hypersonic" (Mach 6 or 4,600 mph, according to Wikipedia). And according to telegram channel speculations (Russian AND Ukrainian) those missiles where actually guided to target be A-50U (Russian AWACS) and S-400 (SAM) systems, they reach this conclusion because several Ukrainian planes where shoot down without being "locked" be the radar of a Russian fighter plane but were "illuminated" be a Russian A-50U/S-400.
WHAT!?! The DoD would fib to us? You mean the SR-71 didn't have the exact performance stats as a Boeing 747? I am disillusioned! For the record, I have been around/involved in DoD and DoE for 5 decades.
You said when looking at the AIM-174B in 2021 that an SM6 was to heavy to be aircraft loaded. From the information I've found online, when the SM6 booster is removed the missile is actually lighter than other hung stores on a F18 airframe so I wonder if it's more like the arrw project that it got shelved because there was no need to bring it into service at that time
Very good, that sounds like breakthrough knowledge. It's for years now: It dawns to me that the SM6 (Navy Standard Missile 6), now obviously about to be based also on truck launchers AND put on jetfighters, is THE answer to the Chinese threat against the fleet.
Did you think an AIMRAAM with triple range would be cheap? Wait until they realize, they need to enhance their planes Radars to use the Missiles to it's full capability in smaller planes. a Lot more expensive than you'd think at first glance.
Completely different missile. SM6/AIM-174B will never be carried in the internal bays of any stealth aircraft. It's way too big - the thing is massive for an air-air missile. Navy will still need AIM-260 to keep the stealth config option.
Good stuff glad to see US still leading in capabilities. Numbers are Chinese strong points but accuracy in offence/defence and strike strength for US are key.
the ability to flex mid leg guidance allows you to send out some Super-Hornets I would guess 4x per AC, put 8-16 missiles in the air and then they turn back to rearm, as the second wave of fighters surges out to deal with survivors of the first wave, and likely the second wave of actual sea base SM-6's.. Cadence and capability.. the navy likes to keep its SM-6's in the VLS for emergency's if possible.. I was talking with a friend about how difficult would it be to put say 180? 240? VLS on a cargo type ship that does not even have an active SPY-9 it just has an aegis data link, and defensive counters. Cut the cost and multi function down to its just a missile storage bunker ship, keep it within the center ring of the carrier group for safety and drain its mags first so it can go back and reload without taking the CBG off station.
I am pretty sure the F-35 can provide guidance for the SM-6. I envision F-35's operating in forward positions, undetected. F-18's launching these RIM-174's at range and allowing the F-35's to provide guidance while never being detected.
I believe LEO space based assets like Starshield are undervalued, it doesn't suffer from a sensor horizon in the same way and can offer 24/7 coverage of everywhere, incl. detection guidance and bda.
8:46 as usual, great content from Subbrief ❤. A former Insurance agent named Tom Clancy has mentioned about this concept in the year 1994, in his book 'Debt of Honor'😄. A missile fired from A Fighter and guided by an AWACS, so the target will never have a clue on he's been targeted. I have no idea if this tech is already in existence with anyone
I thought AIM-54 max range was 120 miles on high flying targets when it lob itself high in atmosphere and dive down on target. Your figure is probably right for the average engagement at lower altitudes.
I do believe it is not just air to air. It is air to ground (i.e. anti-ship) as well. Also this is one amongst a number of programmes the US is engaged in. LREW, LRAAM (JTAM), Cuda, Peregine, etc etc changing the mindset from a AMRAAM only position Similar with European Militaries with METEOR etc
I cannot help but wonder what carrying two of those will impact the performance of a Super Hornet. Really makes we wish we still had an updated version of the F-14 which could carry 6 Phoenix's which was also a large missile.
Boy I bet that F/A-18 handles like a log truck with a couple of those massive telephone poles on the wings. I'd be curious of their operating load and if they'd be escorted by standard -120/9X equipped escorts
I would imagine your looking at a standard loadout off a carrier of two of the big SM-6 with three drop tanks for range. Though heavy the missiles are less then 2000lb(?) each so its really not that bad. Even with that load you could still carry four -120's and two wingtip sidewinders no problem. Likewise you could trade the two wing drop tanks for two extra AIM-174's if shits really hitting the fan, but your range would then obviously be limited. In theory they would not need escorts.
While true, the long range attained with the AIM-174B was accomplished by sacrificing the warhead load- it is unlikely that the missile has enough capacity to sink a PSC, although it may inflict sufficient damage to achieve a mission kill.
@@thomasromanelli2561 It don't need a huge warhead as it would rely on its kinetic energy to do damage. Both Tomahawk and JASSM/LRASM already have the biggest payload of any cruise missile, while AIM-174B and AARGM-ER/SiAW maybe even MAKO in the future will provide speed.
Its nice everyone gets to look at it now, but what is concerning is the need to publicise it now. Especially a cost effective realistic weapon with strong strategic effect. Usually we don't bare these teeth unless we really need to. This is bigger than it seems, it isn't just a new missile but a complete area denial ability for air superiority deep into enemy territory affecting not only CAS and C&C but logistical support. The new system also lets it be deployed by unmanned vehicles also, increasing the threat level of all radar contacts. It heavily reinforces the stealth puncture technique that is successful will render their interconnected systems moot. This is essentially our 'long lance.' All of our best and proven in a neat, portable package, with a little spice at the end. Another neat feature is we can already mass produce them due to their shared features, and calculating our stockpiles is that much trickier. I'd love to see a high quality slow motion recording of the last few seconds on a training drone or similar. Can't wait for it to get a catchier name. Though for such a long, deeply penetrating weapon, the 'shlong lance' is up there
We publicize the UnClass range… the other side knows it goes further, but not how far further… Now they have to find a way to counter it (most likely by spying, but are they getting the real plans?) 😁
Genetic NFT is better than Be-A-Scottish-Laird NFT but I think you could probably get Anduril to sponsor some content, they have some money to burn. Loved the Burke brief xo
Ding Ding Ding. "just" re-add a slim, lighter version of the SM-6 booster and voila a AIM-174 ER. A booster weighing about 300lb would be perfect, resulting in a 2000lb ish weapon.
The Navy just announced a hypersonic missile that fits inside the F-35. Yes the US is really upgrading our systems quickly. The SM-6 must have a much longer range. Ship launched has a 400 mile range.
BS, you confuse mile with km dude, SM-6 naval version range is 150 up to 290 miles. Stop spreading BS. And do not talk about hypersonic, peoples a lot smarter than you (US generals) admitted US needs some 20 years to get a working, in service, hypersonic cruise missile.
This will end up in the new military airfield in Balabac Palawan, Philippines. This airfield can take the F15, F35 as well as F22. The airfield is facing the whole West Philippine sea and south China sea.
Maybe, maybe not. As SB notes, AIM-174B is apparently a "modified" SM-6. Part of that mod presumably is the AIM-120 (or "AIM-120-like"} terminal guidance system. But another aspect of the change must be simply making the missile lighter to enable mounting on an aircraft in the first place. Just speculation, but exoatmospheric capability might (or might not) have been part of the tradeoff is achieving those two goals.
There's another understated advantage to having the SM-6 employed by fast jets: the 174B probably retains the surface attack modes of the surface-launched variant (RIM-174A). That means that the 174B can attack ships as the US Navy's first supersonic anti ship missile. China's fleet defense problem just got a whole lot harder because now they don't have to just defend against just slow, lumbering NSMs, LRASMs, Harpoons and Blk V Tomahawks. They now need to worry about supersonic AShMs, too! The PLAN aren't ready for what a single carrier air wing can throw at them now.
Yes, it probably has the same surface attack capability, but mach 3.5 is pretty slow for missile cannot sea skimming and it probably cannot perform any terminal maneuver. It basically is an ideal target for seaRam or HQ-10.
Imagine if you could somehow see 130 miles away on a flat plane. Imagine how tiny a fighter plane would be to your eyes at that distance. Microscopic, if you could even see it at all, i mean like the size of a skin cell or something. This thing can project a beam that far away and see that.
Interesting. I worked test and evaluation of the Phoenix missile at a Navy weapons laboratory back in 80s.. The program was canceled with hundreds of missile sections built but never assembled into an all up round. Phoenix rises again from the ashes.
There was a rumor that F-16s going to Ukraine would have a surprise. I wonder. Sweden already announced their version of AWACs is being donated. A lot of different factors are involved in useful missle range. The radar range of the launching aircraft, the radar range of any AWACS, and the terminal guidance range of the missle itself. The longer the range of the missle, the larger the missle. The "no escape zone " is actually the measurement that counts, since many missiles are in a ballistic trajectory at extreme range and can be out maneuvered by nimble aircraft (like a fighter).
Although carriers do indeed project a tremendous amount of power, if I was an adversary I'd be very worried about those Virginia Class submarines with the battle groups as well. We all know submarines classify enemies in 2 ways: "Targets" and "Submarines".
Get your 14-day Free Trial offer from MyHeritage by clicking bit.ly/SubBrief
That was a very slick transition 👌
It’s 230 mile range not 130 miles.
@@leapdrive I was wondering, cause that aim 260 is coming and that goes farther than the aim 120.
This missile could be a game changer, especially if there was a stealth platform large enough to carry several internally. But, hear me out, I said this on here before. What if the Orca XLUUV could deploy the SM6 system autonomously from behind enemy lines?
Also the Tomcat could launch the Phoenix from a data point given to them by a Hawkeye/AWACS. The missile didn’t activate its own radar until it approached the no-escape zone. At that point it was free falling in a ballistic arc at speeds approaching or exceeding the requirement for hypersonic flight.
Being a SAM adapted to AAM made me think of the Iranians figuring out how to hang a HAWK missile on their F-14s.
@@petesheppard1709 ah yes, the hawk tua missile.
👍 @@rangerhalt
@@rangerhaltah yes the Iranians and their legendary hawk tua!!
Salim our missiles suck what do we do?
"Hawk Tua and spit on that thang"
What?
Except wasn't the Hawk an adapted version of the Phoenix first?
It is pretty crazy seeing 5 carriers simultaneously cruising around in the indo-pacific on USNI tracker.
No kidding!
Well one former POTUS was nearly assassinated and the other just stepped down from seeking re-election. Wouldn’t be surprised if some of this might be a small signal to world leaders not to try anything during our internal domestic troubles.
They are useless to be fair
5 carriers that are a sitting duck in modern drone warfare, not to mention missiles.
What we see happening in the Black Sea the Russian Black Sea fleet would be happening to our vessels in the pacific on steroids
@@paulroustan3643 Ever see the movie Screamers? I imagine the future like that, particularly the water.
unrelated
there was a few admirals at Submarine Rotational Force-West in fremantle in the news, checking the progress of the sub base. they said next month a US sub tender will be in fremantle with a Virginia for their first go at maintenance. that australian sailors were on 6 US subs and that they are ahead of time with the buildings.
GO AUKUS!!!!! and just to the american and uk people, we in australia thank you all from the bottom of our hearts for the chance to be able to defend ourselves. thanks
enjoy your nuclear subs. when you have to patrol 1,000,000 square miles of open ocean, a diesel sub just can't compete.
@@oldfrend at one stage they were looking at a Japanese class. it would have needed to refuel after a trip from Fremantle to Darwin. i was shaking my head.
Australian submarine Engineers and CO's have just passed there Nuclear exams onboard Royal Navy Nuclear Subs
Defend from what? Your job provider? Your trade partner? A country which literally made you rich?
AUKUS benefits all three countries, thanks Australia for being part of it! 🙂
The Navy lost range when they retired the F14s for the FA18s in both combat radius and weapon range. The loss of weapon range is now being rectified - but the combat radius of the 18's is still shorter than that of the 14's. One improvement is that the 18s have 11 hardpoints vs 14's 8 hardpoints. Also, you need these new weapons in quantity (which will help to bring down unit co$t$). With the increase in weapon range, this will also take some of the pressure on the Burke's limited number of vertical tubes (and also their new weapons loadout using 2 weapons per cell) with the retirement of the Ticos. This will significantly help with the Winchester exhaustion - and their having to retire to base to reload (which brings up foward deployment of support/reload/repair ships - which need additional weapon inventories for reloading).
AIM-54 (Phoenix), AIM-120 (AMRAAM). 54+120=174 for AIM-174 (Phoenix II?). Neat.
Exactly
It has nothing to do with that. The number is just a coincidence. The designation for the ship-launched version of the SM-6 is the "RIM-174". Because this is the new air-to-air version of the same missile, the designation was changed from "RIM-174" (the "R" stands for "Surface Ship-Launched") to "AIM-174" (the "A" stands for "Air-Launched").
@@johnnytyler5685 Oh I know, but it's a *neat* coincidence
I like it. I second that. Shall we put it to a vote? All those in favor of adopting the name “Phoenix II” for the AIM-174 missile say AYE; those opposed, say NAY. 😂
Woosh…
It is refreshing that the USN is finally getting new missiles and increasing its offensive capabilities.
that ad transition was top tier
"can we have aim-260?"
navy : "we have aim-260 at home"
aim-260 at home : ...
One thing to note about the claim from the DoD, is they specified fast, agile, alert, and defensive fighter targets would be engaged at 130nm. This means the max range of the missile is likely much farther against targets like refuelers or AWACS units
Probably at least 200nm against a large AWACS type target
@D00MerJohn likely closer to 250 given the motor is the same as an SM-6, so as long as the plane can fire the missile at the same or greater figures the booster achieves in the VLS variant, the range should be similar or greater I should think
@@user-gv4zb9rc6u They probably can't launch at the speeds the booster gets, but I bet it more than makes up for it launching at 35,000 feet or so.
@@nicazer if the booster only gets the missile up to say Mach 2 at 20,000 feet- I'd think a plane launching at 35,000-40,000 feet at Mach 1.4 would be close enough
@@user-gv4zb9rc6u i'd guess range/alt performance is almost identical for sm6/aim174.
"That's a big missile..."
"Yep"
"Think we can strap it to an F-18?"
"Only one way to find out."
They hang 2000lb bombs so the aircraft is good for it
@@Dan-xo9ly This is why I think the F-18F will have a long life in USN alongside F-35C, as there're still capabilities and missions that only the two seater F-18 possess and can perform. F-35 on the other hand is limited to it's internal weapons bay if they want to maintain stealth.
@@dSlayer6160 F/A-18E* Don't need WSO.
@@joshuabrook-harding978the issue with these missiles is their length : they must fit on the underbelly of the carrier aircraft. there are longer than bombs and can be somewhat « unbalanced » (the front heavier than the rear, or the other way), meaning that they cannot be carried from their centerline, but offset to the front or rear. The front wheel, in particular can be in the way, or it can affect aerodynamics.
I mean it has to take out a big target (wannabe Farmer Stealth Fighter).
Now we just need a Super Tomcat to launch it from.
Just got an ad at 8:49 "How to meet asian women online". 🤣🤣🤣
Make us proud. Close that missile gap, bro 🤏
_'Merica!_ 🇺🇸
Definitely some kind of _gap._ 😉
We know from the Iran x Iraq war that the aim-54 was a fantastic munition that was very effective when deployed in it's doctrine of BVR air denial/ air superiority. It turns out that pairing a powerful tool with compatible rules of engagement makes for a winning combination.
@@XerrolAvengerII I’m sure you heard the story about one Phoenix taking out three Migs. lol There’s an interview with that pilot floating around somewhere on RUclips.
Advance F-35s can remain stealthed, and, use their superior sensors & data-link capability to send targeting info back to Hornet "missile trucks" that are loitering outside of the engagement area.
Yeah this is very similar to the air force using their F22s and F35s to provide targeting for the F15EX missile trucks. Wonder if the air force might pickup some of these AIM-174s for their Eagle fleet.
Also worth noting as the Super Hornet won’t be using their own radar to search for targets this also increases their survivability.
@@joelhume Possibly until Raytheon's LREW or Boeing's LRAAM goes operational.
Should be possible to tie these into CEC. Which opens a whole *universe* of "spotter" platforms, including a "synthetic" firing "lock" where no actual fire control radars are illuminating the target - just multiple "not fire control quality" tracks that can be combined into "fire control quality" position and track, and then relayed via data link to the missile to get it close enough to go bulldog at the last few seconds.
C-5 Galaxy missile trucks would be awesome. Probably be able to put AESA radar panels all over it, but could datalink from a forward aircraft if needed. Drop out 150 of these and blot out the skies (and the USA's wallet, probably).
JFYI @Subbrief. The Phoenix (AIM-54A and AIM54-C) were intended for use on fighter aircraft. It was a part of the standard attack timeline (See Ward Carrol's video on the F-14 BVR Timeline) to utilize the AIM-54 against fighter aircraft with a high success rate (over 70%). In addition, the iranians utilized the AIM54 against fighter sized aircraft multiple times, including the only time multiple aircraft were downed by a single missile (3 Mirage F1s in close formation were all destroyed by 1 AIM-54). While it wasn't a perfect missile by todays standards, it could be used against fighter aircraft in many scenarios.
i had no idea about the 3 for 1, that must be one hell of a warhead.
@@moonasha it was one of the largest warhead mounted on an Ait-to-Air missile since one of its purposes was to take out big planes...
@@alinmeleandra3175…and huge Soviet cruise missiles.
Thank you for the updates!
If you think about it, it's basically the same missile body as the Standard ARM they were hanging off of F-4Gs in the 1960s.
No, the missile body is bigger than the Standard ARM and the motor/seeker are far more advanced.
I think the 1960's Standard ARM gives some good insight into mounting a surface to air missile on an aircraft.
The first version had few modifications other than mounting a signal seeking warhead, later versions got rocket engines designed for air launch and thus more range.
The airframe engineering was already done with AIM-97 Seekbat prototype.
Can't wait for the MAKO Hypersonics to emerge & Arrive . . A Real Overdue Game Changer 😮 !!
Is it confirmed that PL-15 and 17 doesn't have datalink for collaborative targeting? I remember a US airforce general commenting on using an AWAC to guide PL-15 has him worried. Especially for PL-17, it doesn't make much sense to me that this capability would be missing.
The export version of the PL-15 is stated having two way data links, i am not sure if the missile can be data linked from a 3rd source directly but if the plane firing it have data fusion from the AWACS it can guide it without using its own radar.
Yup. The folks on the internet, trolls and supporters alike don't know all that is going on inside the DoD. Their job is to defend the country and not necessarily keeping keyboard warriors up to date. - Good video.
You'd be amazed how much you get with open-source intel. It just takes time and a ton of data to piece together things as oppose to finding someone to just tell you.
@@rh906 Agree. There is so much that folks can figure out a lot if they put the work in. However, having only some of the relevant information can make folks think they know more than they really do and can come to wrong conclusions. Folks don't know what they don't know. The information could be mostly correct as well as the thought logic, but the conclusions could still be wrong. Which being wrong is okay as long as folks are open to correction.
Saw this on DCS and wanted to hear your take on it, so thanks Jive, and also thanks for the referral to heatloss.
We have known about this program for quite a while now.
PLA AF "I want that island"
US: "oops, look at this new AAM"
PLAAF also has PL-17, which is lighter and optimised for fighter.
There's a common misconception that the RIM/AIM-174 uses an AMRAAM seeker. Its actually a significantly larger and higher output seeker that is more or less a scaled up AIM-120 seeker not the actual AIM-120 seeker.
Greetings from Spain . Now all that is left is for PATRIOT to be integrated into aircraft to have total versatility in missiles.
Can you imagine the SM-6, PATRIOT integrated into the B-1 and B-21...
Look up the AL-HTK or Air-launched Hit-to-Kill. They tested a PAC-3 a while back, I believe it was the CRI version and not the MSE.
I wonder where they are with integrating PAC-3 MSE on ships though, I hope it's at least dual-packed
Why not put a Falcon 9 on an F-16 so we have Falcons launching Falcons at that.
@@zolikoff What I think is being sought is the Franken SAM concept.
Patriot is garbage lol
Love the jump ahead button.
I hope someday we move to the battletech nomenclature: SRM, MRM, LRM
those terms are already used but for land based missiles
Just gimme a NARC Beacon- "hey, see the little sticky guy attached to your butt? Well he's going to invite *ALL* the other missiles to the party, whether you like it or not!"
@@tertiaryobjective
There's an air-to-air version of Arrow IV now. Kind of fitting to this video.
Also nuclear-armed Urbies.
The AIM-174B Standard Missile 6 Air Launched Configuration, which is the air-launched variant of the SM-6 missile, has a reported range of:
- Over 150 nautical miles (278 km) against air targets
- Over 200 nautical miles (370 km) against surface targets
Some sources suggest that the AIM-174B may have an even longer range, potentially up to:
- 250-300 nautical miles (463-556 km) or more against air targets
- 300-350 nautical miles (556-648 km) or more against surface targets
Video about AIM-174B starts at 2:38.
Goated comment
Cant wait till its added to DCS 🙂
Kind of reminds me of its grandfather, the AGM-78 Standard Anti-Radiation Missile (STARM) from back in the Wild Weasel day...
The Royal Australian Navy has the SM6.
The Royal Australian Air Force has the F/A-18F and LRASM. Between the SM6 and LRASM I see potential.
Holy crap! I thought it was just being tested!
This is being deployed? That's awesome!
the missile knows where the missile is
AIM-54 + AIM-120 = AIM-174... Coincidence!? Yes. It is, yes. But it's still cool. Now I'm wondering if these could, under circumstances in which it might be useful, also be launched of the Super Hornet's wing with a booster? What kind of range & velocity could these reach, and how devastating could they be, especially by having an F-35 or F-22, or even B-21, much closer to target which could take over targeting for a "boosted" AIM-174B in the last 50nmi or so?
I did kot think of that before. You gotta be right the 174 is a homage to the phoenix. Since the sm6 uses aim120 parts especially the seeker
@@janizzkar The 174 isn't homage to the Phoenix, its just a coincidence. In fact, the 174 is almost twice the size and its parent, the RIM-66/67 is older than the Phoenix. The 174's development can be traced back to the RIM-2, then RIM-67, RIM-156, and then the RIM-174... Back when I was serving 15 years ago, it was a joke about strapping a RIM-66 on a jet, but the damn thing was just to big... Best part is this missile probably climbs up to +70-80,000 feet in the launch phase before ballistically leading its target, an adversary might never know the missile was launched until it goes pitbull a few miles out at Mach Jesus.
@@janizzkar I mean, it really is a coincidence though, even though it's still an awesome one. The official Navy designation for the original ship-launched missile is RIM-174 ERAM, which is what it had been for years before there was any planning (at least that we know of) for an air-launched version with the AMRAAM seeker. SM-6 is just the short-hand standard missile designation, and AIM-174 is just the re-designation of the original RIM-174. Still, a cool coincidence.
More like a standard missile + AIM-120 = AIM-174. The standard missile has been around since before the AIM-54.
Awesome show- thanks again
The SM-6/AIM-174B does not need target illumination as it is active radar homing.
The radar is not good enough to home at such large distances, at a distance even the amraam isn't exactly fire and forget. The missile needs guided some distance before it can effectively guide itself or else it can be evaded pretty easily. Having awacs guide the missile is a massive advantage for air to air since you get to turn and run first.
@@elswagmaster6992 thats not how it works
Great video, Aaron...👍
Could you make a video covering what you know about the PL-21?
He is clearly not familiar with air combat.
First time I've seen my old ship the Blue Ridge on there. Currently it's in Singapore.
The pilot and back seater have there eyes on you!!
It's the kind of thinking thats needed - innovation FTW.
Good stuff, thank you Aaron
Actually was done before look at the standard arm anti radar missile during nam , AGM-78 used the rim-66 airframe
Take a look at the AIM-97 Seekbat prototype.
8:43 There is evidence that Russia has that capability and is using it in Ukrainian right now. The "Russian equivalent" to the AIM-174B is the R-37M (also called "RVV BD") with the important difference that it is "Hypersonic" (Mach 6 or 4,600 mph, according to Wikipedia). And according to telegram channel speculations (Russian AND Ukrainian) those missiles where actually guided to target be A-50U (Russian AWACS) and S-400 (SAM) systems, they reach this conclusion because several Ukrainian planes where shoot down without being "locked" be the radar of a Russian fighter plane but were "illuminated" be a Russian A-50U/S-400.
Holy crap. Took me a second to realize it is next to an AMRAAM.
Its a AIM-54 on crack.
she THICCC
WHAT!?! The DoD would fib to us? You mean the SR-71 didn't have the exact performance stats as a Boeing 747? I am disillusioned!
For the record, I have been around/involved in DoD and DoE for 5 decades.
You said when looking at the AIM-174B in 2021 that an SM6 was to heavy to be aircraft loaded. From the information I've found online, when the SM6 booster is removed the missile is actually lighter than other hung stores on a F18 airframe so I wonder if it's more like the arrw project that it got shelved because there was no need to bring it into service at that time
Very good, that sounds like breakthrough knowledge. It's for years now: It dawns to me that the SM6 (Navy Standard Missile 6), now obviously about to be based also on truck launchers AND put on jetfighters, is THE answer to the Chinese threat against the fleet.
Mako missile is the one that is really going to be a game changer
Navy got tired of waiting for the AIM-260 and went SM6. Expensive munition.
Did you think an AIMRAAM with triple range would be cheap? Wait until they realize, they need to enhance their planes Radars to use the Missiles to it's full capability in smaller planes. a Lot more expensive than you'd think at first glance.
Completely different missile. SM6/AIM-174B will never be carried in the internal bays of any stealth aircraft. It's way too big - the thing is massive for an air-air missile. Navy will still need AIM-260 to keep the stealth config option.
Good stuff glad to see US still leading in capabilities. Numbers are Chinese strong points but accuracy in offence/defence and strike strength for US are key.
the ability to flex mid leg guidance allows you to send out some Super-Hornets I would guess 4x per AC, put 8-16 missiles in the air and then they turn back to rearm, as the second wave of fighters surges out to deal with survivors of the first wave, and likely the second wave of actual sea base SM-6's.. Cadence and capability.. the navy likes to keep its SM-6's in the VLS for emergency's if possible.. I was talking with a friend about how difficult would it be to put say 180? 240? VLS on a cargo type ship that does not even have an active SPY-9 it just has an aegis data link, and defensive counters. Cut the cost and multi function down to its just a missile storage bunker ship, keep it within the center ring of the carrier group for safety and drain its mags first so it can go back and reload without taking the CBG off station.
we can't even make enough of the missiles in the current inventory.
We needed a replacement for the Phoenix missile. And to have something that matches the R-37M hypersonic missile.
Thanks
Alerted maneuvering fighter at 130 sounds to me like it’s a good bit more for their support aircraft.
Remember the F35C has a much longer combat radius of 670nmi then the 18ef which is in the 444nmi-489nmi with 2 or 3 x drop tanks.
I am pretty sure the F-35 can provide guidance for the SM-6. I envision F-35's operating in forward positions, undetected. F-18's launching these RIM-174's at range and allowing the F-35's to provide guidance while never being detected.
I believe LEO space based assets like Starshield are undervalued, it doesn't suffer from a sensor horizon in the same way and can offer 24/7 coverage of everywhere, incl. detection guidance and bda.
Great news regarding AAM ranges!
8:46 as usual, great content from Subbrief ❤. A former Insurance agent named Tom Clancy has mentioned about this concept in the year 1994, in his book 'Debt of Honor'😄. A missile fired from A Fighter and guided by an AWACS, so the target will never have a clue on he's been targeted. I have no idea if this tech is already in existence with anyone
I thought AIM-54 max range was 120 miles on high flying targets when it lob itself high in atmosphere and dive down on target. Your figure is probably right for the average engagement at lower altitudes.
That should really boost the Hornet's ability to intercept at range!
I do believe it is not just air to air. It is air to ground (i.e. anti-ship) as well.
Also this is one amongst a number of programmes the US is engaged in. LREW, LRAAM (JTAM), Cuda, Peregine, etc etc changing the mindset from a AMRAAM only position
Similar with European Militaries with METEOR etc
I cannot help but wonder what carrying two of those will impact the performance of a Super Hornet. Really makes we wish we still had an updated version of the F-14 which could carry 6 Phoenix's which was also a large missile.
the F-14 had a lot of dead weight for the swing wing capabilities.
Capabilities that are long obsolete
Imagine loading up a few BUFFs with these things, and have them orbiting just waiting to unload a ton of missiles to saturate an airborne threat.
Boy I bet that F/A-18 handles like a log truck with a couple of those massive telephone poles on the wings. I'd be curious of their operating load and if they'd be escorted by standard -120/9X equipped escorts
I would imagine your looking at a standard loadout off a carrier of two of the big SM-6 with three drop tanks for range. Though heavy the missiles are less then 2000lb(?) each so its really not that bad. Even with that load you could still carry four -120's and two wingtip sidewinders no problem. Likewise you could trade the two wing drop tanks for two extra AIM-174's if shits really hitting the fan, but your range would then obviously be limited. In theory they would not need escorts.
Any sensor, any shooter, any missile.
Integrating missile systems between services and platforms is the way forward.
Keep up the good work.
that segway lmaoo
He is like the Brett Cooper of naval warfare.
Now I want AIM-174B in War Thunder.
The AMRAM 260 will be out very soon too. It’s supposed to have a range of 130 miles and it will fit inside an F-35 and F-22.
"too big and heavy" lol
Just google AGM-78 we've done it before.
And they developed a prototype air to air variant of the SM-1/AGM-78. The AIM-97 Seekbat.
You forgot AIM-174B can also be used for anti-ship role.
We got some farmer ships and planes to down.
While true, the long range attained with the AIM-174B was accomplished by sacrificing the warhead load- it is unlikely that the missile has enough capacity to sink a PSC, although it may inflict sufficient damage to achieve a mission kill.
@@thomasromanelli2561 It don't need a huge warhead as it would rely on its kinetic energy to do damage. Both Tomahawk and JASSM/LRASM already have the biggest payload of any cruise missile, while AIM-174B and AARGM-ER/SiAW maybe even MAKO in the future will provide speed.
Very good news!
About time. 🎉🎉🎉
Its nice everyone gets to look at it now, but what is concerning is the need to publicise it now. Especially a cost effective realistic weapon with strong strategic effect. Usually we don't bare these teeth unless we really need to.
This is bigger than it seems, it isn't just a new missile but a complete area denial ability for air superiority deep into enemy territory affecting not only CAS and C&C but logistical support. The new system also lets it be deployed by unmanned vehicles also, increasing the threat level of all radar contacts.
It heavily reinforces the stealth puncture technique that is successful will render their interconnected systems moot.
This is essentially our 'long lance.' All of our best and proven in a neat, portable package, with a little spice at the end.
Another neat feature is we can already mass produce them due to their shared features, and calculating our stockpiles is that much trickier.
I'd love to see a high quality slow motion recording of the last few seconds on a training drone or similar.
Can't wait for it to get a catchier name. Though for such a long, deeply penetrating weapon, the 'shlong lance' is up there
We publicize the UnClass range… the other side knows it goes further, but not how far further… Now they have to find a way to counter it (most likely by spying, but are they getting the real plans?) 😁
rimpac ! i think you can be prosecuted for that in the UK !
Genetic NFT is better than Be-A-Scottish-Laird NFT but I think you could probably get Anduril to sponsor some content, they have some money to burn. Loved the Burke brief xo
@Sub Brief Next up: Navy straps an Arleigh Burke to an F-18 😄😉 ...hats off to US Navy for doing an opposite of LCS
Blue ring in the missile means inert or a dummy weapon, it's a practice missile filled with concrete, no explosive or rocket fuel.
Now just wondering if they also can add a booster to the back to get additional distance if needed…..
Ding Ding Ding. "just" re-add a slim, lighter version of the SM-6 booster and voila a AIM-174 ER. A booster weighing about 300lb would be perfect, resulting in a 2000lb ish weapon.
The Navy just announced a hypersonic missile that fits inside the F-35. Yes the US is really upgrading our systems quickly. The SM-6 must have a much longer range. Ship launched has a 400 mile range.
BS, you confuse mile with km dude, SM-6 naval version range is 150 up to 290 miles. Stop spreading BS. And do not talk about hypersonic, peoples a lot smarter than you (US generals) admitted US needs some 20 years to get a working, in service, hypersonic cruise missile.
Best news channel
8:10 so part of the "any sensor, any shooter" (or whatever theyre calling it today) program.
This will end up in the new military airfield in Balabac Palawan, Philippines.
This airfield can take the F15, F35 as well as F22.
The airfield is facing the whole West Philippine sea and south China sea.
Reminds me of the AIM-54 Phoenix
What I think is really dope is the SM-6 is already an anti-satellite missile, and moving it 9 miles higher doesn't make that capability worse ❤
Maybe, maybe not. As SB notes, AIM-174B is apparently a "modified" SM-6. Part of that mod presumably is the AIM-120 (or "AIM-120-like"} terminal guidance system. But another aspect of the change must be simply making the missile lighter to enable mounting on an aircraft in the first place. Just speculation, but exoatmospheric capability might (or might not) have been part of the tradeoff is achieving those two goals.
Kinda tells you how good the aircraft radar is
There's another understated advantage to having the SM-6 employed by fast jets: the 174B probably retains the surface attack modes of the surface-launched variant (RIM-174A).
That means that the 174B can attack ships as the US Navy's first supersonic anti ship missile. China's fleet defense problem just got a whole lot harder because now they don't have to just defend against just slow, lumbering NSMs, LRASMs, Harpoons and Blk V Tomahawks. They now need to worry about supersonic AShMs, too!
The PLAN aren't ready for what a single carrier air wing can throw at them now.
Yes, it probably has the same surface attack capability, but mach 3.5 is pretty slow for missile cannot sea skimming and it probably cannot perform any terminal maneuver. It basically is an ideal target for seaRam or HQ-10.
@@joelau2383 Who said that the SM-6 doesn't have a sea-skimming attack mode?
@@isotaan Because SM-6 is an anti air missile. It won't carry specialized sea-skimming altimeter which cost extra weight, electricity and cost.
Imagine if you could somehow see 130 miles away on a flat plane. Imagine how tiny a fighter plane would be to your eyes at that distance. Microscopic, if you could even see it at all, i mean like the size of a skin cell or something. This thing can project a beam that far away and see that.
Thats a good news .
What is the hit probability vs a maneuvering fighter?
Lmao best ad tie in ever
Interesting. I worked test and evaluation of the Phoenix missile at a Navy weapons laboratory back in 80s.. The program was canceled with hundreds of missile sections built but never assembled into an all up round. Phoenix rises again from the ashes.
That was a smooth segway to the sponsor, kudos!
There was a rumor that F-16s going to Ukraine would have a surprise. I wonder.
Sweden already announced their version of AWACs is being donated.
A lot of different factors are involved in useful missle range. The radar range of the launching aircraft, the radar range of any AWACS, and the terminal guidance range of the missle itself. The longer the range of the missle, the larger the missle. The "no escape zone " is actually the measurement that counts, since many missiles are in a ballistic trajectory at extreme range and can be out maneuvered by nimble aircraft (like a fighter).
Although carriers do indeed project a tremendous amount of power, if I was an adversary I'd be very worried about those Virginia Class submarines with the battle groups as well. We all know submarines classify enemies in 2 ways: "Targets" and "Submarines".