F-18 Follows a Tomahawk to impact on ship

Live anti-ship missile test on a real warship... Wow...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBakzoQDd10

 

Tom- Our Navy is seriously considering both the shipborne and air launched versions of this missile.

 

I'm amazed that a missile that small can rip that big of a chunk out of that frigate...
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

We were offering a turbine for that system back when it was the Penguin. The turbine version would have had a much greater range. Interesting is that this missile has wings and has a much higher "G" capability than most other missiles. The Norwegians wanted a missile that had much higher maneuverability because of the terrain where they are using them. I was the program mgr of that engine development and we had a very light engine that had a very high thrust per unit frontal area as well as a short length. The short length is important because that keeps your fuel capacity high and that boosts the range of the missile. That program died because of the short slightness of our management team but it would have been on this version if they had they been willing to make some investment. The missile has a rocket in it because there simply isn't a turbine that would fit and work other than the one we developed.

 

Now you have me wondering, what is the range of the rocket version? Turbine range?

 

The Penguin launched from the ground was just over 20 miles IIRC. The turbine version was WELL over 3 times that... The beauty of the turbine version was that you'd have "over the horizon" capability even in the open ocean.

The Penguin Mk3 was air launched, glided to near the target and then lit the rocket to gain terminal energy. Range on that was just over 30 miles. With the turbine you could come in on the deck from further away and be harder to detect until the last minute and still have more than twice the range.

 

Some cool, if a little scary, stuff!

Which missile(s?) have terrain following radar onboard? I vaguely recall seeing some pretty impressive footage of one humming along not more than a few feet above the ground, and it wasn't level ground!

I'm no expert, but allows 'em to kinda 'sneak in' under the radar/anti missile defenses?

Cheers,
Ian

 

TLAM and ALCM had terrain following radar IIRC, these two were the first. I don't remember if the SLAM (land attack version of the Harpoon) had it. With the advent of GPS not sure how much you need terrain following radar anymore and an emitter for terrain following is not a good thing as it makes you more vulnerable. It all changes and evolves and I haven't been following that part of the technology for a while so my experience on the guidance side of cruise missile technology is pretty stale.

The objective of most cruise missiles is to enter a low altitude below radar. If you want to attack anything that has an air defense capability, lower is better. When something is that low it is gone before you can respond unless you are waiting for it and know its coming. Many aircraft now have "look down, shoot down" radar that can discern low flying things like cruise missiles if they aren't stealthy, it is an ever evolving circle of measure and countermeasure.

 

Not my area and my data is old too, but the the Tomahawk, pre GPS, certainly emitted for altitude as it flew and followed ground contour, comparing values to DTED (digital terrain elevation data) in order to fine tune the INS and therby increase it's accuracy. I don't know for certain, but would be surprised if they removed that capability from newer land attack systems, as relying on INS only in a setting of GPS loss, is a risky gamble for a weapon system. In any case, I'm not sure if Tomahawk terrain followed rather just flew a preplotted course with little altitude variation along the way. Subtle difference...

 

Thanks guys! Appreciate the insights.

Cheers,
Ian

 

TLAM and ALCM did not have TFR, but they did have a radar altimeter and a terrain comparison system (TERCOM) that allowed them to fly at fairly low altitude and also use the data for navigation updates. They have been updated with GPS as another cross-check. Terrain data bases have gotten more sophisticated, too, and processor power and memory have increased enough for a much more detailed model. DoD is still interested in this technology in case a near peer takes out GPS by various means.

Pretty much the same things Will said.