By: bring_it_on
- 13th September 2014 at 14:06Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think the main difference is that jdradm plan to use normal rocket engine while T-3 plan to use Ramjet engine
( based on their pictures)
I don't think the program specifically asked for one form of propulsion while excluding all others.
Aerojet, a GenCorp (NYSE: GY) company, announced today that it has successfully tested an advanced solid ramjet fuel in an engine ground test. The fuel is being developed to provide long-range, high-speed capability for the U.S. military and potentially for the future USAF/Navy Joint Dual Role Air Dominance Missile (JDRADM).
Ramjet engines have historically used liquid fuel which mixes with atmospheric air in order to provide thrust at high speed. However, for tactical missiles, the military services have expressed interest in a storable solid fuel. In order to meet this need, Aerojet developed the world's first throttleable solid-fueled ramjet for the U.S. Navy GQM-163A Coyote missile target starting in the year 2000. Since that time, Aerojet has been developing a family of advanced formulations called AerGen™ fuels with properties suitable for a tactical missile ramjet engine. The fuel burns very efficiently, resulting in more delivered energy and reduced visible exhaust.
The ground testing was conducted at Aerojet's Airbreathing Test Facility located in Orange County, Va. A full-scale engine was tested at conditions simulating high-altitude, high-speed flight. "Our airbreathing propulsion business represents cutting-edge technology aimed at future military requirements," said Aerojet Vice President and Deputy to the President, Dick Bregard. "Aerojet is proud to demonstrate our commitment to advancing our country's military capability through this innovative ramjet fuel research."
Aerojet is a world-recognized aerospace and defense leader principally serving the missile and space propulsion, defense and armaments markets. GenCorp is a leading technology-based manufacturer of aerospace and defense products and systems with a real estate segment that includes activities related to the entitlement, sale, and leasing of the company's excess real estate assets. Additional information about Aerojet and GenCorp can be obtained by visiting the companies' Web sites at http://www.aerojet.com/ and http://www.gencorp.com/.
By: maurobaggio
- 13th September 2014 at 19:21Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't think the program specifically asked for one form of propulsion while excluding all others.
Aerojet, a GenCorp (NYSE: GY) company, announced today that it has successfully tested an advanced solid ramjet fuel in an engine ground test. The fuel is being developed to provide long-range, high-speed capability for the U.S. military and potentially for the future USAF/Navy Joint Dual Role Air Dominance Missile (JDRADM).
The concept seems very interesting, however I guess this solution had been implemented since 1958 when the Soviet Union began the development of SAM ( Surface Air Missile) SA 6 Gainful.
Those 3M9M missiles from the SA 6 Gainful also has been employed a ramjet rocket with solid fuel with the same purpose due for its advantages that has been mentioned in this article, however the ramjet propulsion were rejected by the successor from SA 6 Gainful that were the SA 11 Gadfly as the SA 17 Grizzly for several reasons.
This does not mean that someone could not improve such old technology, however the content of this article in this post above mention that ramjet propulsion with solid fuel has been developed as an innovation, and this actually would not be the case.
By: mig-31bm
- 13th September 2014 at 20:39Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The concept seems very interesting, however I guess this solution had been implemented since 1958 when the Soviet Union began the development of SAM ( Surface Air Missile) SA 6 Gainful.
Those 3M9M missiles from the SA 6 Gainful also has been employed a ramjet rocket with solid fuel with the same purpose due for its advantages that has been mentioned in this article, however the ramjet propulsion were rejected by the successor from SA 6 Gainful that were the SA 11 Gadfly as the SA 17 Grizzly for several reasons.
This does not mean that someone could not improve such old technology, however the content of this article in this post above mention that ramjet propulsion with solid fuel has been developed as an innovation, and this actually would not be the case.
SAM are often much much bigger than AAM thus easier to use Ramjet , i think , up until now the only ramjet AAM is Meteor
The Coyote was delivered before the Meteor and the company is talking about it when it says the first throttle able solid fueled ramjet. The fuel developed for the JDRADM is nothing but an evolution of what went into the Coyote and since it does not have an application at the moment besides the test missiles for a DARPA project it cannot claim to be anything.
The Meteor was absolutely the first BVR missile to be operational with a throttleable solid fueled ramjet and neither aerojet or this press release is claiming otherwise.
By: maurobaggio
- 15th September 2014 at 03:29Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Coyote was delivered before the Meteor and the company is talking about it when it says the first throttle able solid fueled ramjet. The fuel developed for the JDRADM is nothing but an evolution of what went into the Coyote and since it does not have an application at the moment besides the test missiles for a DARPA project it cannot claim to be anything.
The Meteor was absolutely the first BVR missile to be operational with a throttleable solid fueled ramjet and neither aerojet or this press release is claiming otherwise.
Anyway what seems weird for me is the statement that the Coyote program had been opened up the field of the ramjet propulsion with solid fuel as that could see above in the article:
Ramjet engines have historically used liquid fuel which mixes with atmospheric air in order to provide thrust at high speed. However, for tactical missiles, the military services have expressed interest in a storable solid fuel. In order to meet this need, Aerojet developed the world's first throttleable solid-fueled ramjet for the U.S. Navy GQM-163A Coyote missile target starting in the year 2000. Since that time, Aerojet has been developing a family of advanced formulations called AerGen� fuels with properties suitable for a tactical missile ramjet engine. The fuel burns very efficiently, resulting in more delivered energy and reduced visible exhaust.
Additional information about Aerojet and GenCorp can be obtained by visiting the companies' Web sites at http://www.aerojet.com/ and http://www.gencorp.com/.
In fact the missiles 3M9ME from SA 6 has had a boost stage with solid propellant charge (172 kg VIK-2 propellant)and a ramjet engine 9D16K with solid fuel charge (67 kg LK-6TM reducing propellant).
Perhaps the reason why the Soviet Union had been chosen in 1958 this propulsion by ramjet with solid fuel were not to be the pioneer in the field, but by necessity due to its application.
The main reason that I am able to guess about the SA 6 Gainful should be that any missile with liquid fuel could be a huge problem with high accelerations G, while the missile would be chasing the maneuvers target as fighters, once after the missile had been consuming part of its liquid fuel , the same that remains inside its compartment could flow into compartment one side to another, even that compartment had splitting walls, this last one would not be effective.
The missiles with fuel liquid in maneuvers with high G acceleration it would be struck for something like a 'sledgehammer' by the liquid fuel remaining in its compartment , and it would make the control by the missile autopilot highly problematic such if it had to tame a 'crazy horse'.
The modern fighters also has the same problem but it has been restricted to 9G accelerations, and those fighters has several fuel compartments that are always equalized. While even the old missiles from SA 6 could achieve 40G and the others like the Meteor the values would be higher like something 100G.
So it would be almost mandatory that any air-to-air missile capable to engage fighters should have a ramjet propulsion with solid fuel instead liquid fuel, although a gel solution as fuel for the ramjet could decrease this problem, but the same would not disappear, and maybe that was the reason of this solution after would be tested it has been not implemented in the Meteor program.
By: bring_it_on
- 15th September 2014 at 11:25Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Anyway what seems weird for me is the statement that the Coyote program had been opened up the field of the ramjet propulsion with solid fuel as that could see above in the article:
In fact the missiles 3M9ME from SA 6 has had a boost stage with solid propellant charge (172 kg VIK-2 propellant)and a ramjet engine 9D16K with solid fuel charge (67 kg LK-6TM reducing propellant).
Perhaps the reason why the Soviet Union had been chosen in 1958 this propulsion by ramjet with solid fuel were not to be the pioneer in the field, but by necessity due to its application.
The main reason that I am able to guess about the SA 6 Gainful should be that any missile with liquid fuel could be a huge problem with high accelerations G, while the missile would be chasing the maneuvers target as fighters, once after the missile had been consuming part of its liquid fuel , the same that remains inside its compartment could flow into compartment one side to another, even that compartment had splitting walls, this last one would not be effective.
The missiles with fuel liquid in maneuvers with high G acceleration it would be struck for something like a 'sledgehammer' by the liquid fuel remaining in its compartment , and it would make the control by the missile autopilot highly problematic such if it had to tame a 'crazy horse'.
The modern fighters also has the same problem but it has been restricted to 9G accelerations, and those fighters has several fuel compartments that are always equalized. While even the old missiles from SA 6 could achieve 40G and the others like the Meteor the values would be higher like something 100G.
So it would be almost mandatory that any air-to-air missile capable to engage fighters should have a ramjet propulsion with solid fuel instead liquid fuel, although a gel solution as fuel for the ramjet could decrease this problem, but the same would not disappear, and maybe that was the reason of this solution after would be tested it has been not implemented in the Meteor program.
The article is not speaking off only a solid fueled ramjet (which had also been experimented with the CROW in the 50's) but a solid fuel variable flow ducted ramjet. "A Throttleable Ducted Rocket (TDR) is a ramjet-type engine using a solid propellant for which the fuel mass flow rate can be controlled". The Coyote, Meteor and most likely one or both of the T-3 missiles are Solid fueled variable ducted (hence throttleable) ramjet missiles.
From the Aerojet Release:
Aerojet developed the world's first throttleable solid-fueled ramjet for the U.S. Navy GQM-163A Coyote missile target starting in the year 2000
By: Hotshot
- 15th September 2014 at 15:49Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So the technology has been mature for close to 15 years. It is disappointing that the AMRAAM has not been upgraded with it since, I guess the throttleable ramjet would help for end-game maneuvering against fighters equipped with thrust vectoring.
By: mig-31bm
- 15th September 2014 at 16:30Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
btw do anyone know , what are the approximate RCS of these missiles such as
JASSM
JSOW-ER
SDB II
Aim-132
KEPD tarus
all i know is that AGM-84 and AGM-88 have RCS about 0.1 m2 at x-bands
btw why KEPD tarus have perpendicular side ? , wasnt stealth design avoid perpendicular part ?
By: Hotshot
- 15th September 2014 at 19:03Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I remember for the F-117 they wanted to add external pylons to carry extra bombs using RAM paint.
I wonder whether this could be done on missiles. I doubt it would work on supersonic missiles, but perhaps on subsonic missiles it would work, in particular for the SEAD role.
By: mig-31bm
- 15th September 2014 at 20:49Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I remember for the F-117 they wanted to add external pylons to carry extra bombs using RAM paint.
I wonder whether this could be done on missiles. I doubt it would work on supersonic missiles, but perhaps on subsonic missiles it would work, in particular for the SEAD role.
if i remember correctly it was the F-117B project right ?
btw how much Kg do you think painting RAM on these missiles would weight
By: maurobaggio
- 16th September 2014 at 02:05Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The article is not speaking off only a solid fueled ramjet (which had also been experimented with the CROW in the 50's) but a solid fuel variable flow ducted ramjet. "A Throttleable Ducted Rocket (TDR) is a ramjet-type engine using a solid propellant for which the fuel mass flow rate can be controlled". The Coyote, Meteor and most likely one or both of the T-3 missiles are Solid fueled variable ducted (hence throttleable) ramjet missiles.
From the Aerojet Release:
Now it's much better after this elucidation above.
Maybe someone could inform Aerojet Company to rectify its statement to prevent that some other fool besides myself also misinterpret the meaning of the article because misjudged a single word like: throttleable.
I could mention that it was misled because the beginning of the article as:
Ramjet engines have historically used liquid fuel which mixes with atmospheric air in order to provide thrust at high speed. However, for tactical missiles, the military services have expressed interest in a storable solid fuel. In order to meet this need, Aerojet developed the world's first throttleable solid-fueled ramjet for the U.S. Navy GQM-163A Coyote missile target starting in the year 2000.Additional information about Aerojet and GenCorp can be obtained by visiting the companies' Web sites at http://www.aerojet.com/ and http://www.gencorp.com/.
After I have been reading two lines such idiot like me could be tired and regardless. I also understand that the article was not meant for someone like me, but as far I known many good projects have been canceled in all fields in reason of conflicts generated by erroneous interpretation, once the fact of someone has been in charge to approval or not some project could not be assurance of ...
I believe the intention was to make a comparison with anti radiation missile Kh 31P which were also used in different setup as missile target by the U.S. Navy.
In fact the Kh 31P( AS 17 Krypton) has been equipped with ramjet propulsion of liquid fuel, and it could be throttleable in order to obtain a better range at different altitudes in which it could be released by aircrafts.
However a disadvantage of the liquid fuel from Kh 31 could be that it can not be stored for long, as in the case of solid fuel, so it is only fueled prior to a mission.
I don't really know, my guess would be not that much.
I think carrying the 2000lbs JDAM externally with RAM paint on it wouldn't have been a bad idea for the JSF. As a fighter in the medium weight class, the JSF needed a relatively narrow fuselage for supersonic speed. The 2000lbs JDAM requirement turned the JSF into a fatass. Anyways...
By: mig-31bm
- 16th September 2014 at 09:40Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Now it's much better after this elucidation above.
Maybe someone could inform Aerojet Company to rectify its statement to prevent that some other fool besides myself also misinterpret the meaning of the article because misjudged a single word like: throttleable.
I could mention that it was misled because the beginning of the article as:
After I have been reading two lines such idiot like me could be tired and regardless. I also understand that the article was not meant for someone like me, but as far I known many good projects have been canceled in all fields in reason of conflicts generated by erroneous interpretation, once the fact of someone has been in charge to approval or not some project could not be assurance of ...
I believe the intention was to make a comparison with anti radiation missile Kh 31P which were also used in different setup as missile target by the U.S. Navy.
In fact the Kh 31P( AS 17 Krypton) has been equipped with ramjet propulsion of liquid fuel, and it could be throttleable in order to obtain a better range at different altitudes in which it could be released by aircrafts.
However a disadvantage of the liquid fuel from Kh 31 could be that it can not be stored for long, as in the case of solid fuel, so it is only fueled prior to a mission.
here probably the answear
The Meteor, if you distill it down to the basics, is very much like a VFDR AMRAAM. The seeker, warhead and guidance will be of similar capabilities and yield. What's different is that it is a ducted rocket missile (it is technically NOT a RAMJET even though people like to call it that *see note*). In fact, when the meteor was being planned Raytheon offered a VFDR AMRAAM called the FMRAAM as an alternative to the european program. The motor for such an application, was actually funded and developed (circa 2002) by Aerojet alongside other projects such as the MARC-282 (13.5") and MARC-290 (10") VFDR motors. However, currrently the US armed services have other priorities and there do not seem to be a lot of immediate interest in mounting a VFDR motor on the AMRAAM to extend its reach beyond the 100~150km bracket of the AIM-120D.
Note: Ramjet vs Ducted Rocket -- The biggest difference between the two is that a true Ramjet ignites and burn its fuel using the compressed air from the intakes alone -- like a jet engine minus the rotational compressors. A Ducted Rocket burns its fuel using independent oxidizers then introduce the already ignited but fuel rich exhaust gases of the rocket based pre-combustion to the intake air to be burnt completely. The advantage of ducted rockets is that it can easily be made solid fueled (as is the case with the Meteor) and it never needs to be re-ignited should it momentarily flame out due to intake problems. The disadvantage of Ducted Rockets is that the missile is carrying at least part of the oxidizer it uses and hence as a lower energy content than a true RAMJET. FVDR -- Variable Flow Ducted Rocket -- refers to a Ducted Rocket with the ability to meter its fuel rich combustion exhaust into the main combustor and/or the intake airflow. The Meteor is a VFDR. In the case of the Meteor, the missile burns the solid sustainer grain in a pressure vessel separated from the main combustor by a pintle valve. It works the pintle valve to meter is right amount of fuel rich exhaust to the main combustor depending on the air density (altitude) and thrust desired. To the best of my knowledge its air intakes are fixed.
so basically Ramjet missiles are less maneuver and easier to flame out thus replace by solid fuel , ducted rocket are impossible to flame out , better sustain er than solid fuel and not restricted in maneuver like pure ramjet , but it can not sustain long range as good as ramjet
By: mig-31bm
- 16th September 2014 at 09:53Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
to sum up from my understanding , if the missiles are at the same size then
Ramjet = long range , high cruise speed , not very maneuver , perform bad at high altitude
Solid fuel =maneuver , not effected by high altitude , short range , low cruise speed
VFDR rocket = maneuver (better than ramjet but not as good as solid fuel ) , perform better at high altitude than ramjet but not as good as solid fuel , longer range and cruise speed than solid fuel but not as good as ramjet
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 13th September 2014 at 14:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't think the program specifically asked for one form of propulsion while excluding all others.
Aerojet, a GenCorp (NYSE: GY) company, announced today that it has successfully tested an advanced solid ramjet fuel in an engine ground test. The fuel is being developed to provide long-range, high-speed capability for the U.S. military and potentially for the future USAF/Navy Joint Dual Role Air Dominance Missile (JDRADM).
http://investor.gencorp.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=673225
Posts: 516
By: maurobaggio - 13th September 2014 at 19:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The concept seems very interesting, however I guess this solution had been implemented since 1958 when the Soviet Union began the development of SAM ( Surface Air Missile) SA 6 Gainful.
The SA 6 Gainful(2K12 Kub)
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2K12-Kvadrat.html
Those 3M9M missiles from the SA 6 Gainful also has been employed a ramjet rocket with solid fuel with the same purpose due for its advantages that has been mentioned in this article, however the ramjet propulsion were rejected by the successor from SA 6 Gainful that were the SA 11 Gadfly as the SA 17 Grizzly for several reasons.
This does not mean that someone could not improve such old technology, however the content of this article in this post above mention that ramjet propulsion with solid fuel has been developed as an innovation, and this actually would not be the case.
Posts: 2,014
By: mig-31bm - 13th September 2014 at 20:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
SAM are often much much bigger than AAM thus easier to use Ramjet , i think , up until now the only ramjet AAM is Meteor
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 14th September 2014 at 08:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
According to MBDA, Meteor has solid propellant...
http://www.bayern-chemie.com/ramjet.htm
And they tested succesfully gel propellants (in flight) in 2009...
http://www.bayern-chemie.com/gel.htm
So hardly a world first...
Posts: 2,014
By: mig-31bm - 14th September 2014 at 09:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
no i mean world first ramjet AAM , in production , solid propellant is for the booster
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 14th September 2014 at 14:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Coyote was delivered before the Meteor and the company is talking about it when it says the first throttle able solid fueled ramjet. The fuel developed for the JDRADM is nothing but an evolution of what went into the Coyote and since it does not have an application at the moment besides the test missiles for a DARPA project it cannot claim to be anything.
The Meteor was absolutely the first BVR missile to be operational with a throttleable solid fueled ramjet and neither aerojet or this press release is claiming otherwise.
http://www.orbital.com/LaunchSystems/Publications/Coyote_factsheet.pdf
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 14th September 2014 at 18:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I stand corrected.
Posts: 516
By: maurobaggio - 15th September 2014 at 03:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Anyway what seems weird for me is the statement that the Coyote program had been opened up the field of the ramjet propulsion with solid fuel as that could see above in the article:
In fact the missiles 3M9ME from SA 6 has had a boost stage with solid propellant charge (172 kg VIK-2 propellant)and a ramjet engine 9D16K with solid fuel charge (67 kg LK-6TM reducing propellant).
The source from SA 6 Gainful: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2K12-Kvadrat.html
Perhaps the reason why the Soviet Union had been chosen in 1958 this propulsion by ramjet with solid fuel were not to be the pioneer in the field, but by necessity due to its application.
The main reason that I am able to guess about the SA 6 Gainful should be that any missile with liquid fuel could be a huge problem with high accelerations G, while the missile would be chasing the maneuvers target as fighters, once after the missile had been consuming part of its liquid fuel , the same that remains inside its compartment could flow into compartment one side to another, even that compartment had splitting walls, this last one would not be effective.
The missiles with fuel liquid in maneuvers with high G acceleration it would be struck for something like a 'sledgehammer' by the liquid fuel remaining in its compartment , and it would make the control by the missile autopilot highly problematic such if it had to tame a 'crazy horse'.
The modern fighters also has the same problem but it has been restricted to 9G accelerations, and those fighters has several fuel compartments that are always equalized. While even the old missiles from SA 6 could achieve 40G and the others like the Meteor the values would be higher like something 100G.
So it would be almost mandatory that any air-to-air missile capable to engage fighters should have a ramjet propulsion with solid fuel instead liquid fuel, although a gel solution as fuel for the ramjet could decrease this problem, but the same would not disappear, and maybe that was the reason of this solution after would be tested it has been not implemented in the Meteor program.
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 15th September 2014 at 11:25 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The article is not speaking off only a solid fueled ramjet (which had also been experimented with the CROW in the 50's) but a solid fuel variable flow ducted ramjet. "A Throttleable Ducted Rocket (TDR) is a ramjet-type engine using a solid propellant for which the fuel mass flow rate can be controlled". The Coyote, Meteor and most likely one or both of the T-3 missiles are Solid fueled variable ducted (hence throttleable) ramjet missiles.
From the Aerojet Release:
Posts: 1,123
By: Hotshot - 15th September 2014 at 15:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So the technology has been mature for close to 15 years. It is disappointing that the AMRAAM has not been upgraded with it since, I guess the throttleable ramjet would help for end-game maneuvering against fighters equipped with thrust vectoring.
Posts: 2,014
By: mig-31bm - 15th September 2014 at 16:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
btw do anyone know , what are the approximate RCS of these missiles such as
JASSM
JSOW-ER
SDB II
Aim-132
KEPD tarus
all i know is that AGM-84 and AGM-88 have RCS about 0.1 m2 at x-bands
btw why KEPD tarus have perpendicular side ? , wasnt stealth design avoid perpendicular part ?
Posts: 1,123
By: Hotshot - 15th September 2014 at 19:03 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I remember for the F-117 they wanted to add external pylons to carry extra bombs using RAM paint.
I wonder whether this could be done on missiles. I doubt it would work on supersonic missiles, but perhaps on subsonic missiles it would work, in particular for the SEAD role.
Posts: 2,014
By: mig-31bm - 15th September 2014 at 20:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
if i remember correctly it was the F-117B project right ?
btw how much Kg do you think painting RAM on these missiles would weight
Posts: 516
By: maurobaggio - 16th September 2014 at 02:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Now it's much better after this elucidation above.
Maybe someone could inform Aerojet Company to rectify its statement to prevent that some other fool besides myself also misinterpret the meaning of the article because misjudged a single word like: throttleable.
I could mention that it was misled because the beginning of the article as:
After I have been reading two lines such idiot like me could be tired and regardless. I also understand that the article was not meant for someone like me, but as far I known many good projects have been canceled in all fields in reason of conflicts generated by erroneous interpretation, once the fact of someone has been in charge to approval or not some project could not be assurance of ...
I believe the intention was to make a comparison with anti radiation missile Kh 31P which were also used in different setup as missile target by the U.S. Navy.
In fact the Kh 31P( AS 17 Krypton) has been equipped with ramjet propulsion of liquid fuel, and it could be throttleable in order to obtain a better range at different altitudes in which it could be released by aircrafts.
However a disadvantage of the liquid fuel from Kh 31 could be that it can not be stored for long, as in the case of solid fuel, so it is only fueled prior to a mission.
Posts: 1,123
By: Hotshot - 16th September 2014 at 07:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Apparently yes, it was the F-117B:
http://www.f-117a.com/Variants.html
I don't really know, my guess would be not that much.
I think carrying the 2000lbs JDAM externally with RAM paint on it wouldn't have been a bad idea for the JSF. As a fighter in the medium weight class, the JSF needed a relatively narrow fuselage for supersonic speed. The 2000lbs JDAM requirement turned the JSF into a fatass. Anyways...
Posts: 2,014
By: mig-31bm - 16th September 2014 at 09:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
here probably the answear
so basically Ramjet missiles are less maneuver and easier to flame out thus replace by solid fuel , ducted rocket are impossible to flame out , better sustain er than solid fuel and not restricted in maneuver like pure ramjet , but it can not sustain long range as good as ramjet
Posts: 2,014
By: mig-31bm - 16th September 2014 at 09:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
to sum up from my understanding , if the missiles are at the same size then
Ramjet = long range , high cruise speed , not very maneuver , perform bad at high altitude
Solid fuel =maneuver , not effected by high altitude , short range , low cruise speed
VFDR rocket = maneuver (better than ramjet but not as good as solid fuel ) , perform better at high altitude than ramjet but not as good as solid fuel , longer range and cruise speed than solid fuel but not as good as ramjet