Herald,

            Don?t misunderstand.. I think that Raytheon has done a GREAT job with it?s missiles.

I just think they got screwed over by Hughes in the AIM-152 deal. Their missile was too large and relied on too many risky technologies. Besides, it could only carry one per pylon.

 One proposed Raytheon missile motor was bigger because it offered more burn seconds and it had to carry a gas cartridge oxidizer and throatable valve. (Hybrid). It was  actually longer ranged (much longer ranged)

Both would work.

 

I really do not like the idea of using a B-1 or a B-2 as the launch platform. The B-2 or any next generation heavy bomber will be a very expensive asset to use for Sukoi plinking. Lets use legacy aircraft as the spear carriers. Their lack of stealth will turn them into bait drawing the enemy into the fight. The bad guys will be looking at the F-15s because that is all they can see, making the F-22/F-35 mission more productive.

 

Check Six

 

Rocky

 

 

You are probably right Rocky in this regard. I think the bomber has appeal because of it's speed(B-1B/R), endurance and range.  I think its a potent idea, but not the best or most forward thinking. And the bombers certainly are high demand assets. Not to mention the burden of 8 hour + missions. To me, and no one else has to agree as this is an opinion. I think it would be better if we coulf put an AAM or JDRADM HALE up there as the spear thrower. It could stay much longer than a manned platform and provide other uses such as ISR and or time critical strike on targets of opportunity. Just a few of these, 12-24 could provide near continuous coverage over a very large area working in shifts and if autonomous air to air refueling and rearmament are worked out this would be a very powerful capability.

Herald:
The GD missile relied on the segmented burn candle rocket motor or what is called the multiple pulse rocket motor. You described a two segment candle, which used a dual burn first segment, and then just either lobbed or coasted  after burnout  until a proximity  fuse or active return alert from the seeker would ignite the endgame pulse segment for that chase/endgame. That works if you can get the stupid thing to even ignite. GD didn't have much success. Neither do the PRCs with their current PL=12 which uses that technology (stolen of course).

Herald: 
One proposed Raytheon missile motor was bigger because it offered more burn seconds and it had to carry a gas cartridge oxidizer and throatable valve. (Hybrid). It was  actually longer ranged (much longer ranged)

Violates the KISS principle.

 

Besides, the main reason I like the GD version is that if the F-22 loaded a Meteor, they it could only put 2 per bay due to the increased space taken by the ramjet intakes.

 

The folding fin GD 8 inch missile would enable 8, YES EIGHT, missiles PER BAY.  Also, if they went with a shorter booster, then they could load 4, YES FOUR, per cheek bay.

 

That is a total of 24, YES TWENTY FOUR, internal missiles per F-22.

 

Here arr some other ideas:

1.  Add bigger booster and hang them under the wings as ultra long-range AWACS killers.

2.  You can put 4 (without boosters) in a SM-6.... Swarmed attack, let's see a DIRCM stop that

3.  Put 20 + (without boosters) in an ATACMS... Ultra Swarmed attack against multiple inbound threats, swarmed Cruise missiles, etc.

4.  Use them (without boosters) in a NETFIRES module as an anti-uav system

 

 

The plug between the candle segments has to burn through and tends to act as a DETONATOR if it burns through wrong..

 

PL-12: CREF: Aviation Week and Space Technology May7/14, 2007 p40-41

 

Herald.