SWAT did bappen back in 2004 or so, but they are still on the lookout for potential weight savings. If necessary a fuel tank could be removed from the aircraft as was done with F-22A (though it wasn't necessarily done to save weight) which would affect range somewhat, but it may be a viable tradeoff, if they can save several hundred kilos of weight from the design in doing so.
That is quite true and as ADMk2 reminded us they have been aware of weight concerns since 04.. With this public awareness, there seems to be a new haste to get our little bird right, every problem resolved means we're one step closer full scale production. It seems like finally some of these folks are getting their heads together, the more they fly and get this thing back in the wind, tunnel the more hope I have that we all might be pleasantly suprised at what I nice airplane we have.
Don’t get carried away way with comparing the rang of anti-ship missiles. The limiting factor when used in real world engagements is in almost all cases, to correctly identify the right target and then making sure that after the weapon is fired that it hits the intended target and not something else. Up in the far artic where few people live and it is very cold, it might not be a big problem because there is so few unaccounted for ships at sea in those waters at one time. But in allots of places in the world where things are more likely to happen, the problem is not getting a solid radar contacts or getting a firing solution but telling friend from foe or from a neutral or a clueless fisherman. They all make great radar contacts.
Yeah, i understand there's more aspects to it than just range but I was thinking in times of a conventional war, when the contact is known and it's a reasonably capable enemy it'd be pretty high importance to be able to hit them before they get in range to hit you so comparisons of range should be taken into account. That and i know very little about the technical gizzards inside missile systems so have to make these rudementary judgements
Ah right, thanks. I tried searching things like "F-35 anti-ship capability" and all i could find was numerous links on the NSM.
The JSOW-ER still follows a glide bomb trajectory, the motor just helps it stay in the air longer.
Sure but to achieve the range quote it flys the same profile as a glide bomb. Flying the same profile as a NSM or Harpoon its range would be tiny.
Fair enough. I knew it had a glide flight path and just assumed range at low alt would be much smaller. I do have a full technical report somewhere which I should dig up and have a look at.
While this is not precise information, the SLAM-ER (Land-attack version of the Harpoon) has a number of sensor, guidance and motor/range improvements which gives the SLAM-ER a range of 250+ km... I would imagine at least some of the advancements achieved in the SLAM-ER made their way into the Harpoon Block II. After all, the Harpoon missile programme itself is nearly 35 years old...
I'd be pretty interested in that too
This is from Boeing in regards to the improvements made to the Harpoon's Block II
[1]
When I checked the USN's fact file on the Harpoon and Harpoon Block II, the only actual Block II information was the unit cost of US$1.2 mil. all the rest of the information was taken from the Block I.