America's new AIM-260: The best air-to-air missile in the world?

Let's delve into the world of cutting-edge air-to-air missile technology with the AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missile (JATM) - the highly anticipated successor to America's AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM).
With air combat ranges continuing to grow, the United States needs a new beyond-visual-range weapon to stay competitive... But the AIM-260 isn't looking to compete... It's looking to dominate.
📱 Follow Sandboxx News on social
Twitter: / sandboxxnews
Instagram: / sandboxxnews
Facebook: / sandboxxnews
TikTok: / sandboxxnews
📱 Follow Alex Hollings on social
Twitter: / alexhollings52
Instagram: / alexhollings52
Facebook: / alexhollings. .
TikTok: www.tiktok.com/alexhollings52
Citations:
www.airandspaceforces.com/new...
www.iiss.org/online-analysis/...
www.iiss.org/en/online-analys...
www.twz.com/43235/testing-of-...
www.twz.com/28796/new-aim-260...
apps.dtic.mil/sti/trecms/pdf/...
www.airandspaceforces.com/jat...
aviationweek.com/term/lockhee...
www.nationaldefensemagazine.o...
www.key.aero/article/usafs-ne...
www.mbda-systems.com/product/...
www.mbda-systems.com/?action=...
www.airforce-technology.com/p...
premium.globalsecurity.org/mi...
odin.tradoc.army.mil/WEG/Asse...
www.iiss.org/en/online-analys...
www.globalsecurity.org/milita...
www.popularmechanics.com/mili...

[@toastrecon]

I have some leaked intel on the AIM-260's multimodal seeker. It has both RADAR and IR/UV, but the real top secret functionality is that it logs on to Snapchat and various social media and dating sites and then finds the enemy pilot and sends him messages while he's flying so that he'll respond and reveal his location.

[@Osprey980]

Lol

[@CortezBumf]

leaked intel shows the AIM-260 *can* run crysis

[@RJEvans44]

Big if true

[@Raivo_K]

AIM-260: Check out these hot babes in your area.

[@SmoochyRoo]

SHUT UP, LOOSE LIPS SINKS SHIPS AND I'LL SINK YOUR SHIP WITH MY LIPS SO SHUT U-that sounded weird....

[@NoogaiBooga]

This guy's probably the only channel i know that actually does his research and says actual facts

[@joeterzio7175]

Taking Chinese claims at face value is the opposite of doing research and saying "actual facts."

[@kevman5]

Him and Ryan McBeth are some of the few that I actually trust to spit the most facts and the least bias.

[@knowahnosenothing4862]

@@joeterzio7175 What else is going to use?

[@joeterzio7175]

@@knowahnosenothing4862 That's the point, he doesn't have access to the intel we have on Chinese and Russian weapons. I worked on weapons systems for years as an engineer and we knew that Russian and Chinese equipment was trash because we had access to the intelligence that backed it up.

[@edmondsmith4259]

​@joeterzio7175 Mr. Hollings always says Russian and Chinese "stated" specs are not be taken for face value. Even in this episode he said they were "stated" as in "take it with a spoon full of salt". Alex Hollings didn't get his many nominations in Defense and Aerospace Media, as well the internarionaly recognized award he did win, for surface level journalism just to sound smart like so many with mere titles do.

[@Brett-fn6ks]

Alex, I grew up reading Aviation Week Space & Tech. magazine and Jane's Books. In my opinion, you Sir, have attained their status in this Media. Truly a National Treasure.

[@chrislaska5728]

Massive praise !!!

[@jamesogden7756]

Good facts and research mean something still. ❤

[@weissmorris8822]

Janes (the publishers last name) not Jane’s (possessive of Jane.)

[@TheDoorspook11c]

I don't know, Janes is vast.

[@massengineer7582]

AW&ST. My father, an aeronautical engineer, had a subscription which came to our house when I was a kid in the 1960's. Very interesting magazine. Probably launched my interest in the military and defense as a career.

[@alzeebum]

When discussing no-escape range, it's worth keeping in mind that being beyond that range doesn't mean you're guaranteed to escape. The closer you are, the narrower your options. Stated no-escape ranges are "calibrated" for a specific target, and the range will be different for other targets. It would also not be outside the realm of possibility for the no-escape range to be understated.

[@W1ckedRcL]

The MAR also changes based on the launch parameters and the speed of the target aircraft.

[@user-vt2cr8qd1b]

POV: trying to launch against an SR-71

[@Bomkz]

the MAR also changes based on the altitude of the target, and the lower a target the less distance the missile could reach once the motor is burnt through due to the thicker air.

[@Bomkz]

@@user-vt2cr8qd1bthe SR-71 is at a disadvantage due to the altitude it cruises at, being higher means less air resistance, which also means the missile could reach faster speed and longer distances with minimal speed loss

[@orbiradio2465]

@@user-vt2cr8qd1b Head on or tail chase?

[@RavenRunFoxRoam]

I'm a simple man. Alex uploads a video and I watch it without fail. Still waiting on a deep dive video into a F15EX or even B21 missile truck scenario against a high volume adversary.

[@alexmanion5389]

He does a great job, I'm right there with you.

[@jhonsnow4116]

I completely agree, and I am not even American

[@98MAzdaMilleniaS]

Triggered every time I see his channel name because that’s how my ex broke up with me while at basic training. Through sandboxx.

[@RavenRunFoxRoam]

@@jhonsnow4116 you don't need to be American to appreciate our insane defense budget. 😅

[@thanhtong2281]

…and automatic thumbs up

[@alexbakker8785]

For some reason, everytime i hear you say "this is air-power", it actually comes over as powerful.

[@beayn]

I recently had him say "This is air power" and immediately after an ad for something popped up with a very... gay couple that was very colorful. It was totally out of place lol.

[@Tenchigumi]

One day I fully expect him to say "This is Alex Hollings, and I AM AIR POWER."

[@Revan_258]

He needs to say “and this… is game theory”

[@gonepostal9101]

PL-15: “If this weapon works as advertised” is kinda the whole ball of wax. How many awesome weapons have we (USA) developed because we thought the enemy had something game changing, only to find out their stuff was really just junk?

[@Aim54Delta]

The same is true of our own equipment. Considering the problems Boeing is having keeping airliners from falling apart and the (very much not talked about) 30% combat readiness rating of F-35 squadrons ... As well as experiences in the past with regard to the F-105 and/or the AIM-4... Sometimes we have our own turds that come out of the defense contracting grift, as well.

[@logicplague2077]

@@Aim54Delta Yeah, but you've gotta look at the percentages, an occasional turd vs. a LOT of turds. Also, Russia and other countries typically oversell their equipment's capabilities because they want to sell them, while the US undersells theirs for operational security.

[@Frankie5Angels150]

As is still true of both the Russians and the Chinese.

[@pixsilvb9638]

Case in point: almost 300 Nike Missile Sites spread all over the US with Nike Ajax and Nike Jupiter anti-aircraft missiles were built between late 50’s and early 70’s to defend the country from the Soviet intercontinental nuclear bombers which were supposed to attack the country when the soviets built the Myasishchev M-4 ‘Molot’ four-engined strategic bomber during the 1950s to provide a Long Range Aviation bomber capable of attacking targets in North America. The M-4 nevertheless sparked fears of a "bomber gap" when 18 of the aircraft were flown in a public demonstration on May Day in 1954. The US responded by building hundreds of Boeing B-47s and B-52s as well as the Nike Missile Umbrella, to counter this perceived threat. As it turned out, the Myasishchev M-4 fell well short of its intended range and was not really capable of attacking the most valuable targets in the United States. As this became clear, production was shut down, in spite of the failure to produce a capable strategic design and the resulting small numbers.

[@gonepostal9101]

@@pixsilvb9638 it’s really crazy what we did because of what we thought the Soviets capabilities “might” be. My Old Man was the CMSGT of a SAGE site in Northern Minnesota, and we had a BOMARC site under their control just outside of town that he took me to once when I was a kid. I don’t know how many missiles were there, but they all had Mark 40 warheads, and there was a lot of bunkers there. Same with the airbase the SAGE was affiliated with. Dozens of F-101’s, all carrying Genies. God knows how many warheads were were within a 10 mile radius of our house. Lolol.

[@hestan723]

MBDA Meteor missile : "Finally a worthy opponent"

[@Utubesuperstar]

I love the meteor but if the aim 260 is anywhere near what the dod says (and the us always undersells) it will be unmatched and leaps and bounds better than the meteor

[@ni9274]

@@Utubesuperstar We should compare to next gen European missile then

[@jacobbaumgardner3406]

@@UtubesuperstarI’d be surprised if it has a no escape zone as far as the Meteor.

[@michagysin3082]

@@jacobbaumgardner3406 It probably will, but it doesnt matter as meteor also belongs to nato.

[@mobiusflammel9372]

@@jacobbaumgardner3406It may or may not, but there's still the unnamed LREW on the way as well. The AIM-260 is not the only long range air to air missile in development at the moment, by the US. Edit: Said this before I saw the end of the video where he points out there are other weapons in development.

[@BravoCheesecake]

The AIM-120D entered production in 2006. Think of how far computational technology has come from then. The US has been cooking this next one up for almost 20 years now.

[@breakbollocks9164]

Unfortunately that does not help much. They've been cooking the JSF for at least as long and it has become a multi-billion if not a trillion dollar clusterfuck. Vympel R-37M will beat it anytime with acknowledged kills well over the max range of this new AIM-260.

[@Atom224]

@@breakbollocks9164 Common Russian L

[@wilfdarr]

2006: my flip phone had internet... kind of 2016: My cell phone has facial recognition... 2026: Skynet...

[@Lukyan]

@@breakbollocks9164 How many Su-57's were made? How many A-50s shot down?

[@Thetequilashooter1]

@@breakbollocks9164Keep dreaming. Its kill range has been at most 80 nm, and Ukrainian pilots have said that they’ve already developed tactics to counter it. Like nearly every other Russian weapon it’s been a bust. Russia’s good at one thing, spreading misinformation and lies, and you’re gullible enough to fall for it.

[@blueskiestrevor5200]

A lot of the talk I heard about the AIM-260 had focused on it being powered by a 2-stage rocket motor. This is the first I've heard about a throttled rocket motor. Very interesting

[@kameronjones7139]

I know one called the lrew is 2 stage but it might be to big for stealth fighters

[@toastrecon]

I'm trying to think of this from a physics standpoint: it's more aerodynamically efficient to NOT travel at super high speeds, so maybe the throttling allows it to cruise towards the target and then throttle up for the final kill. Single stage motors can only get to max kinetic energy with a single burn and then hope they have enough energy left for distance, maneuvering and intercept.

[@sferrin2]

Unless it's an air-breather I'd be astonished if it's throttled. Hybrid rockets are too complex for what you want, never mind liquid.

[@Bomkz]

@@sferrin2 recently there was a breakthrough on a throttlable solid state rocket motor which can be throttled via the use of electric , if i'm not wrong via a PWM control system. that and supposedly a new AESA radar system rather than a conventional one.

[@dannydetonator]

@toastrecon From basic aerodynamical principles, all it has to do is travel slower, as it's exponentially more efficient. That's what extends the range, if we ignore air-breathing to avoid oxydiser weight in the rocket fuel. It doesn't need much acceleration in the final stage unless the target goes for a run in the same direction over mach-1. Manouverability also is improved over the equal distance, but i guess all of that is worked out depending on target's predicted speed and distance. And yes, throttled solid rocket engines are a thing pursued by designers for decades. One of the hardest goals, but achieved on different levels for a while now, not only by military contractors.

[@veritasman]

One of the most authentic and "Solid" quote in the internet, is the Alex's: "...And This is AIR POWER"

[@rickwylie7322]

Being the Aim 260 allegedly went into production a year ago, and they have stopped talking about it (usually a clue), I agree there are likely already Raptors flying with them.

[@riskinhos]

they are ashamed because the missile is shit and worse than already deployed ones like the meteor.

[@N-A762]

Lol +15 to your social credit score

[@_Epsilon_]

Raptors are flying yeah not sure about that one. How many of them are even air worthy?

[@asherwiggin6456]

@@_Epsilon_maybe 80-95?

[@rickwylie7322]

Probably more than Russia has SU-35's and SU-57's, as many as UK has Typhoons, not quite what France has in Rafales, but close. @@_Epsilon_

[@dumitrurob]

"would not ramp up production on an ineffective weapon". LCS - "hold my beer"

[@lino222]

lmao

[@twinkyoctopus]

tbf the navy is being forced kicking and screaming by congress to continue production

[@knowahnosenothing4862]

Aluminium warships idea is criminal. They burn like beer cans in a bonfire and stress fracture in bad weather.

[@ChrisEly]

"Ramping up production" is the key phrase. There aren't plans for dozens of LCS anymore.

[@georgesikimeti2184]

Yeah,the LCS was a lemon,made of composite aluminium not hardened steel and only good for speed in shallow water only,well arleigh Burke is still the king.

[@fredfurner]

You've got extremely comprehensive videos man. I really appreciate the style of your show, the fact that you don't use AI or computer voices, and the fact that your information is seemingly cutting edge.

[@jajssblue]

Multimode tracking and rocket or air-breathing engines sound revolutionary. Thank you for the detailed walkthrough. You're an excellent source for this info.

[@solarissv777]

AFAIR Israelis have a SAM with multimode tracker

[@drawingdead9025]

The last point is the key, the 260 will already out range almost all fighter radars in service today.

[@SpamSucker]

Yeah but think forward, where there will be not only AWACS but possibly space-based tracking, and/or drone-assisted tracking. I envision distant detection combined with "long-burn" high efficiency missile track for range, and a passive seeker (IR or even optical) such that the target does not even know it was launched upon until it's far too late. There's some nasty possibilities behind all this stuff.

[@RTmadnesstoo]

Sure, why not Drones ranging out in front and to the sides that are nothing but Radar and EW platforms spoofing where they are and how many?

[@teknetinium]

Mig-31M3 with R-37M?

[@showtime1004]

@@SpamSucker AWACS datalink is already a thing, has been for a long time. If AWACS can see the target, AMRAAM can engage it even if the launching aircraft can't see it.

[@thomasvelazquez9789]

@teknetinium Joke and totally unproven sorry Ivan and the Mig 25 is basically a target

[@keithbarron3654]

I remember when navy tested harpoon on P-3's, they added on box launcher booster to kick it's range out further.

[@paulshearer9140]

Thanks for explaining the nuances and operational limitations of air to air missiles Alex. A real eye opener. The new missile looks like a real game changer.

[@rickh.7158]

Doing great Alex! Keep it up, my man!

[@FUL0H8]

Let your enemies believe you’re less capable with your equipment, and less reliable with your logistics. Never show your FULL ONION

[@timtrewyn453]

That's a tough call between deterrence and baiting conflict. Don't envy the person responsible for public information on a weapon system.

[@Utubesuperstar]

That’s what America does the Russians do the opposite lol

[@Christian-fg3we]

Unless your russian. Then tell everyone your main battle tank is the best in the world, but then gets taken out by a Bradleys 25mm…

[@Bomkz]

@@Christian-fg3we technically yeah it did get taken out by a bradley, but i believe that more to be an issue with crew incompetence from the tank's part. Sadly i don't think a bradley would survive a 2nd round against one unless carrying TOWs. However that does not really matter anymore, the Bradley is an outdated design, and i wouldn't be surprised if they were developing a new design right now.

[@Cecil-yc6mc]

@@Bomkz not the Bradley's fault that Russia's A-Team tankers were cooked in the first 3 days

[@joecrisp9060]

So cool to see you mention that long range shot at the BQM-167. I was the target control technician for that shot. Basically just a liaison between the weapons directors that talk to the firghters, and the civilian comtractors controlling the target. That was a fun one. Coolest job i had in the service, and Panama City ain't the worst place in the world.. by a small margin lol. Got to see the QF-4's go out and the QF-16's come in. And i got to see one of the QF-4's crash on takeoff on a day where the drone guys were giving us a tour. Thanks for yet another amazing video Alex.

[@navyreviewer]

Cool. Please be VERY careful with what you post.

[@184Kitkat]

I, being just a mere ally, am always nervous to learn something I wouldnt want Ivan och Hong to hear..

[@joecrisp9060]

@@navyreviewer Valid. The only real classified I dealt with was range numbers, and it was a while ago so even if I could remember they'ed be outdated lol.

[@Chansencn]

I can see the benefit of loading the F-22/F35 with twice the number of Peregrine AA missiles (over the AIM-120s) and load the AIM-260s (8 each?) on following F-15EXs (back some 20 or 30 miles), with the F-15s radiating at full power on their radars and the F-22s in quiet mode. That would make a flight of 4 F-22s and 4 F-15EXs quite capable of taking out an enormous number of enemy fighters

[@dgthe3]

I prefer putting AIM 260s onto stealth jets so they can go AWACS hunting first. A couple missions like that & everything else basically becomes a turkey shoot.

[@red94mr28]

@@dgthe3 Agreed, take out the AWACS first.

[@Xenomorphine]

It won't happen. F-15s simply won't be authorised to fly in hostile airspace, until stealth airframes have already demolished the IADS and any hostile air assets. There's PR trying to hype what you describe (probably as counter-intelligence), but it just isn't practical. The most optimistic outcome would be that the enemy uses the F-15 tracks to figure out which direction the F-22s and F-35s are heading in from, which is self-defeating. It's possible that the B-21 might have AAM compatibility, which would be a more logical platform.

[@red94mr28]

@@XenomorphineHe didn't mention F-15's but I will. One scenario plays out with F-22s with AIM-260s hunting AWACS and targets of opportunity, F-35s with HARMS accompanied by F-15 EX missile trucks armed with AIM-260s and AGM/HARM mix going after enemy ground radar. The B-21s with AGM-158 JASSMs or cluster bombs targeting ground radar deep in enemy territory with B-52s far in the back launching AGM-86 ALCMs, again, at ground radar and runways. There are a hundred permutations of the above, just mix & match and throw in some additions. I wouldn't worry about counter intelligence regarding potential attack plans laid out in a YT comment section. Any foreign power that doesn't have a competent intelligence or analysis department would be rather obtuse and easily defeated. Russia and China are not obtuse.

[@hoghogwild]

@@red94mr28 B-52s launching AGM-86? Only 86's in service are nukes these days.

[@jackallread]

Thanks Alex, good episode with some great information that I hadn’t heard before!!

[@GoodThings4GoodPeople]

Been watching you for quite some time as you develop and grow on this platform and beyond proud to your success. More and more comfortable on camera and still giving EXCELLENT free education!

[@TypicalAmericanDad]

Been looking forward to this video!

[@Whiskey11Gaming]

Maximum range is always a fun topic given the variables involved, but the thing which HAS ALWAYS been an issue is the ability to IFF. This is the reason why Tomcats which went feet dry in Desert Storm and in the missions after (Desert Fox Southern/Northern Watch, etc) weren't allowed to shoot Phoenix. In fact, in Desert Storm the ROE required VID or hostile intent to engage air targets (something that the Tomcat was particularly good at given the TCS, but it lacked other NCTR IFF capabilities as an excuse the USAF gave). The fear was shooting down friendly aircraft. This problem hasn't completely gone away and it really hampers the usage of these missiles at extreme ranges. We are more apt to see Peregrine or Cougar used by stealth fighters at closer ranges while receiving targeting information from 4th gen AESA equipped aircraft or Wedgetail/E-2D than these super long range shots.

[@Spectator1959]

All good points. Desert Storm had a constraint not likely to be seen in a war with China. DS had a relatively small air battle space filled with very few enemy aircraft and lots and lots and lots of friendlies. It behooved one to be very sure before launching. One of the amazing things I noticed at the time is there were no mid-airs among coalition aircraft, altho friends of mine who were in it related some very close calls. EW research, intel, and detection capability has greatly advanced since then and the F-22 and F-35 are able to carry with them superb low probability of intercept radars connected to databases that reportedly not only let them identify aircraft as enemy, but the type and even the specific weapons they are carrying. From what l’ve read the F-35 has the superior capability in this regard, benefitting from more modern and capable computers and storage that allow up to 600 identification characteristics per aircraft, versus 200 for the F-22. With networking of various sensors and aircraft it looks like one can be much more sure of identification of a specific target than just a single pilot trying to correlate his radar screen, eyeball, intel briefing, flight plans, IFF interrogation, AWACS input, etc.

[@Cheesedream]

Keep up the good work. Thumbs up and comment to support.

[@joetamaccio9475]

Thanks for the update Alex

[@jamesjohnson1710]

The video was very good and Alex explained the middle crisis of the USA and what's being done to give our poilets the edge it needs thanks brother keep up the good work

[@peteracker3743]

Excellent presentation during a groundbreaking update. Keep up the excellent reporting.

[@SonuDR007]

Beautiful video, thank you Alex

[@jeraldtowle2718]

Thank you for all your hard work

AIM-260 has a literal two-stage booster. 1st booster is the boost phase, and it detaches from the missile when it runs out to have no dead weight and better aerodynamics and the 2nd booster is the sustainer where it sustains its Mach 4-6 speed that allows it to reach 200km range. Remember it is only an AIM-260A, probably going to have a longer range on the newer missile variants. There is another missile though, the Peregrine Medium Range Air to Air Missile. It was 2x shorter than the AIM-120 but it has the same range as the AIM-120D. For example, the F-22 can only carry 4 to 6 AIM-120D, where it can carry more than 8 to 12 Peregrine missiles.

[@dwightlooi]

Simply air launching the ESSM Block II will give you a missile with twice the range of the AIM-120D that fits in the same envelope. The 10" ESSM fits in exactly that envelope as the 7" AIM-120. The strakes do not extend beyond the 10" box and the fins fold into that same box. In fact, the ESSM will fit into a smaller box than the AIM-120C/D with it's fins. The missile is 3.66m long practically exactly the same length the 3.65m AIM-120. It is about 620 lbs vs 335 lbs for the AMRAAM, but that is nothing that the weapon stations on existing fighters cannot handle (except for the wing tip rails). Going to 10" from 7" gets you about twice the propellant load and in surface launched application the ESSM is a 50km missile while the AIM-120 is a 25 km missile. Simply adapting the active seeker ESSM Block II will give you a Mach 6 ~ Mach 7.5 missile with an all boost motor and high altitude release from a supersonic fighter. Obviously, if they want to further improve the performance, they can shrink the guidance package ad or the warhead, lengthen the motor by another 20~30% and switch to a lighter graphite epoxy casing. That is a Mach 7~9 missile right there; 100% based on proven and existing technology. A switch to a boost-sustain grain for the motor will allow you to trade speed and ballistic range for a larger no escape envelope. But even without it, a Mach 8 guided projectile that you won't likely see on the radar or warning receivers until it is ~20 km away gives you only about 7 sec to do anything about it. That in itself is extremely deadly. That is not to mention that powered or not, speed is energy and energy is maneuverability. Missiles can turn at 35~60Gs which is more than any fighter or its pilot and will ALWAYS win the agility game until it loses enough speed to be either slower than the fighter or will be if it pulls that same Gs are the fighter. 7 secs is not a lot of time to play that game.

[@Veramocor]

They are already doing something similar for NASAMS. They took the seeker of aim-120 and put it on an essm body. They call it aamram-er

[@vkk5058]

Good comment Dwight. Plus add something like cl20 into the solid rocket propellant mix and you'll extend range by another 20%. Nothing that revolutionary is needed for decent gains in performance.

[@dwightlooi]

@@VeramocorSort of... the ESSM booster has been employed unchanged in the original ESSM (Block I), the SL-AMRAAM-ER and the ESSM Block II. These differ only in their front end. The first has the 8" AIM-7M front end, the second has the 7" AIM-120C front end and the last has a 10" full diameter front end. In the former two a conical interstage helps with the transition. -- The thing is that there is no reason the warhead and electronics of the AIM-120D needs to occupy the same length in a 10" missile as in a 7" platform. In fact it should occupy about HALF that length presuming no further miniaturization in electronics. In the ESSM Block II the front end is actually shorter with the new warhead being shorter and fatter while the electronics stack is also shorter and fatter. The missile is the same length only because the hollow nose cone is twice as long with a pointier ogive. In the Future, they'll probably lengthen the motor, push everything forward and use a shorter nose cone. -- As I said, if this is going to be the AAM for the NEXT three decades, they can do all of the above and more. We already use graphite epoxy motor casings for space launch solids going back the the GEM40 on the Delta II (1990) so this is not technically challenging r high risk just more expensive. With GaN MMICs the seeker block can and should be more compact. -- Sometimes it is best to keep things simple. Instead of trying to have a ramjet or scramjet. Just have a missile which is 75% propellant by mass. It'll go very fast and very far. The gross delta V of a vehicle that with a 75% propellant fraction and the specific impulse of a good solid motor (250 sec) is Mach 9.9. That's probably the upper bound for a purely rocket powered AAM and that is plenty fast enough. Any faster in fact and your radar or IR seeker won't work due to ionization of the air.

[@dwightlooi]

@@vkk5058Sadly I think they are going in the opposite direction with all the insensitive munitions initiatives. But, to put things into perspective, the Specific Impulse of leading HTPE solid motors are around 250 sec (SL). The high energy formulations like those using CL20 as an additive is about 260 sec. PBAN on the Shuttle SRB is 242 sec. This is already about as good as turbo pump fed liquid motors running on room temperature hypergolics like N2O4+UDMH (about 252~255 sec @ SL). So don't expect game changing improvements from advancements in solid propellants. It'll be far easier to make everything else smaller and lighter than to get another 5 secs in Isp from the motor!

[@tuunaes]

@@dwightlooi Indeed no miracles left in propellants, liquid or solid, and lots of research has been in making them less volatile and toxic to be easier and safer to handle etc. (just like there are no undiscovered miracle elements no matter what movies depict) So it's up to squeezing more fuel into missile by miniaturizing other parts, improving aerodynamics etc. Multistage missile which discards first used stage to reduce drag before igniting second stage is one of the possible tricks. Though at the expense of more complexity. Ability to control throttle and use more fuel efficient speed for long range launches is another. Highest speeds come at the cost of highest rate of energy loss to drag.

[@choctaw2sticks193]

gotta love this channel, thank ya, Alex . . .

[@jimnaz5267]

another excellent vid. thanks for your work on this

[@kindnuguz]

☺ might I add I love HAFB Lived around it my whole life and everything they do I appreciate (almost 50 years now). I hear jets almost everyday and love it. I love our philosophy of claiming lower more reliable numbers but in reality maybe better than claimed versus others claiming maximum which in reality isn't even close. Meteor imo is great and I assume meteor claims are being modest as well

[@tuunaes]

In authoritarian regimes general rule is also for good news being exaggerated and bad news not being told as badly as they are.

[@thomassecurename3152]

I learn so much from your presentations. Thanks Alex. Tim. Poulsbo,Washington

[@MarvelousSeven]

Olympia!

[@vhostovich]

You often have in depth information. Thanks

[@djoswald9128]

Imagine what they can make for the F-15EX. Specially made for super long range that is targeted by F-22:F-35 in front. F15EX dose not have to rely on stealth they could carry scram jet missiles and several at that.

[@deansmits006]

Even a CCA in front identifying and relating targeting data

[@Xenomorphine]

That won't be happening, no matter how many glossy magazine articles try to promote it. It's a self-defeating strategy. You're effectively broadcasting to the enemy where the F-22s and F-35s are vectoring in from. The USAF doesn't want the F-15, they want more F-35s, instead.

[@user-fw2dd2cy3c]

Damn, Alex, another kick-ass vidya. I swear, it seems hard enough to produce one or two excellent mini-documentaries...but to *consistently* produce *excellent* ones...just props dude.

[@dovacheski]

Great work man. You have become since i discovered your work a primary source of infomation and detail.

[@willwozniak2826]

Thanks for the updates Alex.👉🏻👉🏻

[@everettputerbaugh3996]

Then there was the 1,000 lb telephone pole that Raytheon created for taking out bomber formations with its 125 lb warhead that zoomed up to 80,000 ft and dropped onto its target at (version 1, anyway) mach 5. If it lost lock or someone beat it to its target, it would just pick another ( it developed a taste for jamming pods over the years). Alas, the concept was ahead of the technology - the rocket motor would not always light, creating a Phoe-bomb. It was also dependent on the Tomcat keeping its nose toward the target. Nice to see tech catching up with 1960's ambitions.

[@hoghogwild]

The AIM-54 rockets fired just fine, if the Ordie did his job and armed them properly prior to the cat shot. 1 single Ordie, armed 2 Tomcats, ON SEPARATE CATAPULTS produced 2 Phoeeney-bombs when fired in 1999 over Iraq. It should be noted that F-15C fired AIM-120 which also missed the same MiG-25s. The A variant was dropped quickly following the revolution in Iran. the follow on variants were much better and digital tech allowed for the most recent counter-measures to be dealt with. The Phoenix ACTIVE shot was interesting, targets under 11 or 13 NM away saw the missiles own seeker doing all the work. The later versions also dealt with maneuvering fighters much better. Derived from the AIM-47 that was going to arm the Mach 3+ YF-12A interceptor. Fired from over 70,000 ft altitude at a maneuvering target flying at 500 feet. FWIW The Iranians had excellent results with the Phoenix.

[@GimpCent]

One thing I would like to add is that the AIM-260 is not only designed to counter China’s PL-15, but also Russia’s R-77M, which is another long-range ramjet-powered missile that is expected to enter service soon. The R-77M is said to have a range of over 200 km and a speed of Mach 6, making it a formidable threat to US and allied fighters. Thanks for sharing your insights! It was a good watch.

[@thomaskarimkargbo3159]

Forget about the Vympel R37M that exceeds 200km what about the unstopable Gremlin GZUR- hypersonic guided missile

[@aflyingcowboy31]

"The R-77M is said to have a range of over 200 km and a speed of Mach 6, making it a formidable threat to US and allied fighters." Russia much like probably China over estimates their weapons capabilities, just look at the Kinzhal.

[@alexanderbelov6892]

@@aflyingcowboy31 Kinzhal is widely used now, and it is successful. If destroyed targets do not show capabilities of Kinzhal what kind of capabilities proof you expect?

[@jimbailey490]

Alex, you present your information in such a way that both the layperson and professional can understand and stay interested.Thank you!

[@cdanea]

I love these videos about new rumoured systems where we take some time to learn about the other systems this might compete against, what the history of the system is and all the unreliable specs of current and past weapons in the same class. I am always holding my breath for the end of the video to see how few seconds Alex manages to talk about the actual title weapon.

[@T33K3SS3LCH3N]

13:30 I would be shocked if it didn't have a multi-mode seeker. At the likely price point of such capable missiles, it would seem like a waste not to install one.

[@jameswalker7899]

This episode has been awaited with much anticipation. You didn't disappoint. Warmest compliments. Thank you, sir. :)

[@Thetequilashooter1]

Excellent and informative video. Thank you.

[@bradleyswaney6100]

Loved it! ❤

[@orbiradio2465]

A missile with an considerable large diameter would fit into the weapon bay of an F-22 or F-35. The AIM-54 Phoenix was only one foot longer than the AMRAAM, but had more than twice the diameter. So it could carry much more fuel.

[@showtime1004]

the Phoenix is out ranged by the AMRAAM though, even with all that fuel. Goes to show the progress of technology. A Phoenix sized AMRAAM would probably go further than the new 260, but unless you have AWACS support it would out range the radar of the jet carrying it anyway, so it doesn't matter much.

[@xanovaria]

I've been waiting for this one for months!

[@paulfollo8172]

Great video, as usual Alex! Just the facts and no BS. 👍👍

[@WWeronko]

In a practical sense a loyal wingman or unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV) carrying AAWs like the AIM-120D is a two stage weapon with greatly extended range. It can loiter for prolonged periods before launching its final stage weapon thereby greatly extending its engagement envelope. We have entered interesting times for air warfare.

[@andyturbo]

Agreed. Props to the Aussies - the Ghostbat is one hell of an awesome design and will be an awesome addition to the USAF.

[@kevinjoiner9847]

Excellence in reporting.

[@matthewrobertson6923]

As aways nice work! I always enjoy.

[@russelltvrdik3266]

Always a joy to listen to and be informed. Thanks

[@Bytesplice]

This is exciting!

[@Scottagram]

I bet it wasn't even China that prompted this. America was just mad that Europeans had been quietly getting really good at missiles with stuff like Storm Shadow and Starstreak and Meteor.

[@Xenomorphine]

Projects of this scale don't get authorised because of a couple of US politicians 'getting mad' at allies (especially given how, say, Storm Shadow is 1990s technology). It's to make sure frontline weapon systems remain relevant, period.

[@Hooptyc]

Know what? When you say, “And this-is AIR POWER,” rocks. Keep doing it like that. You rock.

[@marcuskuffrath4242]

Thanks and greets from Germany! Good job! ;-)

[@erod19969]

been waiting for this one!

[@RaiderNate]

I thought aim 260 was going to be a dual stage missile so that when it goes pitbull, the rear half of the missile falls off and a secondary motor kicks in giving missile greater aerodynamics

[@Shambolicoholic]

I didn't know any of this. Thanks!

[@cahoonm]

Love your videos!

[@dugiejoness5197]

I'm curious how they choose the numbers for these names. There were AIM-7, AIM-9, AIM-54 and suddenly AIM-120 and then AIM-260. Next up is the AIM-6xx?

[@Strykenine]

"That's just physics." Very USMC of you. Edit: Have you done an episode on the CCA drone yet? That would be very intersting!

[@Khosann1]

But despite the hype you cannot seem to avoid, you are the best American defense journalist, genuinely trying to be as objective as possible. Surely you raised my expectations. I salute you for your hard work.

[@Juice_2288]

Thanks for sharing Alex! It’s disgraceful that the US was allowed to fall behind the Chinese. Hats off to all the folks working on the AIM-260, CUDA, & Peregrine!

[@Hyposonic]

All very long range modern missiles, except the Meteor, have dual burn motors. They fire 6-8s at launch, then another 6-8s at apogee. So the faster and higher you fire them, the farther they go. So the performance of the launch platform is critical. What none of them have is a terminal burn. Even the vaunted DCS gets this wrong. The AIM-260 may be a dual stage (not dual burn). If so, it's terminal maneuverability and speed could be off the charts as it would only be 2/3 as long/heavy after the stage 1 burn. That doesn't even account for improvements in sensors and electronics which are undoubtedly better than the 120D.

[@junglelane]

Hard to take anything China claims as accurate.

[@3dpyromaniac560]

They are very much like Russia where they exaggerate capabilities by an order of magnitude. Which is part of China's strategy. They exaggerate the capabilities of a new thing, US makes something to counter the exaggerated capabilities, then China steals it and makes a worse version

[@rickybobby6527]

Definitely can’t believe Russias claims either 😂

[@Cobra-King3]

Well, on the plus side, taking their shit seriously means the US develop shit so much better that all they've done was widen the performance, or in this case, technological gap, between them and the US Remember the last time someone inflated something to a point America panicked? The F-15 became the answer, or at the worst case absolute least, a desperate hope that it isn't outmoded by he supposed """""superfighter""""", the MiG-25

[@Tomas.X]

Depends how you look at it. If they say something - they're lying. From there, cut numbers in half (or double them) and you'll have an "approximate fact."

[@billtukana5916]

​@@rickybobby6527😂😂😂 ballistic missiles in Chinese Silos water powered, big uproar over there recently; big man so disappointed.

[@josephpiskac2781]

Great Alex Thanks

[@MrFantastic23]

You Sir have the best channel of this kind on the whole platform IMO

[@rael5469]

"Capable of traveling at five times the speed of sound, the Phoenix had a radar homing capability and an operational range of over 100 miles. "

[@msgtpauldfreed]

The F-15EX is a missile truck, carrying 12 AIM-120Ds each. Pop one F-22 or F-35 out in front of them and salvo fire from the flight of 15s with terminal guidance provided by the stealth fighters, your enemy is in a world of hurt. Now, imagine those 120s become 260s. Ouch.

[@MultiVeeta]

You mean the same F15EX with the radar cross section of a Jumbo jet. They are going to suffer the opposite version as they'd be the biggest and easiest to see target in the sky.

[@bobo-cc1xw]

The sop is to fly f22 behind the f15 as a peekaboo. Nealry impossible to see behind all that clutter. There are very few fighters who can fly against an f15 but there are stories of f22 flying within meters of enemies undetected annoying the f15 to make the point of go home. In strike the f15 would do loads of jamming be a target for first strike run and run away. Then when chasing f22 would get into better range and wait for missiles to be wasted

[@MultiVeeta]

@@bobo-cc1xw what a load of nonsense, that is dafter than the first idea. You claim the F22 won't be seen behind all that clutter well guess what if that statement actually held any water then the F22 wouldn't be able to see anything through it either. An F22 with RCS of 0.0001m^2 is not going to be seen by the most powerful fighters radar before 20 mile, probably less, so it doesn't need to hide. The F15 is not a leading air to air fighter anymore, it is outclassed by a generation and a half. The F15EX is an improvement of the ground attack variant F15E not the Air Superiority variant F15C. The F15EX can be seen for 100+mile on a fighters radar and be engaged easily, fighters ECMs are not powerful enough to jam multiple radars at once. Modern Stealth opponents like the Su57 and J20 are far more lethal than an F15EX, while not on par with the F22 or F35 they will still not be seen by the F15 until it is too late.

[@georgesikimeti2184]

@@MultiVeetaIt’s needed to point out here that f15ex major upgrade is the communication software platform which enabled it talk to f35 which it was not case in earlier f15s .This is vital to hunt as a pack (communication),again as you pointed out f15ex is not for front on mission,it has to be behind f35 which always was the case because of the stealth,f15ex is not stealth but can pack a mightier punch than f35 provided the enemy stealth is nullified by a much stealthier f35 first.Don’t forget f15 was build by McDonnell Douglas now owned by Boeing and Lockheed f35 ,software aren’t compatible.

[@thomasvelazquez9789]

Yup big time world of hurt

[@alanlefavour2112]

Never miss a grain from Sandbox News.

[@blvck.8197]

We're just taking China's word that the pl-15 actually has 120mi range lol.

[@samuelanders7597]

Kinda my thought lol when America says "this is max performance" you can guarantee its actually less than what its capable of. When russia or china say "this is max performance" you can be equally sure they are exaggerating

[@Brody961]

Why wouldn't you. Prepare for the worst hope for the best. It'd be foolish to underestimate them. The equipment is actually very competitive. It forces us to continue innovating

[@blvck.8197]

@@Brody961 Yeah for sure but Russia and China's claims are always BS. The Ukraine war proved part of that lol.

[@Just_A_Random_Desk]

Never underestimate your enemies

[@Grenadier311]

​@samuelanders7597 The US is notorious for under-reporting capabilities, also.

[@TheDopeMemeSupply]

Thank you for the content love watching your videos when I’m bored at work

[@LeonAust]

1st kill opportunity changes if your a stealth 5th gen fighter and your opponent even with a Meteor or PL15 missiles on a fighter that has AESEA radar can only lock you up at ranges of 20 to 30 odd miles, this changes the dynamics of BVR. Being a non stealth 4.5 gen aircraft is a huge disadvantage even with long range missiles thus with stealth AMRAAM is very capable and the last comment for another topic about targeting certainly is very important future capability.

[@yaseen157]

I've always wondered why we hadn't seen a multimodal seeker anywhere. Very interesting to learn of this rumour that this AIM-260 finally might!

[@cccalifornia7206]

Thank you, Alex!!!👍🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

[@SideWinder_999]

Flashbacks to when the mig-25 was introduced and the US took it personally

[@mgronich948]

I've read the PL15 and perhaps the PL21 are not designed to hit F35's or F22s but tankers and AWACs. At long ranges, the small radars in these missiles might not be able to lock on to stealth aircraft. One other consideration, a steal fighter doesn't just have to worry about other stealth fighters, but ships with long range anti-air missiles. Waiting ot hear your next video on how these long range weapons will find their targets.

[@georgesikimeti2184]

AWACS?,the mother of all radars!

[@Shinobubu]

@@georgesikimeti2184 The AWACS would probably detect missiles being launched at them before they actually get there alerting every other asset of where it came from.

[@georgesikimeti2184]

@@Shinobubuyeah,the heart,soul and the brain behind what’s moving around the atmosphere,a tier one priority target indeed.

[@Sardarkhan69]

Great & informative work ❤ 🇬🇧

[@420cactusgaming7]

I was waiting for this one to drop

[@guyb7995]

16:40 When it comes out, I hope they call it the AIM-154 Phoenix 2 (or AIM-55). That name needs to be reborn and rise from the ashes of time.

[@eugenefleming1614]

All I can say is China is like Russia a lot of talk. Does it work? These numbers of distance and how good the lock-on range is ? Love the idea the the F15 will carry many of these weapons 🇺🇸🤔👍

[@timtrewyn453]

Yeah. Their narrative is intended to get the other side to throw up its hands and quit. Didn't work so well for the Russians in Ukraine in the short run.

[@itwasme2435]

Amazing engineering

[@teddyballgame4823]

Awesome content as always. Is the AIM-120 D3 still testing or close to operational?

[@Meatball1407]

Alex, do you think NGAD will be bigger than the F-22 and F-35 so that it can later house more numerous and lager munitions?

[@SandboxxApp]

I do - I expect it to be a larger aircraft with more fuel storage, more weapon space, and a higher service ceiling.

[@RG-3PO]

Now if we can just get some SR-71s to launch missiles they could have some epic range lol.

[@LOTUG98]

The SR-72 will .

[@cobaltballistics4742]

The A-12 (YF-12) did. It’s basically an SR-71 armed with AIM-47 long range missiles. The ultimate interceptor.

[@Cipherius117]

Great reporting as always Alex. Topic for future video? Loitering munitions (land/submersed/air launched). May tie in further with the system of systems approach.

[@l.a.mottern3106]

Good Stuff!!

[@bbwphantom]

I thought I knew about AA missiles but I learned a lot more today. As always thank you for this video.

[@rocketruss3405]

Another interesting video 👍

[@Ayvengo21]

R-37 was made to use against awacs and so it doesn't need have some fancy capabilities just need to fly as far as possible so it doesn't make much sense to compare with other long range air-to-air rockets

[@hoghogwild]

If you are going to attack high value targets like AWACS, you'd better believe your missile needs "fancy capabilities" in order to survive to get anywhere near said AWACS.

[@kaneo1]

AIM260 needs to be named Phoenix 2, so we can have them patrolling for carrier groups with no changes to story texts.

[@cobaltballistics4742]

Absolutely. And we can add “Fox Three” back to the lexicon.

[@SSDConker2]

@@cobaltballistics4742 uh Fox Three never left the lexicon. It applies to active radar guided missiles like AMRAAM.

[@jloiben12]

China: Builds a super missile. America: I see you haven’t learned from the Russians about trying to outclass our military hardware

[@mr_smee]

Yeah, kinda reminds one of the F15 situation to me.

[@Shinobubu]

The only experience China has is reverse engineering Russian junk. and even copying their playbook of overstating capabilities.

[@andrewpizzino2514]

In an age of near peer competition I’m sure the Navy will be interested in this for fleet defense