We hear so many negative things about the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program these days: cost overruns, missed deadlines, technology failures, etc. So it's nice to see a video of a small piece of the larger JSF initiative moving forward--and moving quickly. It's not part of the plane itself, but a stealthy cruise missile developed by Norway's Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace, and it's looking for a ship to sink.
The Naval Strike Missile is a fire-and-forget cruise missile--that is, you preprogram the missile with a target, and it finds its own way there. The 900-pound NSM is super-nimble and equipped with GPS and other inertial and terrain-based systems that allow it to hug the contours of a coastline, cruise just above the surface of the ocean, or negotiate terrestrial terrain at very low radar-evading altitudes.
The NSM is expected to be a regular payload aboard the F-35 Lightning II when it finally enters service, and if the video below is any indication it will be a formidable adversary. Watch as the missile is launched from a California test range, "sea-skims" low across the Pacific, flies low over an island, and then acquires its target on the far side. Not to give the ending away, but this naval vessel doesn't stand a chance.
That is an amazing projectile, does anyone know if it is strictly terrain launched or can it be fired from planes and submarines?
Read the article. "The NSM is expected to be a regular payload aboard the F-35 Lightning II when it finally enters service"
So do these missile tests not include the explosive charge and only serve as a measure of accuracy?
Yes that it is correct, its functionality demo, the explosive warhead is the easy part.
I was wondering the same thing. Kongsberg put out a press release in late June about "the first live fire shot against a sea target with a series produced NSM" which was held at the US Naval Air Warfare Center in California. So the test did include, at least at some point, an explosive warhead, though the video presented above looks like a showcase of the missile's navigation capabilities.
This is a stealth missile because of composite material construction, according to Kongsberg, as well as using terrain following maneuvers to stay under conventional radar. But terrain following can be defeated by downward-looking airborne radar systems. I suspect its radar cross section would be plenty big from an airborne radar perspective because it is using shape to actively deflect radar. However, it sounds to me like the next stage in this game is to use airborne doppler lidar systems, instead of radar, to defend ships from these kinds of threats.
very impressive indeed. it seems to hover just above the water.
It seems to have hit the ship fairly high. I thought "they" like to hit the shit at or below the water line. I know this missile did not have an explosive tip, but it seems like where it hit, had it exploded, the ship could have stayed a float.
The explosive can cut the ship in half as it blasts off. That's what I see in the video game.
For the purpose of the test, it looks they use shipping containers on a barge to simulate a ship. I imagine, then, that the target was the metal container. They wouldn't want to sink the barge.
By making it hit the containers on top of the ship instead of the hull of the ship they are able to re-use the ship.
"Do not offer sympathy to the mentally ill.
Tell them firmly:
I am not paid to listen to this drivel.
You are a terminal boob." - William S. Burroughs
I would love to tell you much detail new cruise missile, but then I have to K### everyone and this would ruin POPSCI ratings, so sorry, lol. ;)
That ship was a goner from the moment the missile was spotted, the angle it hit the stern was a big fu** you, I'm guessing that the ship was going around 8-10 knots, it was over from the start.
aaaaaaaaaand there goes a million or 2 bucks, but id be lying if i said i didnt want a few of em.
It is very common on a variety of military craft to have test calibration missiles, torpedoes, etc and not be live rounds or munitions. This is done to calibrate the projectile, various guidance systems and to give the operators more practice, reducing damage and cost.
I'd just like to remind everyone that a good missile does not a good Joint Strike Fighter make. Is the pentagon saying that this missile system is non-compatible with our other fighter aircraft? THEN IT IS NOT A PLUS FOR THE JSF. The problems with the JSF have nothing to do with it's weapons, which are expected to be first rate on ANY American warbird.
That is a good missile. I wonder how much money they used.