Electronic Weapons Article Index : Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics
The HARM Sure Shot
   Next Article → ATTRITION: Joy Bullets


July 25, 2007: The latest
version of the U.S. anti-radiation missile, AGM-88E, makes is nearly impossible
for enemy radars to be turned on,  and
avoid destruction. The missile, also called the Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided
Missile (AARGM), was developed jointly by U.S. and Italian firms. The original
AGM-88 has been in use since the 1980s, and the original  1960s anti-radiation missile quickly evolved into what was called HARM
(High Speed Anti-Radiation Missile). The AGM-88E version defeats the favorite trick
of anti-aircraft units,  shutting down
their radars when they note a HARM is on the way. The AGM-88E remembers where
the radar is when it was on, and carries its own high resolution (mm wave)
radar to make sure it gets the radar. Finally, the AGM-88E can transmit a
picture of the target, just before it is hit, so the user can be certain of
what was taken out. Currently, there are orders for over 2,000 of these
missiles from the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps, Italy and Germany. Production
begins this year.

Next Article → ATTRITION: Joy Bullets
  

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
FJV    Countermeasures could be possible   7/25/2007 12:29:23 PM
Source:
"http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/howtomakewar/default.asp?target=HTADA.HTM"

"June 19, 2005: The U.S. Defense Department has revealed high-powered microwave (HPM) systems for air defense applications to shoot down everything from shoulder-launched surface-to-air (SAM) missiles (like the U.S. Stinger and Russian-made SA-7/16/18) to inbound cruise missiles. Ground-based and airborne systems would be built around Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar technology, using the ability of the radar to focus a concentrated beam of radio energy onto a missile and scramble its electronic seeker. "

Focussing the AESA radar on the incoming missile might work.

Or else place a phalanx system next to the radar
 
Quote    Reply

EricTheRed       7/25/2007 3:07:54 PM
The 1960's predecessor was the AGM-45 Shrike, not HARM, as the article states. (there was also the standard ARM). Th original HARM (AGM-88A) went into production in 1983.  Also, AGM-88D had GPS to replace internal gyros to improve the ability to hit a shut down radar (according to globalsecurity.org) Anyone know what the advantage of mm wave radar over gps is? The picture of what is hit is obviously useful for BDA.              ETR
 
Quote    Reply

liverboat    Millimeter-wave radar   7/26/2007 3:43:48 AM

Anyone know what the advantage of mm wave radar over gps is?
My guess is that the HARM uses the millimeter-wave (MMW) radar to lock on to the target during the terminal phase of flight, in case the target radar is mobile, like a single-vehicle AAA or SAM system (tracked ZSU-23-4, Roland), and the operator decides to shut down and flee.  The MMW radar could allow the HARM to follow the target to impact, regardless of weather or visibility.
 
Quote    Reply

lastdingo       7/30/2007 8:32:47 PM
It's funny, but sad.

People still believe that technical solutions to problems liek this one exist.
Another version fo a missile, with a second, expensive seeker?

Great. As the enemy knows this (or learns about it in the first days of combat), he can adapt.

One example of possible adaption is to use mast-mounted radars and hide inside a farm. There are many building in Europe and elsewhere that allow a truck to enter and be shielded to at least 270°.
So they raise the radar, pick their target, launch an active-seeker SAM like MICA VL or Aster (the Russians could deliver something comparable, as such SAMs are basically AMRAAM-equivalents for SAM work, often with simple boosters). Once an ARM is detected the radar is shut off, mast lowered ... and what does the super-expensive HARM with its mmW seeker see? Buildings. It crashes probably into the building, but it won't take out the radar.
The mmW seeker approach might work better in the Alarm ARM, which uses a top-down flight profile. But Alarm is more easily intercepted by AAA.

Again, a weapon for desert warfare - open terrain is so simple, so nice to technologists...why care about complicated scenarios like closed terrain ... terrain in which actually people live.
 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim       7/30/2007 10:24:01 PM
So the introduction of some sort of terminal guidance to HARMs is apparently worthless because the enemy will merely switch to using ground-launched MICA or Aster with active guidance? I most certainly hope that's exactly what they do! Do you know what the range is of HARM? Do you know what the range is of SDB? Do you even know what the range is of a JDAM from medium-high altitude? Now compare that to the range of a ground-launched MICA, but even more importantly compare that to the range of such a SAM while it's in its active radar mode--*especially* against a stealthy F-35 for example. If the enemy spends all the money it takes to introduce new SAM systems that are reduced to SAM range threat rings determined by the range of its SAMs in active radar mode, we've just created the most cost-effective reduction in enemy IADS capability in history. Shoot, just the range reduction alone should allow us to fly right through their IADS to reach half our targets?never mind any need for SEAD/DEAD to clear a path. The AGM-88E's mere existence already will provide a huge SEAD effect. That will be the best $20million (or whatever the AGM-88E program costs) we ever spent on SEAD/DEAD. 
 
 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim       7/31/2007 5:32:43 AM
Whoops, I pulled a Michael Boulton and slipped the decimal point a few places.  I'd guess this program will cost more like $2billion.  Whatever, there's no question that HARMs are necessary, and upgraded missiles with increased capability is worth $2billion, too.  In any event, that doesn't change the result of what woul dhappen if everyone switched to active guidance SAMs.
 
Quote    Reply

EricTheRed       8/1/2007 1:54:32 PM
So can SDB or JDAM be used in a similar role? Or do we just blast the farmhouse with one if the HARM doesn't do the trick?                      ETR
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       8/10/2007 12:10:09 PM

Whoops, I pulled a Michael Boulton and slipped the decimal point a few places.  I'd guess this program will cost more like $2billion.  Whatever, there's no question that HARMs are necessary, and upgraded missiles with increased capability is worth $2billion, too.  In any event, that doesn't change the result of what woul dhappen if everyone switched to active guidance SAMs.



Even with ARH SAMs, one still needs early warning radars and fire control radars to acquire and identify targets beyond visual range. Although it is theoretically possible to deploy a network of observers who use FLIR to search the sky, it is still more practical to deploy a multilayer surveilance radar system.
 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim       8/10/2007 1:54:54 PM
What lastdingo dreamed up was a concept where the target acquisition radar was used to get the active-radar guided SAM to lock onto the target and launch while the TAR shut down and hid from "view" of the MMW seeker of the incoming HARM, thus somehow becoming protected.  I was pointing out that this would be a great development for us if that's what the enemy did, due to the much smaller engagement range of active-radar equipped SAMs compared to SAMs guided by ground-based missile control radars.
 
Your point is an excellent one as well, since a network of EW radars operating relatively continuously is vital to actually running an effective IADS.  EW radars are certainly also HARM targets and their size typically would make some sort of evasive maneuver like ducking the antenna down inside a building while the HARM is inbound basically impossible.
 
 
Quote    Reply

KlubMarcus       10/15/2007 9:44:31 PM
The new HARM's have GPS, or should be able to connect to the plane's GPS. That means that there will be a follow-up strike shortly after the initial salvo. C'mon now, you think the US Military shoots only once? The last known AREA that an enemy emitter is found is going to get hit with bombs, artillery, rockets, helicopters, heck they might send in grounds troops to capture equipment and technicians! There won't be anything left nearby.
 
Quote    Reply