Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!sun!amdcad!amdcad!military
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: AMRAAM
Message-ID: <1991Apr11.033520.4390@amd.com>
Date: 10 Apr 91 15:36:39 GMT
References: <1991Apr10.024102.20311@amd.com>
Sender: military@amd.com
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 39
Approved: military@amd.com


From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)


>From: sdragoo@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen P Dragoo)
>Can someone explain to me why the DoD thought that designing AMRAAM was such
>a great idea?  I understand the need for a fully active radar-guided AAM, 
>but please!  Putting it in a missile smaller than Sparrow is ridiculous...
>... build one a little larger--say, 10inches in diameter...

The reason for being Sparrow-compatible is that an awful lot of aircraft
have been designed around Sparrow, starting with the Phantom and working
up to modern examples like the F-18 and the Tornado F.3.  If you want to
be able to use your new Wundermissile with existing aircraft, there is
much to be said for something that will fit in a Sparrow-sized "pocket".

The reason for making the thing a bit smaller than Sparrow, on the other
hand, was more political:  it had to be able to fly on the F-16, which
is a bit small for Sparrow.  (Sparrows *have* been flown on the F-16,
experimentally, but a slightly lighter missile is easier.  Besides, the
USAF wanted AMRAAM, so officially it Isn't Possible to fly Sparrows on
the F-16...)

>update the Phoenix so that you don't need the AWG-9 system, and make it 
>cheaper...

Fly a Navy missile on a USAF aircraft?  Surely you jest. :-)  (We won't
mention that both Sparrow and Sidewinder were originally from the Navy...!)

In any case, the range of applications for a Sparrow-sized missile is a
lot larger than that for Phoenix.  Phoenix is too big and heavy to be
carried in substantial numbers on most current fighters.  Even the F-14
carries six of them only as an "overload" condition.  (The much-maligned,
defunct, F-111B was the only US interceptor to date that really could
pack six of them without compromising performance.)

-- 
And the bean-counter replied,           | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
"beans are more important".             |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry