Lockheed/Martin's APKWS II or Mini Hellfire

I hadn't heard about this missile before, although it just a development of the standard 2.75in rocket. There are some videos and pdf's on the home page, shouldn't be long before these are deployed to Iraq.

Lockheed Martin's Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System II (APKWS II), or HELLFIRE® Junior, builds on 30 years of leadership in precision laser-guided weaponry, including Joint Common Missile (JCM), HELLFIRE, Copperhead, and the Laser-Aided Rocket System - the world’s first laser-guided 2.75-inch rocket - to deliver a 2.75-inch semi-active laser (SAL) guided rocket that provides HELLFIRE capability at a fraction of a HELLFIRE's cost.

www.missilesandfirecontrol.com...

[edit on 20-3-2006 by rogue1]

i doubt is as lethal as a hellfire the warhead must be smaller i hope its not a replacemnt good for replacing the unguided rockets though.

Most excellent to see dumbfire systems upgraded like this especially in an age where apaches aren't facing the armored wall of eastern doctrine that calls for full pylons of ATGM's. Considerring the overall total ignorance the defense industry has shown for the changing face of warfare this is a promising development. No longer will we be launching maverick missiles at tents with camels outside so to speak... instead we can use updated and more accurate and much cheaper weapons to take out targets like gun trucks and other lightly armored targets.

I watched a TV documentary some time ago where a helicopter pilot stated that the usual form of engagement of AH-64´s was the sweeping run to the target, and that only recently the "hovering at a distance" became more important in dealing with non-MBT threats. For this hovering in the distance the guided FFAR seems to be benefitial.

-----------

Lockheed Martin's Advanced Precision kill Weapon System II (APKWS II), ...

This might be the only weapon I am aware of that actually says what it´s intention is without a fancy codeword ...

[edit on 26/3/2006 by Lonestar24]

anyone ever seen that video of an Apache firing it's cannon at an Iraqi? geez, don't they know what such a big cannon does to a man? I was suprised he didn't explode.

I have heard of this program for quite some time, I wonder what it's armor penetration is rated at, probably around that of the Javalin should fired system?

I dunno man but for the nickel and dime targets our gunships are engaging and the precision that they have to do it with makes this system a winner in my book. At least this is a bit less of an overkill situation.

APKWS II is a retool of the original APKWS program which used a SAL seeker mounted behind the warhead. Allowed the warhead to have the advantage of less parasitic mass to punch through and a good frontal view to engage softer targets.

Problems with the guidance system have lead to a retooling of the program and it looks like it will go with a more conventional seeker mounted forward of the warhead.

Warhead performance will be much less than Javelin! Quite possibly won't go with a shaped charge at all. Primary focus is on light vehicles and troops in the open (especially MANPADS teams).

That first pic in the thread is photoshopped, no II's have flown yet.

-bj

Originally posted by bj


That first pic in the thread is photoshopped, no II's have flown yet.

Well they have flown, if you'd gone to the website link provided you'd see that they have press releases and test videos.

In a briefing at the National Press Club today, the company showed never-before-seen imagery from its recent successful initial guided test vehicle (GTV-1) flight at Eglin Air Force Base, FL, including a side-by-side comparison with the trajectory predicted in its integrated flight simulation (IFS) model.

The Lockheed Martin rocket hit the target board 2.8 kilometers downrange and the impact was less than half a meter from the laser spot designation.

www.missilesandfirecontrol.com...

I guess them calling it a mini-hellfire gave me the impression it was supposed to be similar in it's role lol, well still pretty good fighting them Iraqi's and stuff...

If you ask me it's better than a scaled down hellfire. For one it's bound to be cheaper. This is a huge plus... for two it's designed to combat the REAL threats we face, Such as armored technicals (heavy machine guns mounted on light trucks for us americans), RPG nests, and other shoulder fired weaponry positions mobile or immobile that radiate a heat signature.


AKA this is the perfect camel bedouin tent and toyota hilux destroying weapon. No massive overkill or massive over payment on behalf of tax paying americans to kill said camels and toyota trucks. We all win.... well unless you own camels, a bedouin tent, and a toyota hilux with a dhsk mounted on the rollbars.

Originally posted by astral_ice
If you ask me it's better than a scaled down hellfire. For one it's bound to be cheaper. This is a huge plus... for two it's designed to combat the REAL threats we face, Such as armored technicals (heavy machine guns mounted on light trucks for us americans), RPG nests, and other shoulder fired weaponry positions mobile or immobile that radiate a heat signature.

EXACTLY, you hit the nail right on the head. It isn't meant to take out tanks, rather the targets you mention. It will vastly increase the capability of helicopters to support troops at reasonable range without having to get too close, not to mention an increase in accuracy.

Don't forget one other major advantage this system will give the army. It will enable a helicopter to stay over our troops providing supporting fire for larger intervals between breaking off to rearm. Being able to dole out rockets in ones and twos rather than the previous ripplefire salvoes. Which in the situations we find ourselves these days is a definite force multiplier.

Edit: And also in an era where collateral damage and civilian casualties are becoming totally unacceptable this system has the added advantage of being less of a pray and spray style system.

[edit on 31-3-2006 by astral_ice]

I was under the impression from folks I talk to in Huntsville regularly that none of the II's had yet flown. Should have checked the link.

I guess from conversations I'd had with those guys that there are other aspects that haven't been ironed out yet, as they were asking for some input on those. I wrongly jumped to the conclusion that none had flown.

Still, that first pic looked a little fake to me somehow. Anyway, sorry for jumping to conclusions, I should have known better.