 |
| U.S. Air Force Airmen from the 7th Munitions Squadron transport a Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) toward a B-1 Bomber June 12, 2013, at Dyess Air Force Base, Texas. The weapon loading was part of a trial-run for munitions Airmen prior to the first captive carry test conducted by the 337th Test and Evaluation Squadron on June 17. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Damon Kasberg/Released) |
The USAF is conducting a test of the LRASM onboard a B-1. But it occurs to me that this missile is obsolete before it even gets into service. Stats via Wikipedia.
| Long Range Anti-Ship Missile | |
|---|---|
| Type | Long-range anti-ship |
| Place of origin | United States |
| Service history | |
| In service | Planned to enter service in 2015 |
| Production history | |
| Manufacturer | Lockheed Martin |
| Specifications | |
| Warhead | 1,000 lb blast-fragmentation penetrator[2] |
| Operational range | 370 km (230 mi)+[1] |
| Launch platform | Mark 41 Vertical Launch System (VLS),F-35 Lightning II |
I'm sorry but a cruise missile flying at medium altitude to get to the target area and then dropping low to make a sea skimming final run seems ok in theory, but the range is what has me doubting.
Modern anti-air missiles (at least some of them) will be able to launch on the subsonic missile while its cruising at altitude. By definition it will be saturation attacks or expect mission failure. According to Wiki, there was a planned LRASM-B that was to be supersonic but it was canceled.
I just wonder.
Is this the type of weapon that will win in the Pacific or is it simply about the illusion of progress?
