considering the range figures sm-3, given its volume, offers, i’d wager the 600 km figure will be attained mostly through further refinement of guidance/steering methods and, consequently, the flight profile.

The Tomahawk, like any other proper cruise missile, is NOT a replacement for precise bombing. Tomahaws are meant to help breach a door through the enemy’s defenses, or, alternatively, cause (in some situations limited) damage to strategic targets behind enemy lines. On their own, a salvo of tomahaws aren’t that useful, when their price tag and available numbers are taken into consideration. To take full advantage of their ability during an attack on the enemy defenses one simply has to follow on with proper air strikes with airplanes and bombs – in much, much greater numbers than what current cruise missile inventories of any country can offer.

Did/ does mig-31 cruise over mach 1 without ab? if so, at which speed? There are some figures out on the web for its range at 2.35 mach, and they’re way too big for an afterburner cruise.

Is it just me or the vertical tail surfaces on that image seem to be one-piece, all moving surfaces?

For what it’s worth, Sparrow missiles fired in Desert storm had some 28% effectivess, Sidewinders had, in the same same conflict, 13% effectivess. Amraam, over its service lifespan, had 77% effectiveness. Context of those figures is unknown.

How do we explain discrepancies in *publicly* stated ranges for various stand off weapons?

How does a storm shadow get 250+ km range, kepd 350 gets 500+ km range, jassm gets some 400+ km range and jassm-er 900+ km range?

Lets keep in mind that storm shadow and kepd 350 are very similar in dimension and shape while jassms are some 30% smaller. Both versions of jassm have the same dimensions.

So how do we explain the range differences? What are most likely explanations?

A) Publicly stated max ranges have little to do with reality. ‘over X’ range or ‘xxx plus’ range can often mean two or three times the range. Certain users may require the manufacturer not to state the true range while other users have no such issues or are offering public figures which are much closer to reality.

B) Stated ranges for each missile are given for different flight profiles. Maybe one missile flies low the whole time while another missile (or version of a missile) flies on a high trajectory. That difference alone could offer 100% longer range.

C) Internal composition may be radically different. Just because outside dimensions are, say, 5 times 1 meter, that doesnt mean that all of that volume is used for warhead, engine, electronics and fuel. Perhaps one missile uses relatively thin walls with little room for thick layers of RAM, while another uses several centimeters thick RAM, optimized against even wider bandwidth radars.

D) Engine/fuel technology of one missile is so much more advanced that it really can offer 100% longer range over another missile, with other variables being the same.

E) All of the above…

Why chinooks? It’s not a LHD. But other than that, what you’ve listed may indeed be the usual peacetime air wing. In war conditions we might see another 12 F35s plus one or two more AEW helos and/or asw helos, depending on the projected threat.