Hellfire is closer to $150K than $65K. The replacement JCM program is (was…) targeting a full rate production cost of $80K ($120K during LRIP).
Another system with good potential for MOUT ops such as CS would be something like LOCAAS, capable of being retasked and with sufficient endurance to wait out the target, but still offering low collatoral damage.
Lively debate on the MMS vs. chin turret question over on Kiowa Pilots for the past couple of months: see Kiowapilots.com.
Yeah, but it’s no fun unless you use it…

😀
Or just wait until the richer nations of the world buy F-22s/F-35s/Rafales/EFs, and then snap up those F-16C Blk50/25s, F-15C/Es, FA-18Cs, etc.
As I understand it, the frontrunner is now the C-37.
Keep in mind there are two requirements here. As already stated, the Navy may well merge the role into the P-8 program, or even the BAMS effort. Should a joint-service effort prove too hard, the Army could go back to the ERJ145, or even choose to pursue a common platform with FCA.
Several UAVs already tapped to carry APKWS, which offers a lightweight low-cost alternative to Hellfire.
The US Navy is also developing a guided version of the 2.75″ round, the Low-Cost Guided Imaging Rocket (LOGIR). In this instance the guidance is IR.
The other low-cost system being marketed for the tactical UAV market is Viper Strike, a laser-guided variant of the BAT submunition.
Looks like Kestrel’s a no-go; the Marines have reportedly taken the name for the US101 Presidential Helicopter.
The recent fatal crash was a Comp Air 7SL.
There is now a questionmark over whether those W-3WA Sokols will ever be delivered.
Kestrel’s been mentioned once or twice within the industry, for whatever that’s worth. Still doesn’t seem to have the same ring as Raptor. Maybe it’ll grow on me.
Other suggestions:
F-35 Lightening 1½
F-35 Streetfighter (or F-35 Janet, as in Janet Street-Fighter). Maybe not…
F-35 Meteor would’ve been a nice tribute to the F-80, but those dastardly French (MBDA) got there first !
Pave Low is already in line to be replaced by the CV-22 (deliveries 2006, EIS 2008), though it is also being offered for PRV as the PRV-22. The second phase of the PRV program specifies a target KPP speed of 300 kts, so the Osprey – although pricey – could offer a common solution to both phases of the program.
That was the one. Thanks for jogging the memory !
Lockheed Martin itself believes that the weight issue is well under control – as of the beginning of this year, the weight reduction program for the B had stabilzed at 2,250 lb, which equates to 3,600 lb of extra payload capability. The three-figure weight saving initiatives quoted in the AFA article are the exception to the rule – the average saving for each initiative pursued has been 5 lb.
Does anyone recall the pusher-prop ground attack study proposed by BAe in the late ’80s or early ’90s ? IIRC, it was a straight-wing canard design with propfan propulsion.
IIRC, there was an AAM variant of SRAM considered at one stage.
Sferrin – IIRC also, the original ASALM specs were closer to M4.