I found this one.
If Japan tried to go the RR/GE route they would say goodbye to having those F-35s before 2020. Also, the additional funding needed to finish F136 R&D would double or triple the price of their F-35 purchase not to mention the increased lifetime costs due to the small economy of scale issue.
Given that ground launching is built into every AMRAAM coming off the line, the same should also apply to NGM. This should setup an interesting distributed SAM network with radar and IIR capabilities.
I see the SA-22 and NASAMS having two different roles, primarily based on the different doctrines of western vs eastern warfare.
SA-22 should be cheaper.
The primary Cs are C1,3,& 7. All current AMRAAM production is either C7 or D.
FY2012 budget has 218/363/341/364/279 (FY 2012-2016 USAF 120Ds), 161/210/216/244/232 (FY 2012-2016 USN 120Ds), and 250 each year (2012-2016 FMS C7s).
True, it all depends on the defenses.
There could also be a combo, cheaper SDBs to saturate and NGM to finish it off before it reloads.
As point-defense becomes better, you may need more SDB type weapons to overwhelm the defenses.
Here is a couple of the Gripen NG


Every AMRAAM since the first C has the software installed to be air-launched or ground-launched. To answer your questions, it depends on what missile is purchased, but the C-7 is being used (IIRC) in the latest systems.
Oops, my bad on missing the CLOS info (helps in clouds, but not behind cover)
According to their own website its range is 20km which is still shorter than an AMRAAM.
range out to 20 km
Besides the longer range of the AMRAAM over the RBS23, there is also the issue of networking, Tracking & development.
Networking: Depending on the model of AMRAAM, pre-launch and post-launch updates can come from a variety of sources (even if LOS from the launching vehicle is lost).
Tracking: Being a laser guided missile, the RBS23 gives it’s position away as soon as it tries to acquire the target. The missile itself will lose the track of the target goes behind a hill, into a cloud, etc. OTOH, an AMRAAM can be continue to track a target after it maneuvers as stated above.
Development: All development ro improve the RBS23 has to come from the program itself. The AMRAAM, OTOH, enjoys a massive user & development base that will keep improvements coming for many years to come. There is already a new motor on the way that will improve weight, speed, and range performance.
Nice, I didn’t know it’s was more than a paper plane.
You do realize those are computer models and not physical planes, right?
I hope they win and find out what political BS was working in the background.
My bet, the Big “O” was trying to buy favor in Brazil in order to get a better chance of teh F-18 winning its bid.
High def in relation to what it is, which is a MLD/MAWS.
I think the 6 high definition IIR cameras (backed up by the processing power of the ICP) will help significantly over any previous fisheye based MAWS. IIRC no other MAWS mfg has claimed the ability to track any SAM or AAA flight trajectory.
It’s a possibility – but it is ticklish knowing when to jam. AESAs don’t give you much of a clue that you’ve been detected, and you don’t want to emit and give the game away before that.
Also, a ventral pod is limited to lower-hemisphere targets in level flight.
The same limitations (knowing vs not knowing) apply to current self-protection jammers. One benefit that the F-35 enjoys is that EODAS has a YATO (You Are The One) mode that lets them know when they are the target of a rising SAM or AAA.
As the NGJLight’s job would be primarily protection in a IADS environment, lower+ hemisphere coverage is just fine.