https://www.yahoo.com/news/pentagon-conf...00184.html
The AGM-88 situation is very puzzling to say the least. I am virtually certain Ukraine has no aircraft that can launch this missile. The HARM is probably the most difficult missile to interface with the aircraft. Given that, it would need to be a ground launch. The Israelis have done this with older HARMS. It generally doesn't work well. The HARM is designed to detect the target radar and guide itself directly to the radar antenna. Thus the name "HARM" and the relatively small warhead for a 780 lb missile. The HARM fragmentation warhead is designed to shred the target. It relies on the fact electronics vans are pretty fragile.
The radar horizon (if both the HARM launcher and radar are 2 meters AGL) is on the order of 12 km. The missile can't see the target. It is possible to program the target parameters into the missile and launch it anyway, hoping that when it gets in the air it can "see" the target radar and lock on to it. That means you need some way to know the "radar" is transmitting. If it isn't, or if it shuts down "soon enough", the "basic" HARM will almost certainly not kill it. The AARGM (AGM-88E) has an infared CCD imager and a W band radar imager that can "recognize" target radars by their physical appearance signatures. The AARGM is also the only HARM with GPS capability. The article I cited above doesn't make that distinction. The AARGM can get a solution that is "good enough" to fly near the target radar even if the radar shuts down. The AARGM can then "hunt" using it's imagers until it recognizes the radar. In theory, with "good enough" range and bearing (or approximate GPS coordinates) you could launch an AARGM using that data and maybe it will find the radar without ever receiving a signal from it. It is certainly contrary to the HARM concept of operations. OTOH, if you have exact GPS coordinates of the target, you are probably better off using a HIMARS or similar. Bigger warhead so a near miss may be adequate and you don't risk the AARGM wandering off somewhere.
We don't know which version Ukraine got. I kind of hope not AARGM. The joke about this missile was that it is smarter than most people you know, but for what it costs, it should be. Shooting at S-300 radars and the like from ground launchers that can't "see" the radar will use up tons of missiles and probably not hit much. Firing it from altitude would be a different story, because there the HARM can "see" the radar. Presumably, Ukraine can't do that. Given this, I would trade ATACMS for HARMS (even AARGMs) any day.
The AGM-88 situation is very puzzling to say the least. I am virtually certain Ukraine has no aircraft that can launch this missile. The HARM is probably the most difficult missile to interface with the aircraft. Given that, it would need to be a ground launch. The Israelis have done this with older HARMS. It generally doesn't work well. The HARM is designed to detect the target radar and guide itself directly to the radar antenna. Thus the name "HARM" and the relatively small warhead for a 780 lb missile. The HARM fragmentation warhead is designed to shred the target. It relies on the fact electronics vans are pretty fragile.
The radar horizon (if both the HARM launcher and radar are 2 meters AGL) is on the order of 12 km. The missile can't see the target. It is possible to program the target parameters into the missile and launch it anyway, hoping that when it gets in the air it can "see" the target radar and lock on to it. That means you need some way to know the "radar" is transmitting. If it isn't, or if it shuts down "soon enough", the "basic" HARM will almost certainly not kill it. The AARGM (AGM-88E) has an infared CCD imager and a W band radar imager that can "recognize" target radars by their physical appearance signatures. The AARGM is also the only HARM with GPS capability. The article I cited above doesn't make that distinction. The AARGM can get a solution that is "good enough" to fly near the target radar even if the radar shuts down. The AARGM can then "hunt" using it's imagers until it recognizes the radar. In theory, with "good enough" range and bearing (or approximate GPS coordinates) you could launch an AARGM using that data and maybe it will find the radar without ever receiving a signal from it. It is certainly contrary to the HARM concept of operations. OTOH, if you have exact GPS coordinates of the target, you are probably better off using a HIMARS or similar. Bigger warhead so a near miss may be adequate and you don't risk the AARGM wandering off somewhere.
We don't know which version Ukraine got. I kind of hope not AARGM. The joke about this missile was that it is smarter than most people you know, but for what it costs, it should be. Shooting at S-300 radars and the like from ground launchers that can't "see" the radar will use up tons of missiles and probably not hit much. Firing it from altitude would be a different story, because there the HARM can "see" the radar. Presumably, Ukraine can't do that. Given this, I would trade ATACMS for HARMS (even AARGMs) any day.