[Goose]

Neat video of Ukraine using a "Vampire" SAM system which uses very cheap laser guided APKWS rockets to take out a Russian cruise missile. These had previously only been seen targeting much slower/cheaper Shahed type drones. If they can also successfully target cruise missiles this will be a very important development- a ~$20k rocket taking out ~$500k cruise missile. Should help Ukraine conserve their more expensive interceptor missiles.

https://x.com/Osinttechnical/status/1976687565060309018

Yes, this has been going on for quite a while now. https://www.twz.com/air/f-16s-have-been-...0Red%20Sea. The use of the APKWS with the F-16 allows the F-16 to carry many more missiles than it can AIM-9X or AMRAAMs. The cost advantage is also obviously a bonus. It must be noted however that the APKWS is not a "fire and forget" weapon. The pilot (or ground operator) has to keep the laser designator on the target. In most cases the high speed and relatively short range (12 km at between 700 ms/s and 1 km/sec) of the APKWS missile itself make the time of flight short enough that is not a big challenge. It should be noted that the aircraft velocity in the direction of the target adds to the speed of the missile, allowing the missile to close even faster (although not significantly increasing the range).
 
The APKWS can in theory intercept anything the laser is illuminating. The problem is (or at least was) that the missile has no ability to  "pull lead" on the target. It is always going to follow the shortest path target at any given moment, leading to an curved intercept trajectory. With targets that are much slower than the APKWS the slightly curved trajectory is no problem. The "extra" path length is a very small fraction of the APKWS missile range and can be ignored. As the target gets faster, the problem becomes greater. Typically cruise missiles are much faster than Shahed-136 drones. This produced the concern that the APKWS would not be effective against "normal" cruise missiles. It is undoubtedly true that in some cases the geometry allows an intercept and in other cases it does not. Being directly behind the target of course results in a straight path to the target no matter what its speed is. F-16s can make that happen. SAMs are stuck with whatever geometry nature gives them.
 
I also would not be surprised to hear the Ukrainian SAM operators are firing the missile dumb and relying on its ballistic trajectory to fairly closely approach the cruise missile at a given predicted point in space. The missile will therefore not "see" the designator until it is real close to the target and the curved path will be too short to matter. The operator has to calculate the appropriate "Kentucky windage", but they probably have an app for that :-).

[Goose]

Neat video of Ukraine using a "Vampire" SAM system which uses very cheap laser guided APKWS rockets to take out a Russian cruise missile. These had previously only been seen targeting much slower/cheaper Shahed type drones. If they can also successfully target cruise missiles this will be a very important development- a ~$20k rocket taking out ~$500k cruise missile. Should help Ukraine conserve their more expensive interceptor missiles.

https://x.com/Osinttechnical/status/1976687565060309018

Yes, this has been going on for quite a while now. https://www.twz.com/air/f-16s-have-been-...0Red%20Sea. The use of the APKWS with the F-16 allows the F-16 to carry many more missiles than it can AIM-9X or AMRAAMs. The cost advantage is also obviously a bonus. It must be noted however that the APKWS is not a "fire and forget" weapon. The pilot (or ground operator) has to keep the laser designator on the target. In most cases the high speed and relatively short range (12 km at between 700 ms/s and 1 km/sec) of the APKWS missile itself make the time of flight short enough that is not a big challenge. It should be noted that the aircraft velocity in the direction of the target adds to the speed of the missile, allowing the missile to close even faster (although not significantly increasing the range).
 
The APKWS can in theory intercept anything the laser is illuminating. The problem is (or at least was) that the missile has no ability to  "pull lead" on the target. It is always going to follow the shortest path target at any given moment, leading to an curved intercept trajectory. With targets that are much slower than the APKWS the slightly curved trajectory is no problem. The "extra" path length is a very small fraction of the APKWS missile range and can be ignored. As the target gets faster, the problem becomes greater. Typically cruise missiles are much faster than Shahed-136 drones. This produced the concern that the APKWS would not be effective against "normal" cruise missiles. It is undoubtedly true that in some cases the geometry allows an intercept and in other cases it does not. Being directly behind the target of course results in a straight path to the target no matter what its speed is. F-16s can make that happen. SAMs are stuck with whatever geometry nature gives them.
 
I also would not be surprised to hear the Ukrainian SAM operators are firing the missile dumb and relying on its ballistic trajectory to fairly closely approach the cruise missile at a given predicted point in space. The missile will therefore not "see" the designator until it is real close to the target and the curved path will be too short to matter. The operator has to calculate the appropriate "Kentucky windage", but they probably have an app for that :-).