Previous Work Status
Initial Version of Missile-SIM for Performance evaluation
Aerodynamic Validation of Missile-SIM for Trajectory
AIM-120C Study using Missile-SIM : Part 1 - Sensitivity
AIM-120C Study using Missile-SIM : Part 2 - Launch Condition
AIM-120C Study using Missile-SIM : Part 2 - Launch Condition - revision
Patch note of Missile-SIM : Guidance Algorithm is added w/ Real-Time plot
W.I.P status of Missile-SIM : Addition of Air-propulsion part 1
W.I.P status of Missile-SIM : Addition of Air-propulsion part 2
AIM-120C Study using Missile-SIM : Part 3 - CUDA / LREW / METEOR types. 1 : Baseline Comparison
AIM-120C Study using Missile-SIM : Part 3 - CUDA / LREW / METEOR types. 2 : Sensitivity Analysis
7. Few additional notes for CUDA / AIM-120C / CUDA+Booster / Ramjet(Meteor)
After I conducted sensitivity analysis for the hardware change of the missile, weight of the propulsion fuel, burn time of the fuel, ISP value, and drag. As described in the previous AIM-120C analysis (links in the upper part), now I will move on to the 'extended options' for the given hardware.
More than just describe the possibility of the trajectory optimization, I also added longer-burn booster for the CUDA+Booster missile.
1) CUDA+Booster++ : Upgrade of booster for longer range ??
I have extended test for the CUDA+Booster concept with longer-burn type booster; compared to the 14s of burn-time, 57 and 104s version of the boosters are tested.
In the flight of level flight at 30kft, effect of extension can be shown, but not as dramatic as expected; only about ~20km longer range is obtained via 'per-50s' longer burn. With the initial climb trajectory, range of the baseline can be extended but effect of long-burn is reduced. Because longer-burn type cannot go higher altitude at the initial climb, impact of the long-burn is reduced.
Anyway, maximized range(?) of the CUDA+Booster can be achieved by long-burn and initial climb, and it is about 164km w/ just less than Mach 5 maximum speed. Ramjet-powered, generic Meteor type missile having same trajectory has 290km range with sustained kinematic energy.
Still, advantage of the overwhelmed-ISP provided by ramjet is much significant than CUDA+Booster. The CUDA+Booster type could achieve higher speed easily at the initial phase however, draggy OML of the CUDA and its small weight contribute loss of the energy after burn.
2) AIM-120D : Upgrade of missile w/o change of hardware ?
I have move on to the comparison between range-maximized version of the four models.
- Baseline(14s) and 107s burn-booster of CUDA+Booster
- AIM-120C with initial climb is assumed as AIM-120D
- Generic Meteor type missile with initial climb
Initial climb trajectory is given as certain time of climb with certain angle. Indeed each missile reached different altitude depending on their climb capability.
Result is interesting that assumed AIM-120C having higher climb rate could achieve long range at the given trajectory. Its lower drag and high-altitude climb makes good synergy impact on its range performance. Although this result cannot ignore 100% of possibility of highly maneuverable CUDA+Booster, long-ranged AIM-120C, in the pure kinematic range view, has potential without taking risk of complex booster-ed missile.
AIM-120D(?) is the only candidate having similar range of Meteor at certain condition, then I could understand why some decision makers choose less-risky AIM-120D rather than complex long-range missile candidates.
** In real world, speed of Meteor would not reach hypersonic range because Meteor is throttle-changeable missile. But, still my simulation does not include that function (Future version probably consider it)
** Now, I move on to update of the SIM such as 3d-coordinate, trajectory-missile, long-range cruise function, and scramjet. Because I have little busy in job, speed of work can be low.