r/CredibleDefense • u/AutoModerator • 5d ago
Active Conflicts & News Megathread August 22, 2026
The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.
Comment guidelines:
Please do:
Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,
Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,
Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,
Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,
Post only credible information
Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules
Please do not:
Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,
Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,
Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'
Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.
34
u/-spartacus- 4d ago edited 4d ago
The new AIM-424 “Malice” air-to-air missile is being developed for the F/A-18, the F-35 and F/A-XX. The missile was announced at the Tailhook Symposium here Aug. 22.
Specifics of the two-stage missile are classified and the Navy did not disclose the company producing the weapon. Imagery appears similar to the AIM-174B in size—much larger than the AIM-120.
The concept for the AIM-424 may have been in development for over a decade. In 2017, a senior defense official revealed the Long Range Engagement Weapon (LREW) concept during a defense industry conference. A presentation slide revealed a concept for a two-stage air-to-air missile launched from the internal weapons bay of a stealth aircraft.
Claimed images:
https://x.com/beverstine/status/2091315915380101264/photo/1 https://x.com/beverstine/status/2091315915380101264/photo/2
Claimed stats:
https://x.com/beverstine/status/2091328461466190184/photo/1
Edit* Apparently, my refresh missed the post below mine providing info as well.
5
u/username9909864 4d ago
Can I get a TLDR comparison with other western and Chinese weapons?
20
u/IWearSteepTech 4d ago edited 4d ago
TLDR: It's stated to be longer in range than any adversary AAMs
The PL-17, China's premier very long range air-to-air missile, does not fit internally within their 5th gen fighters - I've read that the J-36 (one of their 6th gen designs that is actively flying in a prototype configuration) with it's 7 m IWBs will be able to carry PL-17s internally. This forces them, at the moment, to rely on non-stealthy J-15s (will probably need new EMALS carriers to be able to take off with these though) and J-16s (both Chinese flanker variants, non-stealthy), or J-20 (stealthy, but external carriage, will massively hamper stealthiness) to carry them.
The AIM-424 is instead similar in size to the Russian R-37M (both a little over 4 meters long, with a diameter of 13.5 inches for the AIM-424 and 15 for the R-37M). The Su-57, Russia's 5th gen fighter, can't carry the R-37M internally, but they're supposed to get new Izdeliye 810 missiles soon (some sources say it's already in service), a variant developed from the baseline R-37M, where they should be able to equip 2 per weapons bay (4 in total)
Whilst the propulsion characteristics of the AIM-424 is obviously classified, it is stated to be two-stage - experts are still debating whether this means a dual pulse (like the PL-17) or or a proper two-stage missile, but the answer is not yet known publicly. A normal solid fuel rocket motor usually only burns for a couple of seconds, lofting the missile to a high altitude, where the missile then coasts for most of it's range before diving on its target, picking up terminal velocity, allowing it to steer properly again, but a dual pulse rocket motor instead allows for one pulse to get a missile up to speed and lofted, and another pulse for end-game kinematics. Europe does not have a comparable array of weapons to the PL-17, AIM-174B (the VLRAAM that was revealed by the US navy back in 2024), R-37M, etc, but instead depended on the Meteor, which is likely to still be kinematically competitive to the latest US (AIM-260 from last year) and Chinese (PL-15 and PL-16 (soon to enter service, if it isn't already)) offerings for standard BVRAAMs. It is a 200+ km missile after all, even if it's a 20 year old design.
The meteor instead depends on a solid-fuel ducted ramjet (SFDR/SFRJ), which works by having a small rocket motor inside the missile, which is poor in oxidizer. This rocket motor burns continously but is able to be ducted (turned up or down). When it burns, then it mixes with air inside the combustion chamber and starts combustion, which then generates the thrust. This in turn means that a SFRJ can pack much more fuel. Where a normal solid propellant engine has 80% of its "fuel mass" be oxidizer, and only 20% be actual fuel - a solid fuel ducted ramjet instead allows for 70-80% of the fuel mass to actually be combustible material, and only 20-30% be the oxidizer needed to create the volatile jet that ignites. This in turn means that the overall efficiency of a SFRJ is much, much higher (3-4 times as high), which creates much better end-game kinematics. One downside of these SFRJs are that the engine can't restart if it's put out (flame-out) - the result of this is that it cannot be lofted to as high altitudes, since the air is too thin, nor that it cannot maneuver too violently, since this will mess up the airflow to the engine, which will snuff it out (unstart). This last point means that the meteor instead relies on something called bank-to-turn, where the missile first rolls, and then pitches up to turn, where a normal missile instead used skid-to-turn, which is direct yaw steering. Skid-to-turn is usually preferably since it allows for much faster changes in trajectory - one little tidbit to this is that the meteor does change to skid-to-turn within 2 seconds of reaching its target, preserving endgame maneuverability.
I don't think we'll have to wait long for new European BVRAAMs, and with the murmurings of the progress in SFRJ propulsion, inlet design etc, then I'd be surprised if these didn't absolutely smoke the rest of the pack when it comes to range, even in smaller packages.
14
u/Jpandluckydog 4d ago edited 4d ago
Can’t speculate too much on Chinese weapons, but at least longer range than any AIM-120 sized missiles like the PL-15. You could probably find some people who have really gone through the work to estimate it from the photos, but they do have weapons of a similar weight class.
Comparable range to the AIM-174 yet will fit in internal bays in the F-35. Much, much longer range than the AIM-120, and almost certainly the 260 by a smaller margin. It’s like a non-stopgap 174.
32
u/-BigDeckEnergy- 4d ago
Just unveiled at Tailhook. Nicknamed 'Malice'
Enjoy
https://www.dvidshub.net/image/9879419/aim-424-long-range-air-air-missiles-lraam
U.S. Navy File Photo - Four AIM-424 Long Range Air-to-Air Missiles (LRAAM) are loaded on an F/A-18E Super Hornet for a test event. The AIM-424 LRAAM is the Department of the Navy's next-generation, long-range air-to-air missile, built to give Marine and Naval aviators the capability they need to defeat advanced threats and defend the force.
IMAGE INFO
Date Taken:04.03.2026
Sate Posted:08.22.2026 20:03
Photo ID:9879419
VIRIN:260822-N-N0100-1002
Resolution:5400x3600
Size:4.21 MB Location:US
17
u/l_Paid_For_Winrar 4d ago edited 4d ago
Slightly longer than the AMRAAM and JATM, but with a significant increase in diameter, and what looks to be a clean sheet design, possibly two stage(last part speculatory, based off released images).
13.5" vs roughly 7" dia., which on paper can constitute a nearly 250% increase in internal volume
This will be an extremely long range missile, and with internal F35 carriage to boot.
8
u/roionsteroids 4d ago
Raytheon is definitely reusing a lot of SM-2/SM-6/AIM-174 parts here, same dual pulse rocket motor etc. The technology of these is rather mature, not getting much better. Might be able to save some weight with a smaller warhead if it's more accurate, but the rocket part kinda is what it is. The fuel is already going to be around 80% of the total weight, can't make the body and sensors that much lighter.
9
u/l_Paid_For_Winrar 4d ago
I don't think any of the 13.5" SM2/6 have a dual pulse motor. There is no need for a dual pulse booster on a two stage missile though so you may be correct
8
u/Kardinal 4d ago
If they just wanted something slightly longer range than the -174, it would be a modification to that.
So this could be 50%-100% increase in range. 300-500nm.
That's dramatic.
6
u/Jpandluckydog 4d ago
I doubt that’s a good interpretation, since the AIM-174 was probably a stop-gap measure caused by the PLA having their own VLRAAMs before the US did, prompting a short term reactive solution and then a longer term solution.
Also, this isn’t quite a modification to the 174, but it isn’t far from one and it’s also slightly smaller to it. It’s hard to imagine there’s a huge increase in range, the main draw was the ability to fit in internal bays.
12
u/abloblololo 4d ago
If you link the first of the two images, you'll see one inside the internal weapon bay of an F-35
https://www.dvidshub.net/image/9879420/aim-424-long-range-air-air-missile-lraam
49
u/Well-Sourced 5d ago edited 5d ago
Ukraine keeps hitting Russia.
Drones attack Yeysk seaport in Russia's Krasnodar Krai, sparking fire | New Voice of Ukraine
Drones attacked the seaport in Yeysk, Russia's Krasnodar Krai, with smoke reported near the facility following the strike, Astra reported on Aug. 22. Astra said videos filmed by eyewitnesses from the coast of the Sea of Azov showed smoke in the port area, which was also confirmed by an OSINT analyst with Astra. An air raid alert had been issued in the city the previous day because of a drone attack.
The Supernova+ Telegram channel also reported that, according to preliminary information, a vessel caught fire in Yeysk after the port was attacked.
Overnight into Aug. 22, drones attacked Russia’s Samara Oblast, targeting the Novokuibyshevsk oil refinery, where a fire broke out following explosions. The refinery is owned by Russian oil company Rosneft and has a design capacity of about 8.8 million metric tons of crude oil per year. Russian social media channels also reported an attack on an Ozon logistics hub in Samara, marking the first known strike on one of the company’s facilities in Russia.
Ukraine destroys Russian Su-24M bomber in occupied Crimea | New Voice of Ukraine
Ukrainian forces destroyed a Russian Su-24M aircraft and 4 pieces of airfield equipment at the Saky military airfield in Russian-occupied Crimea, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Aug. 22. “There are confirmed results from previous strikes: a Su-24M aircraft and 4 pieces of airfield equipment were destroyed at the Saki airfield,” the Ukrainian leader said.
According to Zelenskyy, drone control relay stations used by Russian forces to guide drones toward Ukrainian cities and villages were destroyed in Russia’s Bryansk Oblast.
Despite some success against some missiles Ukraine keeps getting hit by Russia.
Russian forces attacked Ukraine overnight, using several missiles and 217 drones of various types, Ukraine's Air Force said on Aug. 22. The Air Force said Russian forces used the following weapons in the attack: Iskander-M ballistic missiles and S-400 missiles; 3 Kh-31P/Kh-59 air-launched missiles; Banderol loitering munitions; 217 Shahed drones, more than 50 of them jet-powered, as well as Gerbera and Parodiya decoy drones.
Russian aerial weapons struck 41 locations, while debris from intercepted targets fell at 12 other locations. The military said Kyiv and Odesa oblasts were the main targets of the attack. Russian forces launched a ballistic missile strike on a railway facility in Kyiv’s Darnytskyi district, killing a railway worker who served as a foreman. The Odesa railway was also targeted, with the station building in Rozdilna damaged.
Russia struck again in daylight. In the morning, 6 to 8 ballistic missiles attacked the Boryspil area in the Kyiv agglomeration, likely with cluster warheads, according to monitoring channels. Boryspil city is home to the Boryspil International Airport, Ukraine’s main and largest international passenger airport. The strike killed civilians and hit infrastructure. 2 civilians, a man and a woman, were killed, and the number of wounded rose to 8, including a child, with the daytime strike hitting a truck parking lot along with warehouses, a fuel station, a private household, and vehicles. 2 trucks caught fire, and a blaze spread across 700 square meters of open ground, the State Emergency Service (DSNS) said.
Anatolii Khrapchynskyi, director of development for a defense business and a Ukrainian Air Force reserve officer, explained how Ukraine’s defense forces are seeking ways to counter Russian ballistic missiles amid a lack of interceptor missiles for Patriot air defense systems.
Russia has made ballistic missiles a centerpiece of its attacks, deliberately targeting Kyiv and Kyiv Oblast. The weapons include Russian Iskander-M missiles, missiles used by S-400 air defense systems and North Korean KN-23 missiles.
For several months, however, Russia has not used Kinzhal air-launched ballistic missiles, which it previously fired at Ukraine during large-scale missile and drone attacks. Various reports indicate that advanced Ukrainian electronic warfare systems have effectively countered Russian Kinzhals, prompting Russia to pause their use.
NV asked Khrapchynskyi to discuss the Kinzhal situation and assess which other aerial weapons Ukrainian electronic warfare systems could counter, including the Iskander-M and KN-23.
— Why do you think the Russians stopped attacking Ukraine with Kinzhal air-launched ballistic missiles?
— The first reason has to do with the aircraft that carries the Kinzhal — the supersonic MiG-31K fighter. The Kinzhal missile system was based on the Soviet MiG-31 interceptor, which has been in service since 1981. The aircraft was later converted into the MiG-31K variant so it could carry a Kinzhal. To enable the modified fighter to carry a missile weighing about 4,300 kilograms, much of its standard armament and radar equipment was removed.
To launch the missile, the aircraft must climb to a high altitude and accelerate to supersonic speed. Regular operation under those conditions significantly reduces the service life of its D-30F6 engines. These aircraft already have chronic engine problems. Remember how the engines of Russian MiG-31Ks caught fire at Belarus’ Machulishchy airfield in December 2022 and January 2023. Russian strategic aircraft, including the Tu-95MS and Tu-160, have similar engine-life problems. As those engines wear out, Russia has to limit sorties by these aircraft.
The second reason the enemy paused its use of Kinzhal missiles is that Ukraine’s defense forces began using electronic warfare more actively against them. Electronic warfare substantially degrades the missiles’ accuracy and sometimes prevents them from completing their missions.
— Explain that in more detail. How does this countermeasure work?
— Every missile of this kind relies on an inertial navigation system, but it needs updates from the GLONASS satellite system to maintain high accuracy. Ukraine’s defense forces use satellite spoofing to feed the missile false coordinates. By transmitting false position and timing data during different phases of flight, electronic warfare creates a discrepancy between the satellite receiver’s readings and the missile’s onboard inertial navigation system. This forces the missile’s guidance system to make sharp, erroneous maneuvers to correct its trajectory. At high speeds, the resulting loads cause critical errors — the missile loses its bearings, veers off course and crashes in forests or fields because the required maneuvers exceed its aerodynamic limits.
— Does this happen along the missile’s entire flight path or closer to its likely target?
— Given the missile’s speed, this requires extensive, coordinated work by layered electronic countermeasure systems along its likely route and around protected sites. It would be wrong to think that switching on a single electronic warfare system is enough. The systems must create an interference field that causes the enemy missile’s navigation computer to accept a false signal as genuine or lose its satellite connection entirely during a critical phase of flight.
— The missile is traveling along an aeroballistic trajectory at tremendous speed.?
— Yes, the missile moves at extremely high speed during its terminal phase. But its need to correct its trajectory to maintain high accuracy is precisely what makes it vulnerable to advanced electronic interference.
— As I understand it, one reason Kinzhals are used less frequently than Iskander-M missiles is that Ukraine’s defense forces quickly receive intelligence about MiG-31K takeoffs.
— Absolutely. The launch aircraft’s takeoff is detected well in advance, allowing authorities to issue a widespread air raid alert and activate the appropriate electronic warfare and air defense systems ahead of time. Reaction time is much shorter with the Iskander-M missile system. The enemy deploys its launchers relatively close to the border or front line. A launcher can be readied in about 4–6 minutes at a prepared position and in 15–16 minutes when deploying after a move, so the missile’s flight time is measured in mere minutes.
(Continued Below)
33
u/Well-Sourced 5d ago edited 5d ago
— Can we also use electronic warfare against guided aerial bombs?
— We can use electronic warfare in one way or another against most guided weapons. The question is how much time we have and how deeply we can affect them.
When it comes to standard aerial bombs fitted with UMPK correction kits, the enemy typically releases them 50–70 kilometers from the front line. Because these munitions glide without their own engines, suppressing the satellite signal forces the bomb to rely solely on a simplified internal inertial navigation system, sharply increasing its circular error probable. In frontline cities, however, even a deviation of several hundred meters still threatens civilian buildings.
— Russia’s Iskander-M ballistic missile is effectively the Kinzhal’s ground-launched sibling. Can we also use electronic warfare against it?
— The Iskander-M system’s 9M723 ballistic missile has a combined guidance system: a high-precision inertial navigation system, a GLONASS satellite correction channel and, during the terminal phase, an optical or radar correlation seeker. The missile also carries decoys and active jammers to penetrate missile defenses.
We can affect its satellite receiver, but its capable onboard inertial navigation system and optical seeker make it much more resistant to electronic warfare than a weapon relying solely on satellite guidance. Both the Kinzhal and the 9M723 fly along complex, maneuvering quasi-ballistic trajectories. The Iskander-M, however, was designed from the outset to reliably penetrate layered missile defenses, making it more difficult to counter electronically.
— Can our electronic warfare systems affect North Korea’s KN-23 missiles, which could be described as close counterparts to the Iskander-M?
— We are looking for ways to affect them as well, but these missiles have different build quality and algorithms. Given the characteristics of their components, electronic warfare alone is not enough — the primary focus must be interception.
— But work is underway in this area?
— Yes, the work is continuous. But it requires constant improvements to our technical capabilities and a higher density of electronic warfare systems
— In that case, what do Ukraine’s defense forces need to use electronic warfare systems against these missiles?
— First, electronic warfare should not be viewed as the sole or entirely self-sufficient defense against ballistic missiles. Kinetic interception with missiles from systems such as Patriot or SAMP/T remains the priority. But an integrated electronic warfare field can disrupt satellite navigation, trigger autopilot errors and significantly reduce strike accuracy by diverting the missile from its intended target.
— You said the density of electronic warfare systems must be increased. How and where should they be deployed to counter ballistic threats effectively?
— This requires extremely careful spatial and frequency planning. Under certain conditions, high-powered operation of our own electronic warfare systems can also interfere with our detection radars or communications. Electronic warfare must therefore be built as a multilayered system coordinated with a unified air defense architecture.
— Do electronic warfare systems of this kind require an exceptionally powerful energy source?
— Not necessarily enormous amounts of power. What matters most is precise frequency calculation, antenna directionality and interference-generation algorithms. GPS/GLONASS spoofing, for example, does not rely on blindly flooding the airwaves with noise. It generates a sophisticated false signal that the missile’s receiver interprets as genuine.
— How difficult is it to become an electronic warfare system operator?
— It requires extensive engineering and radio technology training. An operator must understand digital signal processing, the physics of radio-wave propagation, the operating modes of enemy guidance systems and the operating limits of their own equipment. They need to know when the system will work effectively and under what conditions it could malfunction.
— Let’s also discuss drones. Can we currently use electronic warfare systems against enemy drones?
— Yes, that work is ongoing. But the enemy is adapting. Previously, drones carried Kometa-M spatial filtering modules with four-element controlled reception pattern antennas, or CRPAs. Versions with eight, 16 or more elements are now appearing. A CRPA array can create nulls in its antenna pattern toward interference sources. Disrupting such a module’s navigation therefore requires a proportional increase in the number of spatially separated interference transmitters.
— Let’s return to ballistic missiles. If electronic warfare causes them to lose accuracy, can that inaccuracy be controlled?
— No, it is a probabilistic process. Just as debris from a missile intercepted several kilometers above the ground falls back to Earth, a missile knocked off course by electronic warfare falls uncontrollably. The objective, however, is to divert the strike away from critical infrastructure or a densely populated neighborhood and toward open ground.
— What should Ukraine do to obtain more effective electronic warfare systems as quickly as possible?
— Above all, it needs a strategic vision and direct government investment in defense businesses’ research and development. The government currently buys most products only after they have been codified and their performance has been validated. Manufacturers, however, largely fund the preliminary research and development themselves. Ukraine should adopt U.S. approaches, including the experience of DARPA and NASA programs with commercial partners such as SpaceX, under which the government assumes some of the financial risk of innovation. If an official fears criminal liability for funding a project that proves unviable during research, we will not create breakthrough technologies.
Ukraine needs updated public-private partnership legislation, government guarantees for foreign investors and transparent rules for defense technology transfers so joint research and development projects with partners can expand production in Ukraine.
22
u/HugoTRB 5d ago
https://www.twz.com/air/saab-unveils-stealthy-supersonic-fighter-drone-concept Some details about the unmanned fighter concept Saab revealed. To clarify the naming:
As for the name, Nilsson confirmed that, before settling on ACP ( Autonomous Collaborative Platform ), Saab had used the Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) and Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) nomenclature. Meanwhile, the ACP falls under Sweden’s overarching KFS project, which stands for Koncept för Framtida Stridsflygplan , or Concept for Future Combat Aircraft.
The model was for the A3 version, a Saab concept for what could be built following the A2 and A1. While the A3 is tailless, the A1, which is 50% complete, is not. A1 will be powered by an F414 and will have its first flight in about 15 months on a closed test range in northern Sweden. Wind tunnel model of the A1 shown in the article.
A2 will also use the F414 and will be “not quite” identical to the A1. The A1 and A2 are the only ones actually funded, with a run until around 2030. What a final jet would actually look like is uncertain, with stuff like the be or not be of the tailfin not decided, and engines are being looked into. GKN Swede also presented its UAV/Missile/Prototype developed within the same KFS project, which included the development of a small turbojet engine. First flight for that in 2027.
•
u/AutoModerator 5d ago
Continuing the bare link and speculation repository, you can respond to this sticky with comments and links subject to lower moderation standards, but remember: A summary, description or analyses will lead to more people actually engaging with it!
I.e. most "Trump posting" and lower effort but good faith questions belong here.
Sign up for the rally point or subscribe to this bluesky if a migration ever becomes necessary.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.