As of now, there is only one Air-to-ground/air-to-surface missile integrated into the FA-50PH. That missile is the AGM-65 Maverick. If the FA-50PH will ever get a chance to perform the maritime strike role, it would be nice to discuss if the AGM-65 can be used for this purpose.
The AGM-65 Maverick
The AGM-65 Maverick is an air-to-ground missile. It is commonly carried by the venerable A-10 Thunderbolt in CAS missions. However, it has recently been tested recently by the US against naval targets. So far, the AGM-65 is the only air-to-ground/air-to-surface missile integrated into the FA-50PH’s weapons systems.
The AGM-65 is commonly used by the USAF’s A-10 Thunderbolt for CAS missions
An A-10 Thunderbolt firing an AGM-65
So far, the AGM-65 is the only air-to-ground/air-to-surface integrated with the FA-50PH
Ideally, we’d want the FA-50PH to have a long-range AshM like the AGM-84 Harpoon or the air-launched Exocet missile. However, such missiles are not yet integrated with the FA-50PH, so if the FA-50PH will ever perform the maritime strike role, it will have to use the AGM-65.
The AGM-65’s given range is 40km, which is short compared to the range of missiles like the Harpoon or Exocet which can reach 200km.
While the FA-50PH should ideally carry a long-range AshM such as the AGM-84 Harpoon which can do 93-200 km or more than twice to five times the range of the AGM-65 Maverick, such missiles are not yet integrated into the FA-50PH
But is the using the AGM-65 in the maritime strike role still a good idea? It could possibly be. Considering the range of the SAM’s on China’s warships, while their destroyers such as the Type 52D and Type 52C carry the HQ-9 with its long-range of more than 100km, or their older Type 51C with the S300 that also has a range of more than 100km, attacking these with the 4okm range Mavericks would NOT be the best idea. Their frigates on the other hand, are a different story.
Chinese destroyers such as this Type 52D or even its predecessor, the less improved type 52C carry the long-range HQ-9 or S300 SAM’s that would make attacking them with the 40km AGM-65 a very bad idea.
Their frigates on the other hand, do not have the same AAW capability as the destroyers. The most advanced, the Type 54A carries the HQ-16 SAM with 42km range, while the HQ-16 outranges the AGM-65, this is only a 2km difference, making it still possible for the FA-50PH to cross that 2km and then turn back after firing their missiles. The Type 54A carries 32 HQ-16’s in their 32-cell vLS, the Maverick being a non-sea skimming missile could be an easy target for the HQ-16, however, one deficiency of the Type 54A is its fire control radar that can only guide 3-4 SAM’s at once, making saturating it with a decently large number of AGM-65 Mavericks possible.
The Type 54A frigate of the PLAN, while its SAM has a range of 42km, the FA-50PH can cross that 2km, fire the Mavericks and turn back
The other two “modern” frigate classes of the PLAN that would likely be a target for an FA-50PH in the maritime strike role would be the aging and soon retiring Type 53 frigates and her more modern derivative, the Type 54, which is the predecessor to the Type 54A.
The Type 53 and Type 54 frigates have the HQ-7 SAM which is fired from an 8-cell launcher mounted on the deck (not a VLS). They have the same fire control radar problem with the Type 54A and have an even less-capable SAM. The HQ-7 is a copy of the French Crotale SAM, and has a range of 15-17km. The Maverick’s 40km range would put the FA-50PH way out of range of the HQ-7 making it possible to use the AGM-65 to saturate the Type 43 and Type 54 frigates from “standoff” distance.
The older Type 53 and Type 54 frigates are not even as capable as the Type 54A, and using the AGM-65 Maverick against them is very possible with their HQ-7 SAM’s having a range of only 15-17km at best
Overall, while the AGM-65 Maverick is not really an AshM and was not really meant for this role, it could still be used, especially against the older Chinese frigates. If the DND does finally get the AGM-65’s for our Geagles, then we will at least have something that can pose a threat to the PLAN.
romeo1tangosmilitaryanddefenseblog 
July 9, 2016 at 4:41 pm
The US Govt won’t approve Maverick & Harpoon missiles to the Philippines because the US doesn’t trust the Philippines with High tech weapons. The US fears the US made High tech weapons will be used on their own people. It’s best the Philippines looks for European alternatives such as Brimstone missile or the Israeli Nimrod (missile).
LikeLike
July 10, 2016 at 3:48 am
The Maverick was pushed to the US Congress along with the AIM-9, it would have been likely approved had the PAF not withdrew the request, the Maverick again is for CAS and COIN making it one of the few weapons that CAN be sold to us, the Harpoon is only an example
LikeLike
July 10, 2016 at 5:11 am
It depends on who’s in Congress. Since the fact that your president has pissed off America. I don’t think the US is interested in selling anything to america.
LikeLike
July 10, 2016 at 6:16 am
I agree had the past president been the one top buy the missiles, we would have probably gotten the missiles
LikeLike
July 10, 2016 at 6:32 am
But now, the one you have, pissed off America so badly that America may refuse to sell them.
LikeLike
July 11, 2016 at 10:28 am
yep, guess we’re lucky you can use Pythons and Derbys for the FA-50 and Gripen
LikeLike
July 11, 2016 at 10:38 am
nick what about the Israeli Popeye AGM?
LikeLike
July 11, 2016 at 5:40 pm
The Popeye (missile) would be one option. Even any missile from Israel is one option because it bypasses US Govt Approval.
LikeLike
July 12, 2016 at 10:11 am
I wonder, the USAF has already offered F-16’s to the PAF and the offer is still up, given that the offer is up and we get the birds, what do you think about the PAF upgrading used USAF F-16’s to F-16I Sufa standards
LikeLike
July 12, 2016 at 4:27 pm
Their is a couple of reasons why the US won’t offer the F-16 to the Philippines. The 1st being that the Philippines have a Horrible Maintenance record in maintaining anything the US gives them such as the poor maintenance record of the Philippine C-130. 2nd is because it would cause a huge rift in the region that already have F-16 operators such as Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand. They would all complain to the US Govt. 3rd, the US doesn’t trust the F-16’s in the hands of the Philippines because their biggest fear is that sensitive US technology like the Harpoon, Phalanx CWIS or even the F-16 could fall into the hands of the Chinese by corrupt Philippine politicians, generals and admirals.
Though if the Philippine Govt can convince the US they are trustworthy enough to maintain and operate the F-16, the US may entertain the idea. The only way they will get F-16’s is via how Iraq is getting their F-16IQ’s. What Iraq has is the block 50/52 F-16IQ, which is newer but their weapons load out is going to be stuck in the past or what prior to the introduction of the AIM-120C AMRAAM. For example,Currently, Iraq has only been approved to buy the Paveway series laser guided bombs, AGM-65 Mavericks, gravity bombs and rudimentary rockets. When it comes to air-to-air weaponry, the F-16IQ will be armed with AIM-9L/M Sidewinders and AIM-7M Sparrows. Basically, this is an early 1990s loadout of a USAF tactical fighter as the Sparrow relies on semi-active radar homing and thus does not allow for “fire and forget” engagements.
This handicaps the F-16IQ from engaging multiple aerial targets at one time. The AIM-9L/M Sidewinder is a proven all-aspect infrared homing missile, but it lacks the ability to engage targets at oblique angles off the aircraft’s bore-sight or center-line axis.
Basically, the State Department and Foreign Military Sales directorate have given Iraq a survivable fighter, with modern systems and great growth potential, but has only allowed it to carry late 1980’s vintage weaponry. This makes the jet usable for internal counter-insurgency operations, surveillance and air defense against lower-end threats like Iran and Syria, but handicaps the jet’s ability to skirmish with Jordan, Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and other major US allies in the region. Additionally, sensitive systems on-board the jet, like its APG-68V9 pulse doppler radar, Joint Helmet Mounted Cuing System, targeting pod, electronic warfare suite and identification friend or foe (IFF) system all have tight export controls and have to be serviced by contractors.
Which if the Philippines do ask for F-16’s they may wind up getting what Iraq is getting because the US doesn’t want it’s allies to complain why a neighbor is getting the same plane like them. That’s why if I were the Philippines, I would talk to France on taking the used Mirage 2000 off their hands. It would bypass US govt approval and France can give you a fighter with everything.
Here’s what Iraq is getting to give you an indication on what the US could give to the Philippines.
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/iraqs-f-16s-have-a-cool-paint-job-but-antiquated-weapon-1573085398
LikeLike
July 13, 2016 at 11:49 am
Again, the US has an offer up for the F-16’s, this is for the airframes ONLY not the SLEP and weapons. The airframes are old block 15’s awaiting disposal, since we already have approval for the airframes, I was thinking of upgrading them to F-16I Sufa standard
LikeLike
July 13, 2016 at 5:33 pm
You may had a deal under the Clinton Admin but right now their ain’t no deal. Also cite your source where the US had offer F-16s. The fact the matter is the US doesn’t trust the Philippines with F-16s.
LikeLike
July 14, 2016 at 11:15 am
Nick, It’ll take me a while to get the article fished out, but as far as I remember;
The offer was for 12 Block 15 F-16’s at AMARC that the USAF wanted to get rid off
The offer only included free airframes, SLEP and weapons would have to be approved by US Congress
LikeLike
July 14, 2016 at 11:17 am
Oh and the deal was under Obama, not Clinton…
LikeLike
July 14, 2016 at 12:04 pm
http://s3.zetaboards.com/Defense_Philippines/topic/837032/133/
here ya go
LikeLike
July 15, 2016 at 10:09 am
And Nick, which US president candidate would you think be able to ease the weapons export laws? And also, the offers for F-18’s, F-15’s, and F-16’s, used ones, were under Bush…
LikeLike
July 14, 2016 at 11:24 am
And they were even selling us the F-18 and F-16 back in the 90’s…
LikeLike
July 14, 2016 at 4:30 pm
That was in the 1990’s before the Asian Financial Crisis hit the Philippines. After that, the Philippines can’t afford it and even today and with Today’s prices, the Philippines still can’t afford any new or 2nd hand fighters from America. France is their only option with the used Mirage 2000 or F-1’s.
LikeLike
July 15, 2016 at 10:07 am
Nick, it was FREE F-16 A/B’s, the question that I’m curious is upgrading them OUTSIDE the US…
LikeLike
July 15, 2016 at 5:14 pm
At the moment, None because only US congress can approve any weapons sales. Under the Bush jr in the late 90’s, it would have been possible, but since the Asian Financial crisis, the Philippines won’t be able to afford anything new or used from America. As I have said, France is their only option with the used Mirage 2000 or F-1’s.
As far as getting used fighters from America, the F-16’s are out of the question because their Airframe hours are used up. F-15’s to political and out of the question. F/A-18 C/D out of the question. Which is is why France is offering used Mirage 2000 and Mirage F-1’s. France can even upgrade the Mirage 2000 and F-1’s. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38AEBg2ZkXs&t=1
LikeLike
July 16, 2016 at 3:27 am
Nick, actually, the PAF wanted the Block 15’s, the problem back then was we couldn’t get them as we had no trained pilots, as for used F-15 C/D’s, they won;t let those go until the F-35A proves itself, the F-18C/D is also being eyed aside from the F-16’s
LikeLike
July 16, 2016 at 5:01 am
In reality Nothing is ever Free in this world. Look at how much Indonesia had to pay for their F-16. On top of that they were only cleared for Day time use. That’s why the F-16 is out of the question for the Philippines.
LikeLike
July 16, 2016 at 6:45 am
Nick, the Indonesian F-16’s are Block 50/52. They are cleared for nighttime action
LikeLike
July 16, 2016 at 5:02 am
On top of that, the only place the Philippines will ever get fighters from is France. The US is a NO go
LikeLike
July 16, 2016 at 6:44 am
Nick, the two choices considered are the F-16 Block 60 and the JAS-39C Gripen, also, the PN is apparently discussing taking 76mm guns an 20mm Phalanx CIWS from used OHP’s from the uSN
LikeLike
July 16, 2016 at 5:56 pm
The Philippine can’t afford the F-16 block 60. The price alone will break their budget. The JAS-39 Gripen C/D is too political because Sweden won’t sell to countries with questionable Human Rights practices. The US won’t give the Philippines the 20mm Phalanx CIWS because they are afraid of US made weapons being used on their own people.
As for Indonesian F-16’s they are cleared for night work because they were cleared for AIM-120C AMRAAM.
LikeLike
July 17, 2016 at 10:42 am
Nick, the PAF has already started asking SAAB about Gripens, the PAF WANTS either the F-16E/F or GripenC/D , AFP Mod law no longger accepts used MRF’s, SAAB has shown interest to sell Gripens, the USN and PN are AGAIN already discussing taking the old Phalanx guns from retired Perrys. These are defensive weapons meaning theres no way you can use them against US citizens if ever. Also remember that the PN has NEVER participated in any coup.
LikeLike
July 17, 2016 at 8:21 pm
As far as the Gripens, I don’t think the Philippines will be able to afford any Gripens under any price scheme. The fact that the new Gripens are out is why the Philippines can’t afford anything. That’s why France has used Mirage 2000 and F-1’s available.
LikeLike
July 18, 2016 at 12:17 pm
Nick, the budget for each MRF exceeds 100 million dollars a piece, tell me how they cannot afford a Gripen?
LikeLike
July 18, 2016 at 4:36 pm
Look at how much Brazil is paying for their Gripens. That should give you an indication as to how much the Gripen will cost. Current unit cost for the JAS-39 Gripen C/D is. US$ 30–60 million. Brazil for example, paid 39.3 billion SEK (US$5.44 bn, R$13 bn) contract for 28 Gripen E and 8 Gripen F. Judging by the fact that Philippines brought F/A-50’s without any weapons. The price goes up.
Their was a recent article that you need to see because you need to see the current cost for fighters in 2016
Fighter Jets 2016: Who Makes the 10 Top-Sellers, and How You Can Own Them
http://www.fool.com/investing/2016/07/17/fighter-jets-2016-who-makes-the-10-top-sellers-and.aspx
LikeLike
July 19, 2016 at 10:55 am
Nick, the Gripen C’s are 30-60 million w/o weapons, 30-60 million is the FLYAWAY cost
Thailand’s price was more or less 100 million per bird, and i believe that’s the price the PAF would go with
LikeLike
July 19, 2016 at 5:25 pm
The Gripen C/D w/o weapons is 30 to 60 million. With Weapons, it jacks up to were the cost of the Super Hornet and Rafale is.
What Thailand paid for in the their Gripen’s is 34 billion baht (US$1.1 billion). That is because on top of the 12 JAS-39 Gripen C/D Sweden, Thailand included the Saab 340 AEW&C as part of the packaged deal. What Thailand got in a deal was 12 Gripens delivered (4 Gripen D and 8 Gripen C) and 2 Saab 340 AEW&C. So basically, Thailand got a total air defense program from Sweden. Here’s what they got; http://saab.com/about-saab/sites/2015/defenseandsecurity/news/updates/2015/thai-gripen-guardians-of-the-skies/
That’s why the Philippines won’t be able to afford anything new. Even the JAS-39 Gripen C/D & E/F would be out of their reach because the fact that they can’t afford the weapons cost associated for the Gripen. It’s why their only option is France with the Mirage 2000 or Mirage F-1’s. The other is Russia’s Mig-29/Mig-35.
LikeLike
July 23, 2016 at 1:27 am
Again if our budget is 100 million above per bird, explain to me why we cannot afford a Gripen Nick
LikeLike
July 23, 2016 at 1:43 am
Simple, the price of the plane alone without weapons is one thing, but you simply forgot the added cost of Weapons, training, maintenance, supplies, spare parts and support from SAAB. That alone beings the budget to the Billion plus dollar range. You think the Philippines can afford the Gripen but judging how the Philippines brought the F/A-50 shows the Philippines won’t be able to afford the Gripen. That’s why a Russian SU-27 or Mig-35 is their only option.
LikeLike