Do missiles need anti-icing? Are anti-icing systems needed for any missile carried by a small combat jet? And if so, how is this achieved?
I realize of course that missiles typically fly at Mach 2.5+, so the compressive effects will heat the air around it. However, a jet is typically carrying the missile under its wing, and can be fighting at subsonic speeds. Flying through clouds or rain, or high altitude subsonic dogfight, are very ice-prone situations. If the missile has iced up and then is fired, it could fail.
Moreover, even at supersonic realms, there are other parts of the missile besides the nose and leading edges.

Top wing surface, if it gets iced, will affect the camber and lift.

Trailing edge of a control surface.

Main body could theoretically get too heavy with ice.

Seeker head could ice up at any time before firing, and if not ready, will prevent lock on.


I highly doubt the inside of the missile will be hot enough to cover all those areas, especially the nose and wings. So do missiles need anti-icing, and if so, how is it achieved? If not, why not?
In a history of NASA's Icing Research Tunnel, &quot;We Freeze to Please,&quot; NASA SP-2002-4226, Fig. 5-2 shows Hellfire missiles being tested.  But it conspicuously mentions nothing about de-icing systems for them, unlike the many pages that it devotes to de-icing for other aircraft and aircraft parts.  So it's likely that such de-icers are either still classified, or were deemed unnecessary.
Dohn Joe's remark, that Hellfires this icy could not be laser-guided, suggests that classified is more likely.