F-ZeroOne Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 Well, I don't see a stealthy "EB-52" as likely. I can see some issues with the concept as proposed, though. One of the reasons I believe the US Navy didn't go for proposed "Arsenal ships" is that munitions are expensive and its a helluva lot of pricey eggs to have in one basket. I get that with F-35s, drones etc in the area the opposing force might not know that they're being targeted, but your jammers are going to have to be pretty darn good for them not to see the B-52s in the first place... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thom Posted March 12, 2016 Share Posted March 12, 2016 but... B-1R... I like the acronym... Boner... Shame we will never be able to use it in real life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anime52k8 Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 Well, I don't see a stealthy "EB-52" as likely. I can see some issues with the concept as proposed, though. One of the reasons I believe the US Navy didn't go for proposed "Arsenal ships" is that munitions are expensive and its a helluva lot of pricey eggs to have in one basket. I get that with F-35s, drones etc in the area the opposing force might not know that they're being targeted, but your jammers are going to have to be pretty darn good for them not to see the B-52s in the first place... See, the B-1R would be stealthier than a B-52, and could just nope right out of any bad situation with sustained mach 2.2+ speeds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grigolosi Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 (edited) When i was assigned to Eglin back in 91 we had F-111's there (3 of them). I was told by the F-111 crew chiefs that there were actually 4 assigned to the wing but 1 EF-111 was kept out at Edwards for while until it was reassigned. They told me that during a night testing mission a few yrs prior when the EF was stationed at Eglin the aircrew flipped on their jammers as part of the test. At low power they blacked out the Florida Panhandle for about an hour or so. I also know from reading that an E-2 Hawkeye once blacked out a large area of the NY eastern seaboard by accident back in the 70's/80's. Considering how powerful the jammers were at that time I can only imagine what they could do at full power now. Thom they still refer to the B-1 as the Bone. But it would have been cool to see that acronym in use. Hell I was hoping that F-22 production would have gone on long enough to see F-22C Raptor.....we could have called it the....Craptor.. Edited March 13, 2016 by grigolosi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 So I take it the intent currently with Raptor is to stick with the F-22A but keep upgrading via Blocks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 I've heard that military jammers and radar systems can be pretty... powerful. If they're that good, it does make a bit more sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchizophrenicMC Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 Radar jamming is a game of cat-and-mouse between your jammers and the enemy's radar. Blacking out a bunch of TVs is one thing. Those are low-power transmissions across a few bands. Many military radar systems can actively- even randomly- change their frequencies across a fairly wide band, and remember: interference at one frequency only affects that frequency. Generating interference over a lot of frequencies, sufficient to jam enemy radar at long range, consumes a lot of power, and any frequencies the enemy goes blind on, so do you. Then there's the issue with triangulation. With continuous jamming, it's possible to triangulate the position of the jamming transmitter, which has led to techniques like pulse jamming and so on. And then there are some issues with modern digital radar, and AESA radars are minimally affected by jamming- though those are typically western equipment that wouldn't usually be available to groups you might consider "adversaries". Still, electronic countermeasures probably offer fewer compromises than passive low observability. It's not like "stealth" aircraft are totally invisible to radar either. And making them low observable requires a lot of design compromises, as we've discussed round and round already. Of course, in a world where we have incredibly long range missiles, and the only time we wouldn't use long range doctrines is in close air support roles where methods of detection that aren't affected by ECM or low observability, it's hard to see the point of either. All the toys we give the military cost a third of the tax dollar, and I'm not scared enough to feel like that's a good investment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grigolosi Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 Pretty much unless congress decides to start building the F-22 again, the A model will be the only one produced. But as you said they will just upgrade as they have with every other aircraft. i was just reading last week that the idea of restarting F-22 production has been brought up. Congress actually asked LM what it would cost to restart the production line in a meeting with the Joint services committee. They are realizing that the F-35 is not going to be ready soon enough and that the F-15's will eventually have to be replaced. They also said the limited production on them at the time was "hesitantly premature" due to scares about cost and its early issues. I know from personal experience that the world of ECM in the USAF is kind of a shadowy world. Avionics specialists are the only ones who really see the working's of the countermeasure systems and their knowledge of the actual capabilities are limited. They store all required codes and equipment required for the maintenance of the systems in vaults and even then only a few of them per squadron have access to enter the vaults. This is for the fighter world. I can't imagine the system security requirements for the true dedicated large ECM birds like the EC-135's or EC-130's. For fighters flying with ECM pods the system is set for training use. Certain precautions are taken on the aircraft to keep the systems safe from real world activation. The term ECM though covers more than just jamming though. The systems in use now are used to pin point all kinds of emissions and target them prior to any engagement. Blacking out would definitely help in cutting clutter emissions so the true threat emissions and military broadcast freq's can be targeted quicker. The world of ECM and radar detection is a continuous game of tech advancement to get one up on the other. Since the capabilities are so hushed it is hard to say for sure what the newest systems in both arenas are truly capable of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZEOD Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 (edited) The gear on the EA-18G Growler is pretty top notch and covers about everything at its time of release. One thing that would be interesting, aside from holding an unplugged Fluro tube in your hand and having it light up like a lightsaber near a Growler, would be to see just how much radiation the crew is absorbing while its in use. The Black Box I carry when working on IEDs is pretty scary in its output. Glad I have all the kids I want already. Good article on the Job of a Warfare Officer http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/confessions-of-a-us-navy-ea-18g-growler-electronic-warf-1694954599 Love the comments on trying to keep up with Brit Tornados and being left in the dust at 200ft and 1000kph or so... Edited March 13, 2016 by NZEOD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grigolosi Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 The Tornados just switch on the the terrain radar and let the computer fly them through the canyons and hills. The Tornado was designed with that in mind. It was intended to rain havoc on WarsawPac armour and convoys at low level. It is an impressive aircraft for its size when you look at them up close. They aren't huge aircraft but carry a massive stores load on them. That reverse thrust system works extremely well also and very distinguishable when you hear it on landing. The cockpit is usually shielded to an extant and alot depends on the transmission pattern the pods use. I know just the fire control radars in use now can be felt at 200 yds when transmitting at full strength. But the actual transmission area is confined to a certain width area due to the way the fact the signal is focused for target acquisition. I imagine the jamming signals are broadcast the same way depending on the intended target and the number of of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sildani Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 Interesting stuff. I still don't know why the USAF doesn't do one of the best things Brown advocated: replace the wing spars with composites. The greater strength should allow for the deletion of the outrigger landing gears. Then, my other suggestion would be to replace those eight old turbofans with four newer ones, perhaps off the shelf from airliners. They'd be more efficient, reduce maintenance, and possibly lighten the wing further. As for the Megafortress... yeah. It was also given a butterfly tail as I recall, a pointy, Concorde-ish nose and a Stinger missile launcher in the tail. Still, the idea is there... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 Tornados often get stick for being a bit weedy, engine-power wise compared to other contemparies but apparently they always were a bit faster than usually thought; part of it I believe is probably due to the ADF version, which was designed with a eye on patrol endurance more than outright performance. And, y'know, money. grigolosi, first I'd heard about F-22 production possibly being restarted. The prospect of hanging...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grigolosi Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 I just read about it last week. But question was raised. It will be interesting to see where it goes. While at the Cope T exercise in Alaska back in the 90's we worked along side the RAF with their Tornados. We got jealous because the RAF would get up on their aircraft by just climbing up the external wing tanks. The USAF in all its wisdom (I say that lightly) does not allow us to do that.....its a safety hazard you need to get a stand. ...They might as well have made us do the safety dance.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 You can dance if you want to, we have a war to fight... 'elf and Safety has infiltrated the UK over the past couple of decades so if you get any Typhoons visiting they might now need a fully qualified stepladder handler to help get the pilots up... Or, always a possibility with UK defence, the Typhoons will be fitted "For, but not With" ladders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grigolosi Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 Well they have to keep the idiots of the world safe now. In the USAF it is so bad that if our QA finds a paper cutter with the cutting arm left in the up position with no one using it they can write us up with a DSV (disallowable safety violation) When you get one of those you have to go explain to a Lt. Col. or higher to why you did what you did and then get your ass chewed for it. Doctrine pretty much dictates that someone along the way hurt or killed themselves or someone else for this stuff to be safety violations and needing warnings to prevent it. Hell who needs ladders or stands.... I always figured the pilots would just jump out of or into the cockpits like they do in all the anime....no matter how high the cockpit is off the ground Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZEOD Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 (edited) Its a PC world now... like seeing oxygen thieves doing BETs (Battle Efficiency Tests) with lightened loads and assistance - WTF!!! Nasty Nigels arent going to assist you before they fire at you!! Or alternatives to the RFL tests (Required Fitness Test) where the Overweight admin desk jockey gets to walk the 2.4km course in 30plus minutes and thats called the same as the rest having to run it in 8mins! Those same guys and girls still put their hands up to get sent to the sand box or any other mission where they may just have to move their ass into cover at speed! Thats ok, Nasty Nigel will wait while they walk to the bunker before raining 81mm on their heads. Nigels good like that. The funny thing with all the PC rules is seeing the things they ignore... Like firing 155mm proximity over the top of the biggest ammo depot here. Or sitting in the carpark at the ammo dump and transmitting between LAVs about whats for dinner... right in front of the Radio Hazard Signs! You swear at one of those sensitive wee armoured souls and they will be in the Padres office crying harassment faster than lightning but you dismount a forklift without the correct 3 points of contact lest you fatally fall 10cms to the ground and you'll be written up or volunteering to run MHE safety lessons for the next month. Edited March 15, 2016 by NZEOD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grigolosi Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 (edited) Another reason I am happy I retired 2 yrs ago. The USAF got away from evaluating based on your work and on how schooling and volunteer work you did. Unfortunately we live in a world where everyone gets offended at the drop of the hat over stupid s@#$. Fortunately I work with ex military crew chiefs, you have to have a thick skin to survive in an aircraft maintenance hangar, especially a civilian one in a foreign country. The only thing we really have to watch is what we say to the customer or our supervision, short of that its old school flightline behavior here. In other news, me and aircraft 3078 are no longer on speaking terms....due to her very b@!#$ like behavior tonight during our post phase engine run Edited March 15, 2016 by grigolosi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 Chopped up footage of withdrawing Sukhoi's over the weekend from Syria. Taxiing Su-25s look as unstable as a U-2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 Chopped up footage of withdrawing Sukhoi's over the weekend from Syria. Taxiing Su-25s look as unstable as a U-2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grigolosi Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 I read about that during the week. I was surprised at first to see they were pulling out like even with negotiations still in progress. It would make more sense to me if they stayed in place and put a hold on the bombing campaign. I can imagine it is eating up a nice chunk of change operating there though. I see what you mean about the stability while taxing. Look at the narrow track gear it has. Not the best design for an aircraft designed to carry that much ordinance on wings like that. At least the U-2 has wing pogo's to stabilize while taxiing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nazareno2012 Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 I see what you mean about the stability while taxing. Look at the narrow track gear it has. Not the best design for an aircraft designed to carry that much ordinance on wings like that. At least the U-2 has wing pogo's to stabilize while taxiing. Could that be one reason why the A-10 Thunderbolt was selected over the YA-9, as the YA-9 has the same landing gear configuration as the Su-25? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 Well, the tailcode on some of those planes is only going to confirm some politicians suspicions here in the UK that a certain national broadcaster is full of communists... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 Always neat seeing the shape contrast between the old-Cold War horses like the Su-24 and the smoothed out Su-30 and 34. No doubt the hours put in were pushing the aircraft to their limits, especially the Fencer and Frogfoots. The Russians are still keeping a number of aircraft there along with their ground personnel and air defenses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electric indigo Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 Those SU-34s look like something out of Ace Combat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted March 19, 2016 Author Share Posted March 19, 2016 In the spirit of Macross Delta, I'm going to post pics of the only Draken I've seen---anyone else here seen a Draken? Anyone ever get to see one fly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 great photos David! lovely bird aren't they! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted March 19, 2016 Author Share Posted March 19, 2016 There was also apparently a Viggen there, but I somehow (despite spending hours there) missed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted March 19, 2016 Share Posted March 19, 2016 National Test Pilot School flies Drakens out of Mojave, they are cool to see in flight.I still get ticked about how Pima Air Museum got screwed out of their Viggen by the BATF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted March 20, 2016 Share Posted March 20, 2016 There was also apparently a Viggen there, but I somehow (despite spending hours there) missed it. its all good! besides the Draken is a much nicer plane than the Viggen anyways.. But the Viggen is also nice still. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grigolosi Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Never seen a Draken up close or even in flight. I always liked them as a kid when I saw pics of them and when I would play with my toy diecast metal planes. The Gripen is the only one of the family I have seen up close and flying. They are a beautiful design. Just straight clean lines. Nazareno from what I could tell looking a the A-9 its gear were no where near as narrow as the SU-25's is. It still had a a wider track than the Frogfoot. Several reasons were given for the selection of the A-10 over the A-9. One being the A-10's engine placement being able to hide its infrared signature better due to the twin tail arrangement. The twin tail also allowed greater survivablility due to the redundancy systems built into the design. If the one tail was lost the aircraft can still operate with only one. The long horizontal tail also aids in lift if part of the wing is destroyed.. These were the main reasons cited. But also the A-10's wheel can still roll even when the gear are retracted, this is another redundant system built into the design. This allows the aircraft to belly land with less damage to the frame. The A-9's gear were completely enclosed in the wells. Everything built into the A-10 was put there to ensure its survival in the CAS field. I think Republic just had a better design team then Northrop did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dobber Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 its all good! besides the Draken is a much nicer plane than the Viggen anyways.. BLASPHEMY! Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electric indigo Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 I think Republic just had a better design team then Northrop did. Yeah, the A-10 is a classic example for outside-the-box thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anime52k8 Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 BLASPHEMY! Chris but it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchizophrenicMC Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 (edited) So I visited the Peterson Air & Space Museum, Peterson AFB, Colorado this past weekend. Took some pictures: Album Edited March 21, 2016 by SchizophrenicMC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 The Draken is a cool sight to see in flight. I would have loved to see the Viggen up close and or in flight. I had this diecast viggen toy as a kid that I was in love with, until my teacher confiscated it in class. I never did get it back. But it was the first canard wing airplane I had ever seen and I thought it was so cool looking and such a sci-fi looking design.In regards to the one that Pima Air Museum almost got, it would have been the first one on display outside if Europe. The local newspaper in Tucson ran an ad saying how the museum would receive the plane in late 2000. Two years later and nothing. I was working a project for the air museum, restoring a BD-5, and asked what happened. Everyone there was pissed about that subject but this is what happened. They had contracted to have the plane demilitarized but retain the hardpoints and plug welded cannon along with some other hardware that would get shipped in for the display. The Viggen would have been flown in and would have several fly overs the city including escort from the ANG and USAF (F-16s and A-10s) There was a huge press thing scheduled, then the brakes were put on the whole thing. The BATF did not want this foreign warplane getting flown in for use by a private organization and launched an investigation into it. They tied the whole thing up for over a year before basically stating that they could still receive the plane in the condition that was already agreed upon, one problem, the plane by that time had been chopped. The only way for the museum to get the plane now was to have it shipped. Shipping a plane that has been chopped is a lot more expensive then just flying it in, and the museum could not afford that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.