Aircraft VS super thread!

[RFT]

There's a little bit of a mention of the naval F-16 (which would have been a GD/Vought joint venture in the same way the F-18 was Northrop/MDD), including some low-res cutaways of the design, here: Aerospaceweb article

The stepped cockpit of the two-seaters is interesting, and arguably more elegant than the shape of the F-16 B and D.

To be honest, though, I don't think it was ever likely to have happened. If both planes needed substantial re-engineering to work on carriers, I'm not sure even the stingiest of bean counters would have forced the navy to start from a platform they weren't happy with when there was another they were happy with available for development. Particularly in light of how recent the F-111 debacle would have been at the time.

Edited January 16, 2006 by RFT

[buddhafabio]

any news on the v-22 osprey?

is the military waiting to see devlopment of the technology of the x-50a aircraft. helo copter blade to wing project

this seems less problematic then the tilt rotor

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Last I heard the V-22 was entering service as the MV-22, the military still wants it.

Whats the X-50 look like? Is it an attack copter?

And speakin of which what do you guys think of copters? My favs are the HIND, Ah-1 cobra, and apache. The HIND looks awesome and is versatile and menacing, apache is cool, and cobra is just so sleek and sexy. I bought 21st century's ultimate soldier XD 1/18 Ah-1W Cobra over break on clearance at hungates. VERY cool but the pilot figure is not as good as the BBI copter pilots. And judging by pics I saw in a recent magazine on OIF, the cobra seems fairly accurate in terms of liveries and weapons loadout.

Its fairly durable, has opening surfaces and is very detailed, very cool.

Do you guys think jet engines will totally replace the rotors on copters one day? I keep envisioning that it is the next step.

[Knight26]

any news on the v-22 osprey?

is the military waiting to see devlopment of the technology of the x-50a aircraft. helo copter blade to wing project

this seems less problematic then the tilt rotor

361274[/snapback]

I could tell you things about the CV-22 IOT&E but then I would have to kill you.

[buddhafabio]

Last I heard the V-22 was entering service as the MV-22, the military still wants it.

Whats the X-50 look like? Is it an attack copter?

And speakin of which what do you guys think of copters?  My favs are the HIND, Ah-1 cobra, and apache.  The HIND looks awesome and is versatile and menacing, apache is cool, and cobra is just so sleek and sexy.  I bought 21st century's ultimate soldier XD 1/18 Ah-1W Cobra over break on clearance at hungates. VERY cool but the pilot figure is not as good as the BBI copter pilots.  And judging by pics I saw in a recent magazine on OIF, the cobra seems fairly accurate in terms of liveries and weapons loadout. 

Its fairly durable, has opening surfaces and is very detailed, very cool. 

Do you guys think jet engines will totally replace the rotors on copters one day? I keep envisioning that it is the next step.

361334[/snapback]

as per your request the X-50A

http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archi.../may/ts_pw.html

it seems the x plans go x-51 so far and stops with no x-49 yet

and i was wrong about the make up of hover its more of a harrier-mv-22 type approach.

i think if the military were to axe the jsf and make a piloted version of the X-50a it would be plenty suitable for the Marines

Edited January 17, 2006 by buddhafabio

[Zentrandude]

Wonder if this would qualify as a precurser of an f-35 before stealth was in the mind of todays designers.

edit:

the top left one.

Edited January 17, 2006 by Zentrandude

[Knight26]

You can see the same sort of thing in early F-15 concepts, i.e. the eventual F-22 configuration is remarkably similar to that of a rejected F-15 concept, just not stealthy.

Edited January 17, 2006 by Knight26

[SpacePirateNeko]

Aircraftresourcecenter.com is THE place for planes.  It is at its core a site dedicated to building model airplane kits, but the boards are as good as you'll find.  I learn more from knowledgable kit reviews than magazines...

Aircraft Resource Center (ARC):  http://s96920072.onlinehome.us/ (recent domain change)

ARC Forums: http://www.arcforums.com/forums/index.php

302874[/snapback]

I was just about to post about this site but searched mw if anyone had first. I came across ARC while searching for references for a japanese ww2 zero fighter im working on right now. What a great source for aircraft and sci modelers too.

maybe i should join the forums over there and ill post my zero there when its done.

[buddhafabio]

is this true of the f-22 radar suite?

http://electronicaviation.com/sections/news/Military/560

F-22 and JSF Radar Can Fry Enemy Sensors

discuss | subscribe | printable version

Posted on 6-5-2005 at 06:18 PM

Posted By Michael

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The radar mounted on the F/A-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) can be used to fry electronic parts of ground-based radars and disable airborne cruise missiles, program officials for the planes acknowledge.

U.S. Air Force officials and contractors have longed bragged about the active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, citing its ability to track multiple targets, map terrain and protect planes from attack. And there have been hints of offensive capability, like a brief mention of “high power electronic attack†on one of the JSF’s glossy marketing brochures.

But contractors say they have not publicly talked about the capability — until now.

“It could cause actual physical damage to a system … providing it’s on the X-band,†a common frequency for military radars, said Wayne Wilson, the director of fighter business development for Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems.

The radars — the AN/APG-77 for the Raptor and the more advanced AN/APG-81 intended for the JSF — emit electromagnetic emissions that could be used to damage or disrupt guidance components in cruise missiles, Wilson said. Other sources said the radar also can help deflect air-to-air missiles.

It’s been a given that pilots could use the radar to track the missiles, or other aircraft, in order to attack them with their own air-to-air weapons. But, military analysts say, it’s the offensive possibilities that make the sensor-turned-weapon a much more powerful tool.

They say the Air Force could fly a “wall†of Raptors or JSFs through an area to knock out enemy radars, sweeping a battle zone clean of many threats to aircraft and ground forces.

The revelation comes as Air Force officials work to convince Pentagon officials to allow them to buy more of the stealthy, supersonic Raptors. Service officials want more than 400 of the jets, but Pentagon officials decided to cap the program at about 180.

[Nied]

is this true of the f-22 radar suite?

http://electronicaviation.com/sections/news/Military/560

F-22 and JSF Radar Can Fry Enemy Sensors

discuss | subscribe | printable version

Posted on 6-5-2005 at 06:18 PM

Posted By Michael

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The radar mounted on the F/A-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) can be used to fry electronic parts of ground-based radars and disable airborne cruise missiles, program officials for the planes acknowledge.

U.S. Air Force officials and contractors have longed bragged about the active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, citing its ability to track multiple targets, map terrain and protect planes from attack. And there have been hints of offensive capability, like a brief mention of “high power electronic attack†on one of the JSF’s glossy marketing brochures.

But contractors say they have not publicly talked about the capability — until now.

“It could cause actual physical damage to a system … providing it’s on the X-band,†a common frequency for military radars, said Wayne Wilson, the director of fighter business development for Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems.

The radars — the AN/APG-77 for the Raptor and the more advanced AN/APG-81 intended for the JSF — emit electromagnetic emissions that could be used to damage or disrupt guidance components in cruise missiles, Wilson said. Other sources said the radar also can help deflect air-to-air missiles.

It’s been a given that pilots could use the radar to track the missiles, or other aircraft, in order to attack them with their own air-to-air weapons. But, military analysts say, it’s the offensive possibilities that make the sensor-turned-weapon a much more powerful tool.

They say the Air Force could fly a “wall†of Raptors or JSFs through an area to knock out enemy radars, sweeping a battle zone clean of many threats to aircraft and ground forces.

The revelation comes as Air Force officials work to convince Pentagon officials to allow them to buy more of the stealthy, supersonic Raptors. Service officials want more than 400 of the jets, but Pentagon officials decided to cap the program at about 180.

361465[/snapback]

I'd imagine a Raptor or JSF would have to get pretty close to actually do damage to another radar (earlier reports said only the Raptor would be able to do this, and only after being upgraded with extra "Cheek" antenna). I do think that AESA radars can be very effective jammers in many circumstances, especially when mounted on a stealth platform. In fact I think the combo of stealth speed and the APG-77 radar will make the F-22 one of the most deadly SEAD/DEAD platforms on the face of the planet.

Imagine if you will:

A pair of F-22As move in to the FEBA (Forward Edge of Battle Area) at mach 1.5 with four SDBs and four AMRAAMs in their bellies (plus two AIM-9X Super Sidewinders in their side bays). Their radars are in passive mode, acting as some of the most sensitive RWRs to be mounted on a fighter plane, with it they can pick up the radar of an S-300 SAM system, its enormous range held in check by a pair of F/A-18G growlers orbiting several hundred Kilometers away. The Raptors fly gentle S curves so that they can triangulate the range of the massive BILL BOARD tracking radar for the S-300, combined with the ESM sensors on board the data linked Growlers the F-22s begin to build a picture of the exact location of the radar. At this point the lead raptor sets its radar into transmit mode, going into LPI ground mode it fixes the exact position of the radar, while it's wingman remains in passive mode keeping an eye on the pair of J-10s flying CAP 300 km inside the enemy border, the two update each other using their datalinks so that both have the exact same information. The Raptors then move in for the kill, the two aircraft split up and move in from two different directions, the lead ship focuses it's radar into a tight beam completely blinding the S-300, while the second Raptor, still in passive mode goes to full afterburner. It accelerates to Mach 1.8, drops two SDBs and turns toward the now alerted J-10s. The lead ship drops two SDBs of its own and then throttles back so that it can continue jamming the S-300 so that it is unable to target shoot down the four SDBs speeding toward it at well past the speed of sound (it does have that capability). At the last minute it turns and breaks away, the S-300 can see everything now the four glide bombs and even a weak return from the lead Raptor, but its too late, the bombs are only a second away. The first two SDBs land within meters of the tracking radar assembly spraying the antenna and command station with shrapnel, instantly disabling it. One of the second pair of bombs scores a direct hit vaporising the high powered radar antenna. The lead ship then turns to join it's wingman firing off a pair of AMRAAMs at the two pursuing J-10s before speeding off behind the curtain of jamming.

[Zentrandude]

If it did we shouldn't be seeing it here.

(watches shawn get raided by the fbi/cia)

[buddhafabio]

If it did we shouldn't be seeing it here.

(watches shawn get raided by the fbi/cia)

361580[/snapback]

Hey i got mine from Google.

[Skull Leader]

I have nothing more than common sense to go by, but in all fairness if something like this WERE real, I'd give really long odds against hearing anything concrete about it for a long while. Another forum that Dave and I inhabit has a raptor driver who has been approached about this very issue. Not surprisingly he danced around the issue ("I will not discuss, confirm, or deny the capabilities.... etc"). If it IS that capable, it readily falls into the category of "hella cool stuff our airforce can do that theirs can't... suckas"

[Zentrandude]

Plus I don't want to see MW get labeled like. Macrossworld: giving away national secrets since 1998

Plus shouldn't ground radar be able to do the same thing? They should be more powerfull than ones in jets.

[buddhafabio]

i emailed my dad about the AN/APG-77 radar basically just sent same website i found in google and he said f-18e/f has same system and so does the french mirage.

[Nied]

Newer Super Hornets have an AESA radar (the APG-79) that's a lower powered derivative of the APG-77 in the Raptor, so it should have similar capabilities (this is also why it should make an excellent jamming platform). AFAIK the Mirage 2000 (the latest mirage variant) has an old fashioned mechanically steered radar and thus wouldn't be able to do this. In fact, other than the F-22, the F/A-18E/F, and a handful of F-15Cs, I don't think that there are any other operational AESA radars in service (and all of those are from the US).

Edited January 19, 2006 by Nied

[Nied]

So I've been reading through the new F-22 book I got for Christmas (titled simply "Lockheed Martin F/A-22 Raptor" by Jay Miller), and it's gotten me thinking about the possibilities for the F-22 beyond being an uber air dominance fighter. For instance the Small Diameter Bomb: current plans call for it to carry 8 in the belly bays, but looking at the pictures of them loaded in it looks like it could carry at least another two in each bay and maybe even another pallet of four, that makes it 16 SDBs (but only Sidewinders for self defense). But wait there's more: most of the plans for the FB-22 that I've seen call for it to carry two or three SDBs in the sidewinder bays, those same plans currently call for the FB-22 to use the same fuselage as the vanilla F-22, I can't imagine a reason why that same modification couldn't be rolled back in to the legacy aircraft. All of the sudden the F-22 makes a pretty good CAS platform, with 14-22 SDBs it could dump bombs out of its bays B-52 style only, only since it's carrying them internally it's completely stealthy so it can be doing this on the first day of war, and it's can get to a trouble spot at twice the speed of sound. If air threats have been cleaned up and stealth isn't a necessity any more you could hang another 16 SDBs under the wings as well. And as long as we're talking about FB-22 mods being rolled back into the F-22, does anyone know what could keep Lockheed from putting the FB-22's bulged weapons bay doors on the F-22? A lot of hay has been made about how it would give the FB-22 the ability to carry 2,000 lb bombs in the bay, but it hasn't been mentioned that the JSOW glide bomb has almost identical dimensions. A pair of those would make the DEAD mission I described above even more effective, the F-22s could release their weapons much further away and would probably need to jam the radars for a second or two to keep the S-300 from getting a lock on the JSOW (although they are stealthy as well so that might not even be necessary).

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

I'm in favor of canning the FB-22 and just modding the bays of the vanilla F-22 to accomodate the bays and doors that would have been on the FB. Theres a lot of potential in the F-22, and unlike the JSF, its got a lot MORE space to work with. Add on external stores once the air defenses are killed in the beginning days of the war and then you have a potent iron bomber with long range that can fight its way in and out possibly a lot better than the present day F-15E can. If the F-22A has more avionics and weapon systems upgrades, then perhaps more F-22s can be bought, some to replace F-15E's. This would make the air force happier and would be cheaper than making a delta winged FB-22. And if they kill off the JSF thats more money for the F-22, and a more capable multirolerl.

[David Hingtgen]

Kill off the JSF, make F/A-22 Strike Raptors.(heh heh, bring back the /A) History has shown that big fighters can easily be modified into EXCELLENT attack planes---see F-14B/D, F-15E.

Of course, I'm also in favor of developing a new bomb that is the biggest possible that'll fit in the current F-22 bay. 1,300lbs? 1,567lbs? Whatever it turns out to be. Almost all current bombs are fat in the middle for aerodynamic reasons, for both stability in flight after being dropped, and minimal drag while being carried. Well, with modern guided bombs directly controlling their own path through the air and internal carriage, there's no need for that. So long as it's not literally shaped like a brick, it'll be fine.

[Knight26]

Ugh don't get me started on SDB I worked on its seeker back in college, let's just say, oh wait, sorry I can't say.

[David Hingtgen]

Ugh? I've seen fairly universal positive results for the SDB. Of course, seeing "good results/news" for any military program is such a rarity it casts suspicion...

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Knight you were already working on stuff in college? wow man!!Cool!!! Are you still@edwards? Did you get to see the F-16Xl's?(those are AWESOME).

BTW I am not sure if you heard yet but admiral toys might be making a 1/18 B-17. But their next release MAY be either WWII jets, or some of the modern jets like the tomcat. Jason from admiral toys has been dropping hints. He will reveal the next release soon. He said they won't make the A-10 yet due to tooling costs.

And MIke from BBI said that there arew repaints of the BBI apache, hornet and falcon this year. I got the black hornet over xmas and LOVE it. Great toy. Do you have any 1/18 copters? I got the XD cobnra from 21st, VERY cool. I intend to get an F-16 during spring.

[Skull Leader]

a 1/18 scale B-17 (any variant) would be just obscenely large, and no doubt hella expensive too. Bring me my 1/18 scale Tomcat

[Knight26]

I want my 1:18 A-10 dang it. As for what I have seen at Edwards, oh man, I have seen the XL, but only in a hanger, it doesn't fly much anymore. I will get my new digi-cam this weekend, and after that well my bike rides will involve a lot of picture taking of the various birds on site. Heck the gate guards over at the NASA entrance include: one of the original shuttle lifting body protos, an X-29, the F-8FBW, and F-8 Supercritical wing. There are T-38 and F-104s on sticks all over, 1/4-1/2 scale models over various planes, the first P-59, not mention all the flight ops, and the planes at the museum. Heck the engine shop is right across the street and they have a couple engines on display out front, I can here DH salivating now as he ponders what engine. ANd then there is the mini-boneyard which has all kinds of neat shreg, including more 1/4-1/2 scale mockups and an A-9 prototype, X-15 nose, and a few ohter tasty bits. Heck when I leave the office everyday I am treated to avery nice sight, out on the flight line is the restored A-10B just sitting there, too bad she can't fly but it is a nice sight everyday.

And yes I did work on some projects back in college for my various internships. I have heard good things about SDB too since college but if you saw the garbage that went on with that seeker when i was at Raytheon oh man. Of course they may have gone with a different seeker since then, but I helped get that program from 9 months to only 2 months behind schedule in the 10 weeks I worked there.

[Nied]

I didn't know the SDB had a seeker head on it. I always thought it was a tiny JDAM with wings. What kind of seeker does it have? Laser, IIR, millimeter wave radar, or "If I told you I'd have to kill you."

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Keep the hopes up boys Jason from admiral toys should be announcing in a month or less or 2 which plane will make it next into 1/18 scale. He did say the F-14 and F-4 were possible amongst a few others.

[DeathHammer]

Question for any of the pilots, there were some terms in BSG during some Viper combat that I wondered if they were similiar to actual modern terms. Tried looking a few of these up online and no luck so far.

1) "Tone and Lock"

2) "No Joy" ( or what sounded like that)

3) "Bingo Fuel" ( guessing it means out of fuel. Does 'Bingo' apply to everything that way then? I.E. if you are out of something, do you say 'Bingo [FILL IN THE BLANK]'? )

Heres another interesting bit, heres a shot of the BSG board that Apollo uses to organize his roster.

http://img41.imagevenue.com/img.php?loc=lo...=8eb5f_bsg1.jpg

This accurate for modern day? Any insight into what the abbreviations/numbers mean in some of those categories?

Thanks in advance.

[F-ZeroOne]

Question for any of the pilots, there were some terms in BSG during some Viper combat that I wondered if they were similiar to actual modern terms. Tried looking a few of these up online and no luck so far.

1) "Tone and Lock"

2) "No Joy" ( or what sounded like that)

3) "Bingo Fuel" ( guessing it means out of fuel. Does 'Bingo' apply to everything that way then? I.E. if you are out of something, do you say 'Bingo [FILL IN THE BLANK]'? )

Thanks in advance.

364112[/snapback]

"Tone and lock" suggests a missile has been targeted on an enemy - some missiles produce a tone in the pilots headphones to indicate successful "lock-on", acquisition, of a target prior to launch of the weapon.

"No joy" probably means just that i.e. lack of success.

"Bingo fuel" usually indidcates the aircraft is down to a set minimum of fuel reserves to return to base. I don't think its quite the last "possible" fuel state - I think most aircraft are given a final reserve in case of emergency.

Edit: just looked at that linked image. Only ones I recognise off the bat are "STDBY" - "Standby" and "CAP" - Combat Air Patrol, typically a defensive patrol flown by carrier aircraft around the carrier or fleet in order to increase the chances of intercepting potential attackers before they get too close.

Edited January 25, 2006 by F-ZeroOne

[Knight26]

1) Accurate as described already.

2) No Joy means that you cannot do something, in combat terms you can't engage a target for some reason, No Joy is usally followed with a reason.

3) Bingo fuel is the fuel state at which a pilot had best turn around and come home, it usually allows for additional fuel in case of trouble. Joker Fuel is the call to say that you have just enough fuel to make it home without dipping into your reserves, you hope.

As for the picture I will have to wait until I get home to look at it, the website is blocked here.

[Skull Leader]

With that in mind, here are a few other common radio calls:

-"Winchester"- implies that you are out of ammunition/missiles/bombs

ex: "Two's winchester."

-"Spike"- implies that you have received a radar spike on your radar warning receiver. This is usually followed by the direction the spike came from.

ex: "Victory103, spike, 3 o'clock"

-"Shotgun"- implies that you just fired an air-to-ground missile (things like Shrikes, Standard ARMs, HARMS, etc)

-"Rifle"- (COULD be wrong on this one, but I think I'm on) implies you just dropped a laser-guided bomb. (including but not limited to JDAMs)

-"Shack"- implies that the ground target is destroyed

-"Sparkle"/"Illuminate" to designate a target with a laser (used mostly in vietnam, I don't know if they use it so much anymore)

"In the groove"- (so far as I know, a naval aviation term, I've never heard an air force pilot use it) implies that you are on the final approach for landing on the carrier. Usually used by the LSO

ex: "Tomcat in the groove, you're at 3/4 a mile, call the ball."

-"Angels"- altitude in thousands of feet

ex: 10,000 feet= Angels 10

-"Bogie"- unknown radar contact (NOT to be confused with "Bandit")

-"Cleared"- requested action is authorized

-"Cleared Hot"-ordinance release is authorized

Fox codes:

"Fox One"- release of a radar-guided missile (sparrows usually)

"Fox Two"- release of an infared-guided missile (IE: sidewinders)

"Fox Three"- release of an AMRAAM or Phoenix missile

The term "Tone" was born from the fact that sidewinders emit a "growl" when the seeker head is activated. When the seeker aquires a target, the growl changes to a higher-pitched frequency (really f-ing annoying to my ears... but the flyboys back in 'nam referred to it as the "sound of success")

[David Hingtgen]

There's different levels for a tone, it doesn't mean automatically LOCK it simply means it can tell there's something out there and is looking for it. It'll make a different tone (almost always described as a growl--listed for it in real gun camera footage , especially the F-14 ones) when it's actually LOCKED. You can fire a Sidewinder at a sort of "half-lock"----low chance of success, but sometimes it's the best you've got.

No noise: Missile's acting stupid, even if it's staring at an afterburner.

Tone: Searching, sorta sees something, can tell there's a heat source somewhere in its field of vision. Means "seeker is active". If it actually locks on, it'll give a growl to indicate how well it's locked:

Low-pitched growl: slight lock

Medium-pitched growl: moderate lock

High-pitched growl: strong lock

(I think, could be the opposite)

Also---"No Joy" specifically refers to sighting of aircraft. If you call "Bandits, 8 o'clock high" to somebody, he'll either respond "Tally Ho" that he sees them too, or "No Joy" that he doesn't.

Edited January 26, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[Coota0]

I believe "Shack" is more of an Air Force term tha Navy/Marine Corps, but I could be wrong.

From looking at the picture...

I know STBY is Stanby (maybe the BSG version of Alert 5?)

I think TAC is either thier Tactical Callsign or the frequency their on

From the looks of the stuff along the left side I'd say it's aircraft type and nthe aircraft's number.

[Knight26]

That board is pretty accurate to modern boards from what I can see of it, not only does it have the crew status and stats it also has the status of the various craft, up, down, in repair, etc...

[Nied]

"Rifle" actually reafers to the fireing of an AGM like a maverick.

"Magnum" is the call for fireing a HARM missile ("shotgun" is used for all other Anti-Radiation missiles)

OPERATIONAL BREVITY WORDS AND TERMINOLOGY

[Knight26]

Well I got my new camera and I took it out for a test ride today, taking pics out at the Edwards boneyard. Enjoy, 56kers beware. And yes for those that want them I have larger pics. Addendum, a scooby snack to whomever can ID the contents of all times in all the pictures.