WT Forums

Home | WT Forums | Hogpedia | Warthog blog | Hosted sites
It is currently 02 May 2026, 01:16

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Feb 2003, 13:54 
I have no problem with the presence of Super Hornet Trit, that has never been my issue.

I have HUGE problems with it being the 'defender of the fleet'.

Once the F-35C is doing that job the USN will be MUCH better off.

Trample the wounded- hurdle the dead.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Feb 2003, 13:57 
Offline

Joined: 05 Dec 2002, 08:53
Posts: 1167
Boomer:
I've seen the propaganda on the fuel capacity of the JSF's (e.g. 19 klbs for the F-35C) and I am amazed. Where do they put it? If it is in there, they must be paying a price in frontal area and wetted area (L/D, accel, specific range etc.)and empty weight to carry it. It is a unique thing to require that kind of a fuel fraction in a tactical fighter. The last single engine strike aircraft I can remember in that weight class (>50 klbs TOGW) was the F-105. It only had 10.5 klbs of internal fuel if you count the bomb bay tank. That 19 klbs number is more than the F-14. I'm wondering what gives?

Mc/I + P/A

_________________
????


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Feb 2003, 14:53 
Offline

Joined: 05 Aug 2002, 13:28
Posts: 2210
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>I have HUGE problems with it being the 'defender of the fleet'.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

I keep thinking that will the Goal of AEGIS. I do not see in the near future that the Navy will ask for the big bucks on FLYING fleet defender. I could be wrong; I doubt it.

Test pilots have actually been happy with the role Fleet defense lying on the Hornet-I'm still hoping for Supercruise and advanced BVRAMRAMM.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Feb 2003, 15:19 
Offline

Joined: 04 Aug 2002, 20:10
Posts: 1118
The F-14's AWG-9/APG-71 and FDL/SDL.......coupled with the E-2 is an intregal cog in the AEGIS combat management system.

If you are not having fun, you are not doing it right!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Feb 2003, 17:52 
Offline

Joined: 05 Oct 2002, 14:22
Posts: 5353
Location: Missouri
the F-35C has a wing something in the area of 30% larger than the other 2 versions! The Boeing entry had 18,000lbs of fuel and carried every bit of it in the wing, no fusalage tankage at all!

"We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would harm us". George Orwell

Fighting For Justice With Brains Of Steel !
<img src="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/atengun2X.GIF" border=0>

_________________
The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire.
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Feb 2003, 22:07 
Yup, REAL big wings on the C version.

Trample the wounded- hurdle the dead.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Feb 2003, 22:10 
Tritonal, about Aegis, i think you maybe overestimating it's capabilities.

While it is the best in the world(for the moment), it is still restricted by the illuminator Horizon.

An Aegis warship can't fire at a target until it can illuminate it. For a low altitude fighter that range is about 25 miles.

I'll bet you didn't know that...did ya? ;)

CEC will help immensely, but until SM-2/ESSM are given IIR autonoous seeker like RAM has, they will be restricted to LOS engagements.

Trample the wounded- hurdle the dead.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Feb 2003, 22:16 
Offline

Joined: 04 Aug 2002, 20:10
Posts: 1118
I have been reading up on the PW-F119........Very impressive powerplant, not only does it have a unheard of thrust to weight ratio, but it is also extremely efficient, more like a Turbojet, than a Turbofan,........The fact that it is a low bypass turbofan gives it the qualities to thrive at high airspeeds while remaining very effecient. With the F-35C's fuel cpacity and engine effiency, it is going to really be long awaited aircraft.

If you are not having fun, you are not doing it right!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Feb 2003, 23:06 
Offline

Joined: 05 Aug 2002, 13:28
Posts: 2210
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> CEC will help immensely, but until SM-2/ESSM are given IIR autonomous seeker like RAM has, they will be restricted to LOS engagements.

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

All in due time. Wait till the SM-3 comes online.(Hope it comes online).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 08 Feb 2003, 01:00 
SM-3 will be coming on line(and soon), but it has ZERO AAW capability.
It's flight speed is so high that atmospheric friction obscures the IIR seeker in the HTK vehicle.

SM-3 is pretty well useless against any targets below 150,000 feet.

Or so i have been directly told.

In any case, a fleet defender is definitely still needed.

Trample the wounded- hurdle the dead.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 08 Feb 2003, 09:04 
Offline

Joined: 05 Aug 2002, 13:28
Posts: 2210
My thinking is that it's an ABM for strategic defense-kinda' like an Arrow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 08 Feb 2003, 12:09 
Yes, that is sort of the same.

Unlike Arrow SM-3 is primarily designed as a boost Phase(Ascent) interceptor operating close off the enemy coast(Say 50 miles).

It is planned to convert ten of the Tico VLS ships to BMD platforms with the prototype SPY-1(V)2 and Aegis Mk7/7b CEC. Each Tico will carry 20 SM-3's, and a mix of SM-2ER IV and TACTOMs.

That way we can keep one in the Med, off the coast of Korea, off the coast of Taiwan, and off the coast of Pak/India at all times.
To stop a nuclear war after the button is pushed, but before anything gets broken.

It's a brilliant plan if you ask me(Especially since CONUS will be protected with a redundant Minuteman II interceptor battery by 2010 at the latest).

But we still won't have an adequate fleet defender that can range far and fast to intercept aircraft before they fire their missiles, starting the day the last F-14 squadron is retired.

Trample the wounded- hurdle the dead.



Edited by - m21 Sniper on Feb 08 2003 11:11 AM


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 08 Feb 2003, 14:04 
Offline

Joined: 05 Aug 2002, 13:28
Posts: 2210
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>But we still won't have an adequate fleet defender that can range far and fast to intercept aircraft before they fire their missiles, starting the day the last F-14 squadron is retired.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

As much as you disagree with it the role will most likely go to the E/F Superhornet.


We have one for the next 9 years if the threat arises. I don't know if they'll be mothballed or totaly destroyed. my friend's dad is chief engineer for Lockheed Martin Aegis Weapon systems at Moorestown. I'll ask him about what they have the future of fleet defense, though he has clearance and can tell very little.



Edited by - Tritonal on Feb 08 2003 1:15 PM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2003, 14:39 
Offline

Joined: 05 Oct 2002, 14:22
Posts: 5353
Location: Missouri
the Navy ERAM(Extened Range Active Missle) is supposed to have a 100 mile range. But I dont know how they plan to handle the OTH targeting, E-2 maybee? Anyway it's an active version of SM, and a follow on to the cancelled SM-4A ( I think) using the same airframe, motor, and warhead with the seeker (more or less with a bigger antennae) from AMRAAM. BTW more or less confirmed, AMRAAM has HOJ/Passive RF seeking capability.

"We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would harm us". George Orwell

Fighting For Justice With Brains Of Steel !
<img src="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/atengun2X.GIF" border=0>

_________________
The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire.
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2003, 15:30 
I never heard of ERAM, but SM-4 was LASM- a land attack missile based on SM-2MR BkII, and is long cancelled.

SM-1 is about to be withdrawn from service completely, and SM-2ER IV Production appears to have ended at about 170 missiles.

IF an active seeker missile is developed OTH targeting can be handled by Mk7/Bl7a and newer variants of Aegis using the JTIDS feeds of any and all friendly aircraft in theater, as well as any surface ships equipped with CEC in the theater.

Trample the wounded- hurdle the dead.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2003, 15:41 
I just did a search for ERAM and came up with nothing.

I think the program you mentioned was/is just a proposal. I can find absolutely nothing about it.



Trample the wounded- hurdle the dead.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2003, 23:04 
Offline

Joined: 04 Aug 2002, 20:10
Posts: 1118
It envolves more than the range of the missile...........
The F-14 can stand off 250 nautical miles away from the carrier, and loiter in BARCAP. It can then fire its missiles from that standoff range, or hit burner and engage to enemy beyond that range. To put this in perspective.........If a CVBG was sitting in Chesepeake Bay, VA. An patrol of F-14's, plus two more on ready five, plus an additional two on alert five, could sanitize all of the airspace from Chicago east.........From Boston south, and from Miami north.

Nothing will match its loiter capability, radar range, passive s&t capability, and missile standoff range, not to mention endurance in a dogfight if the enemy planes do merge with the F-14's.

If you are not having fun, you are not doing it right!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 10 Feb 2003, 02:56 
I agree with all of that except the part where you say 'nothing will match that'.

I think the F-15C (especially the AESA variant) could do the same thing, and so could the F-22(no brainer).



Trample the wounded- hurdle the dead.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 10 Feb 2003, 13:42 
Offline

Joined: 05 Oct 2002, 14:22
Posts: 5353
Location: Missouri
I'll try to cut and paste from Av-Week


"We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would harm us". George Orwell

Fighting For Justice With Brains Of Steel !
<img src="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/atengun2X.GIF" border=0>

_________________
The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire.
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 10 Feb 2003, 13:57 
Offline

Joined: 05 Oct 2002, 14:22
Posts: 5353
Location: Missouri
Raytheon Snags Navy
Air Defense Contract
ROBERT WALL/WASHINGTON

In an unusual move, the U.S. Navy has decided to forego competition and award Raytheon a contract to develop the service's future ship-launched, long-range air defense missile.

The Navy argued that Raytheon was the only vendor that could meet its goal of fielding the missile by Fiscal 2010 while addressing two key requirements--extended range and the use of an active seeker. Moreover, the service argued that use of a different vendor would increase costs that couldn't be offset through a potential price reduction brought about by competition. However, the move has drawn strong opposition from competitors who felt they were shut out unfairly.

The need for the Extended-Range Active Missile (ERAM) grew out of a Pentagon decision last year to terminate the Navy Area Wide missile defense project. Raytheon's Standard Missile SM-2 Block 4A interceptor was to serve both ballistic missile needs and anti-air warfare requirements. Earlier, the Navy truncated the buy of its SM-2 Block 4 long-range air defense weapon. The decision to kill the SM-2 Block 4A was attributed to significant cost growth in the project, rather than technical difficulties.

The deal cements Raytheon's near-monopoly position as the Navy's supplier of air defense missiles. The service also buys the company's Rolling Airframe Missile and Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile to protect its ships. The Navy, recognizing its close link with Raytheon on missiles, is looking to combine the various offices buying those weapons in one directorate to garner efficiencies, according to Rear Adm. Tom Bush, program executive officer for the service's new Integrated Warfare Systems.

THE ERAM PROJECT WOULD draw on work the Navy and Raytheon put into the canceled SM-2 Block 4A, using the same missile frame, warhead and the motors that were already going to give the weapon the long-range requirement, in excess of 100 naut. mi., the service is interested in. Reuse of those components, many of which were tested in the ballistic missile defense effort, is seen as the main reason the Standard Missile would be much faster to develop than an alternative.

The most significant difference for the Navy will be a switch from a semi-active seeker to an active system. The semi-active configuration in use on older Standard Missiles requires a ship's Aegis radar to illuminate the target. With an active seeker the missile can operate independently, removing the Aegis radar as a constraint. The main advantage would be the ability to attack low-flying targets at ranges beyond the scope of Aegis radar because of the curvature of the Earth.

Rather than develop a new seeker, Raytheon plans to draw on engineering work it has done for the AIM-120 Amraam air-to-air missile, says Jeff McKeel, a company manager overseeing air and missile defense projects. The Standard Missile implementation likely would have much greater range and resolution, however, because the seeker can be larger. Amraam is a 7-in.-dia. missile, while the more than 13-in.-dia. Standard Missile should be able to accommodate an 11-12-in. seeker.

The Navy and Raytheon are expected to spend the next several months defining the ERAM development program. Significant funding to start the system design and demonstration phase won't be available until after October, when the new fiscal year begins. A low-rate production decision isn't expected until 2007 or 2008.

The service also has several other issues it needs to address regarding the new missile. For instance, Navy officials have to decide whether ERAM would supplant the existing inventory of Standard Missile SM-2 Block 3s, or whether both weapons would be retained. Moreover, the Pentagon will have to determine if it wants ERAM to take on some of the lower-tier ballistic missile defense requirements that can't be handled by the exo-atmospheric SM-3. The Missile Defense Agency is looking to SM-3--designed as the upper-tier interceptor--to take on the SM-2 Block 4A's ballistic missile protection role, but won't know for some time whether it can fully meet the requirements. Amraam also features an ability to track an aircraft by locking on its radio frequency emissions. The Navy has not yet stated if it wants to exploit that feature.

© January 27, 2003 The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc


"We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would harm us". George Orwell

Fighting For Justice With Brains Of Steel !
<img src="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/atengun2X.GIF" border=0>

_________________
The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire.
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 10 Feb 2003, 15:18 
Offline

Joined: 04 Aug 2002, 20:10
Posts: 1118
A-10 stress,

The source that I got my info from is a bit archiac, I read it in "Fighter Wing" By Tom Clancy. It was published in 1995 and devotes a section to the F-22 and its sytems. Basicaly describes the PW-F119 as having the best qualities of both the Turbofan, and Turbojet. I can post the section this evening for you guys, very good read.

If you are not having fun, you are not doing it right!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 10 Feb 2003, 15:46 
Offline

Joined: 04 Aug 2002, 20:10
Posts: 1118
F-15C or F-22 still will not be able to loiter on BARCAP, or have the endurance of the F-14. The size of the aircraft, VG wing design, and efficency cannot be compensated for, not even with the ability of the PW-F119/F-22...........

F-22 will be close, but still no cigaro......:-~

If you are not having fun, you are not doing it right!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 10 Feb 2003, 17:23 
Thanx Boomer!!!!

Trample the wounded- hurdle the dead.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 11 Feb 2003, 10:10 
The F-22 is a pretty big plane Tomcat- it has the same wing area as an F-15.

I read the same thing about the F-119 being low bypass, in fact i started a war about it here with my first ever post.

I like to make a big entrane, lol.

Trample the wounded- hurdle the dead.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 12 Feb 2003, 12:40 
DAMN!

Stinkin Clancy, i aint listening to his 'facts' anymore, lol.

Maybe it was span....lol

Trample the wounded- hurdle the dead.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group