By Andrea Shalal-Esa

In an apparent nod to big-ticket F-22 and F-35 fighter jets built by Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N), the administration said the United States needed to preserve its “unparalleled airpower capabilities” to deter and defeat any conventional competitors, respond to crises across the globe and support ground forces.

(Reporting by Andrea Shalal-Esa; Editing by Andre Grenon)

You could interpret this statement any way you want to. We should know pretty soon the fate of the F-22 program.. keeping my fingers crossed.

A drop tank is quite pricy (think high end BMW prices). They are every bit as complex as the wing they attach to. Most have multiple cells to maintain CG and all the plumbing, pumps, valves, pressurization, feed and gaging as the remainder of the fuel system. Then add aerodynamic considerations, explosives for safe separation and maybe some RAM for low observables.

That was what I thought also until I came across another aviation forum where it stated a tank cost only a couple thousand bucks. No way for me to verify. But on the Raptor the cost of the disposable pylon should bump up the price quite a bit.

Sounds like William Tell………….but with the USN this time!:D

Tyndall live missile exercise is Monday
Comments 0 | Recommend 0
Navy and Air Force flight crews to accomplish live-fire training
December 05, 2008 02:20:00 PM
By TONY SIMMONS / Online Editor
TYNDALL AIR FORCE BASE – Aviators from the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy will conduct a joint live-fire exercise at Tyndall Air Force Base on Monday, Dec. 8.

Air Force F-15E Strike Eagles from Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, S.C., will be joined by Navy F/A-18 Super Hornets from Naval Air Station Oceana, Va., for missions as part of a new program bringing aviators from both services together for realistic combat training, according to a news release.

More than 80 Air Force and Navy personnel including pilots, aircraft maintainers, weapons loaders and mission analysts, will arrive at Tyndall AFB Monday to be tested on their ability to conduct air-to-air missions using live, active weapons, the news release said.

Aircrews will be evaluated on every aspect of fighter aircraft combat missions, from weapons handling and loading techniques, to the pilots’ ability to accurately fire live air-to-air missiles, the release said. The missions Monday will be the first of their kind in support of a new joint program, which will bring Navy and Air Force pilots together on a quarterly basis to test their skills at realistic combat operations at Tyndall AFB.

Just curious regarding the marksmanship competition.. I can understand how firing the cannon requires a lot of skill but accuracy in firing missiles seems to rely more on how good your targeting equipment is. The missile seems to be doing most of the work.

So if the rumors about the AIM-120D having a dual-pulse motor turn out to be true, your cheetah just grew an extra pair of legs..:D

When one considers that the Raptor will serve for the next 30 years or more as the US’ frontline air dominance fighter, somehow 183 planes don’t seem that many.

Well, in Moseley’s words, the results are “pretty fascinating” but that’s as far as we’re likely to know for now..

In the meantime, the Air Force is re-evaluating the future of some key programs. The B-52 Standoff Jammer, one piece of a multi-pronged Pentagon airborne electronic attack strategy, was terminated in 2005, but Moseley says he’s reviewing whether to reinstate a simpler version of it, taking into account the jamming potential of the active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars being fielded on the F-22, F-35 and new capabilities offered by the Navy’s E/A-18G Growler. Leading to the B-52 Standoff Jammer’s demise was a roughly sevenfold cost increase, to about $7 billion.

“We’ve reopened the door to say this could be attractive,” Moseley says. “But as soon as that rascal begins to go up toward $7 billion again it is dead. That is a gas chamber offense.” With Boeing as the prime integrator, the first increment is expected to cost $1.7 billion, although only $75 million has been earmarked for it, according to another Air Force official. This increment will employ E/A-18G mid- and high-band receivers and a low-band receiver developed by the Air Force Research Laboratory.

In the meantime, the Air Force continues to explore an AESA as an electronic attack system. By focusing multiple AESA modules on one electronic target, experts are finding they can disrupt the object’s performance with a nonlethal means.

Although details are classified, Moseley says that the Air Force has “played” with the F-22’s AESA, with “pretty fascinating” results. “The physics will work,” he says. “These AESA radars provide opportunities to be able to jam like we have had with the EF-111s and the EA-6Bs and with other jamming systems and pods. This antenna allows you to go out and do the same thing with the F-35 or the F-22.”

How capable would a stretched F-22A (what people around here refer to as FB-22) dedicated fighter-bomber be in reality? I can only think of the Mirage IV as anything halfway comparable to the idea, although the latter was a stretch of a single-engine design to accommodate both an internal bomb bay and a second engine.

I think the AF has pretty much ruled out a FB-22 as a candidate. i recal reading an interview by Gen. Keys last year and he confirmed thata FB-22 is not being considered but that some of its technologies would be adopted.