mabieJust curious why you put that JDAM thing in this thread. The article is about NCW ( netcentric warfare ) targeting hand-offs. Where the topic of the thread is electronic attack which would mean anything from supressing a cell phone tower, radar sensor, sensor in the nose of an aircraft, sensor in the nose of a missile, attempting to attack or even cook part of a network node by ruining the equipment via the enemy antenna etc.
Just thought the article highlighted another advanced capability of AESA similar to those described in the first post; the JDAM part wasn’t really my focus.
mabiemore AESA Super Hornet stuff
Boeing Super Hornet Demonstrates Network Capability In Multiple JDAM Drop
File photo: A cluster of JDAM bombs await their release.
by Staff Writers
St. Louis MO (SPX) Apr 20, 2006
Boeing [has demonstrated the capability of an F/A-18E/F Super Hornet to provide targeting coordinates to other aircraft using the Raytheon APG-79 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar system.
During the test at the Naval Air Weapons Center at China Lake, Calif., an AESA-equipped F/A-18F created a long-range, high resolution synthetic aperture radar map and designated four closely-spaced stationary targets.
The aircraft then data-linked two target designations to non-AESA equipped Super Hornets, which successfully delivered four 2,000-lb. Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM). All four weapons impacted the targets within lethal distance. The targeting Super Hornet then used the AESA to provide highly detailed bomb damage assessments to confirm the hits.
“This demonstration proves some of the capabilities of the Block II Super Hornet we have been talking about,” said Capt. Donald “BD” Gaddis, F/A-18 program manager for the U.S. Navy. “This is just one element of the tremendous networking potential of the Block II Super Hornet for our warfighters.”
The AESA radar provides the warfighter with higher resolution at much longer ranges than traditional, mechanically scanned arrays. This information enables other aircraft crews to more precisely target weapons for greater accuracy. Additional demonstrations of the Super Hornet’s future precision engagement capabilities are planned as part of tests leading to the program’s Operational Evaluation later this year.
“We continue to demonstrate the incremental capability improvements we promised from the beginning of the Super Hornet program,” says Bob Feldmann, Boeing vice president for the F/A-18 program. “While we will continue to provide future enhancements, this latest milestone demonstrates the affordable capability the F/A-18 program brings to our customer today.”
“It’s great to see our revolutionary APG-79 AESA radar continue to soundly hit its milestones and sustain Raytheon’s commitment to provide the U.S. Navy with ‘best of breed’ technology harnessed in an unparalleled radar capability,” said Erv Grau, vice president, Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems.
“This network targeting demonstration using our APG-79 AESA radar truly shows the force multiplier capacity of an AESA-equipped Super Hornet. This is the first time that target coordinates were generated by one F/A-18 aircraft and passed via data link to other F/A-18 aircraft. Close teamwork among the Navy, Boeing and Raytheon continues to produce superior warfighting capabilities such as this.”
mabieRaptor dominant in WVR combat
http://www.f-16.net/news_article2199.html
Interesting feedback from Red Flag. The aggressor pilot claims he can’t even get his weapons to lock onto a Raptor that’s in plain sight.. just awesome! I wonder if this was for both radar-guided and IR systems?
mabieBoeing goes for the KC-767
ST. LOUIS, Feb. 12, 2007 — The Boeing Company [NYSE: BA] today announced that it will offer the KC-767 Advanced Tanker for the U.S. Air Force’s KC-X Tanker competition.
“The Air Force has made it clear — the mission is refueling aircraft, often in tight, hostile locations. The Boeing KC-767 Advanced Tanker is made for this mission,” said Ron Marcotte, vice president and general manager of Boeing Global Mobility Systems. “It is the ideal fit for the requirements set forth in the Air Force’s Request for Proposals. Highly energy efficient, agile and with exceptional takeoff performance, the KC-767 puts more fuel closer to the fight — with access to more than 1,000 additional bases worldwide than the KC-135.”
The tanker will be an advanced derivative of the future 767-200 Long Range Freighter and will be produced at Boeing’s facilities in Everett, Wash., on the existing commercial line where more than 950 highly reliable and maintainable 767s have been built. Installation of military refueling systems and flight test activities will take place at the company’s finishing center in Wichita, Kan.
Boeing’s Global Tanker Team producing the KC-767 Advanced Tanker includes Smiths Aerospace, Rockwell Collins, Vought Aircraft Industries, Honeywell and the newest member — Spirit AeroSystems. The team has proven expertise in aerial refueling systems, network centric operations, integrated avionics solutions and lean manufacturing concepts.
“This KC-767 Advanced Tanker will support more than 44,000 American jobs and 300 suppliers,” said Mark McGraw, vice president, Boeing Tanker Programs.
With more than $1 billion already invested in the KC-767, Boeing will blend the latest commercial and military capabilities into the world’s most technologically advanced tanker. Innovations include an advanced fly-by-wire boom, new wing refueling pods, a centerline hose drum refueling unit, the most advanced 777 commercial digital flight deck and a third-generation remote vision refueling system. This is a tanker with flexibility to meet other airlift missions; whether it’s delivering three times more pallets and passengers than the KC-135 or five times as many patients and medical crewmembers.
Boeing has been designing, building, modifying and supporting tankers for nearly 75 years. The company is flying KC-767s and has more than 220 flights and 660 hours on the tanker platform.
mabieIsnt something similar to this idea used on Microlights and or light aircraft?
yeah, exactly the same principle.. the parachute would be attached to the tail boom and be shot out by a rocket in case of an emergency.. save the crew and help recover a valuable aircraft (hopefully not for the enemy).. seems easy enough to retrofit to existing choppers and shouldn’t cost that much for the extra insurance.
mabieLike Kalashnikov-men on the ground with spicky bayonets.
I’ll take the possibility of men with bayonets vs going up in a fireball or being decapitated in the crash.:D
mabieHow feasible would it be to attach an emergency parachute system to helicopters, civilian or military, so in case of an emergency the entire aircraft could be lowered gently to the ground? I recall that a patent application had been filed for such a system but I’m not aware of any applied in practice. It would seem to make sense unless there’s something I’m missing.
mabieGEAE will build as many F414s as P&W will build F119 & F135.
There are no secrets in the US aerospace industry. The migration of engineering talent between contractors/.gov and the .gov’s contracted research and development programs make sure the playing field is level and no one contractor gains an upper hand.
I don’t think its a fair comparing the F414 with the F119 & F135; the former is just an advanced version of the old F404 while the P&W engines are a generation ahead IMO. I really think P&W will gain an unfair advantage if the F-136 is cancelled and this will hurt US strategically in the long-term.. I like competition so GE and P&W push the state-of-the-art, stay honest and keep on their toes.
mabieJust on the principle, is it wise to give P&W a monopoly on the fighter engine business.. this stifles innovation, leads to higher prices, etc. Is removing competition a good long-term move?
mabieAssuming that a pilot could actually do these fancy somersaults and flips in the heat of combat and putting aside whether they have any merit or not, my question has to be what would the level of his situational awareness be? I understand it takes a lot of concentration to pull off these types of maneuvers. Would’nt he be disoriented and lose the tactical awareness?
mabieUSAF assets fit into 3 categories: shooters, lookers and trash haulers.
At present, there is excess capability in the short-range “shooter” category and that excess capability will continue with introduction of F-35.
The “trash hauler” category has seen an influx of C-17s while older C-5s and C-130s are retired. The tanker issue is being addressed with the recently released RFP with the B767 and A330 tankers going head-to-head. The tanker competition is fairly low cost because most of the development is already done.
The “looker” category is falling way behind the need. Insurgent targets are orders of magnitude more difficult to find than Soviet tank armies were during the Cold War. JStars is almost useless against insurgents, Predators limited to EO aren’t much better, and there aren’t enough U-2s to provide 24/7 coverage to find insurgents planting IEDs in Anbar Province much less cover the rest of the world’s hot spots. Global Hawk isn’t doing well due to the way USAF pushed an inadequate demonstrator program into production (not enough engine to provide electrical power, cooling and thrust for high altitude operations). Recce isn’t flashy and exciting, but if you cannot find targets, all your shooters are useless. The prospects for improved USAF recce are dismal at this time. This is where more of the USAF’s scarce money needs to go.
There’s a lot to be said for having a pair of eyes on the ground that can verify targets and call in the heavy hittters..
mabieThe USAF has to plan for potential future conflicts with hostile nation-states, the war on terror notwithstanding and this is where the F-22 will prove invaluable. Buying 183 planes to serve as your primary air superiority platform for the next couple of decades just doesn’t seem right for a superpower whose interests/commitments span the globe. I’m personally hopeful the F-22 production line stays open and the AF gets more jets.
The undeniable fact is that a lot of the existing fighter inventory is old and will be significantly older by the time the F-35 comes online. Using F-35 money to upgrade older jets or build improved 4gen fighters doesn’t make sense in my book and I’d take the 5gen F-35 anytime. Is there really a big price differential between buying new SuperHornets, Harriers, Vipers, or Strike Eagles vs. the Lightning-II? All indications are that the F-35 program is making steady progress and the lessons learned in designing and building the Raptor has a lot to do with this. I think the F-35 will prove to be an outstanding aircraft and will prove its critics wrong, just like the Raptor is starting to do.
mabieThe boots on the ground should get first priority on the very limited funds available.. modern radios, night vision gear, better weapons, new boots, better rations, etc. etc. even a single A-10 costing 10M dollars would wipe out the supplemental 5Billion peso budget congress OK’d for upgrading the ENTIRE military.. better to spend the money on fixing their C-130s and helicopter fleet.
mabieThe Philippines’ primary threat is the communist insurgency and the A-10 would provide an excellent platform in this environment. 😀 However there is no money and this must remain a dream for now unless Uncle Sam is willing to donate a few flyable specimens from the current A-10 fleet from among those that won’t be modernized. 😀 😀
mabieTwo possibilities:
1. He’s describing a scenario where the IR data is acquired by some other platform and they’re using the F-22 to relay the information in a netcentric environment, or
2. The USAF has decided to push thru with the IRST sensor originally deferred, not discarded, to a later date and it is possibly even prioritizing it for an earlier IOC date. They realize how IR capability will further enhance the raptor’s capabilities to identify, track and target enemy assets, particularly those on the ground.
Sign In
