dark light

mabie

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 529 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: F-35 News Thread III #2363669
    mabie
    Participant

    The Air Guard doesn’t need stealth to police domestic airspace. New AESA equipped F-16/18’s would work just fine. Didn’t the USAF purchase F-4’s?

    Only thing is the ANG is expected to serve right alongside the regular AF in any conflict.. they’re not looked at as a second string reserve happy to use aging and less effective equipment.

    in reply to: LRASM vs the Chinese Threat? #1800730
    mabie
    Participant

    I agree its about time a new anti-shipping missile is developed, capitalizing on progress made since Tomahawk and Harpoon made their respective debuts.

    in reply to: What is this? #1800847
    mabie
    Participant

    Not a munition, a flare

    Thanks..

    in reply to: Raytheon re-invents JDRADM: enter T3 #1800939
    mabie
    Participant

    Multi-role is now the name of the game.. trying to get the most bang for the buck.

    mabie
    Participant

    I think a light long range cheap to purchase & cheap to operate interceptor would suit Canada, How about being launch customer for Tejas ?
    should be a nice topping being launch customer.

    Canada seems to want something more than an interceptor.. participating in future NATO operations, for example. Kudos to them for actually acquiring the assets that will allow them to be a significant contributor in any such effort.

    in reply to: F-35 News Thread III #2381720
    mabie
    Participant

    Looks pretty smooth to me(though I’m not using smooth and flat as synonyms here).

    looks like it came out of a mold.

    in reply to: Raytheon re-invents JDRADM: enter T3 #1801002
    mabie
    Participant

    Parallel programs to develop key components increase the chances of ending up with something that works.. the contract prices are pretty modest. I see the benefits of cross-pollination of knowledge between various vendors comprising the diffferent development teams who may have worked on similar technologies in previous projects, often with techies whom they are now competing against.

    in reply to: Raytheon re-invents JDRADM: enter T3 #1801027
    mabie
    Participant

    Didn’t Boeing win the contract to develop JDRADM a couple of years ago? Is this a parallel project to Boeing’s (ie. noticeably the JDRADM acronym is not used in the article) or has raytheon taken over primary responsibility?

    in reply to: Raytheon Tests New Small UAV Munition #1801029
    mabie
    Participant

    This seems to be a different missile than the Griffin, also a Raytheon product. Griffin is already pretty lightweight at 35-42lbs. (depending on w/c source you read) and it has a 13lb. warhead. I wonder though if there’s been some mistake in the report and maybe they are actually the same system.

    in reply to: Female Aviators #2389357
    mabie
    Participant

    http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/images/real_wonder_women.jpg
    Four F-15 Eagle pilots from the 3rd Wing walk to their respective jets at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska, on Wednesday, July 5, for the fini flight of Maj. Andrea Misener (far left). To her right are Capt. Jammie Jamieson, Maj. Carey Jones and Capt. Samantha Weeks.

    in reply to: Future air superiority UCAV #2391565
    mabie
    Participant

    I think we will see UAV/AAV complement manned fighters in the not too distant future already. A son of MALD might be a start.

    Meaning for the air-to-air job not a real unmanned plane, but something that is small and purely air-launched and air-recovered.

    And they probably will not primarily be used as effectors (a la kamikaze), but as a forward based sensor and for ISR, a rearward based line-of-sight network node, and for electronic warfare purposes (jamming, spoofing, &c).

    The holy grail of course is taking them *back aboard*, the ability to re-latch to a pylon in full flight. Otherwise the whole shebang is too expensive.

    That said, it might well be that such a UAV will not use a manned platform for carriage, but an unmanned donkey-RPV which launches them close to the ops area and keeps circling till they are back. And of course a very obvious launch platform are bombers and tankers (yet another secondary job for KC-X) – also for self-protection, btw.

    Another – more kamikaze like mission – would be to pack a dozen or so of them onto a large missile (from ATACMS upwards) and launch them deep into enemy territory.

    Wouldn’t it be simpler to give them A2A refueling capability? Images of the parasite fighter come to mind..

    in reply to: Future air superiority UCAV #2391774
    mabie
    Participant

    True. But do they go for large wing loitering UCAvs or swept wing fighter types?
    even though the tech is new they still will be subject to the laws of physics.
    If they are to take over the fighter role they they will need to be fast and agile. if they are strikers then they need to loiter. How do you get around this?

    Probably both using morphing wing technology.

    in reply to: Combat involving multiple aircrafts #2391813
    mabie
    Participant

    Correct about the few Cannon kills, but the Israeli pilots admitted they wanted feel the classical way and spare the expensive “heater”. In short all kills over the Bekaa were AAM ones in general. 😉

    it probably had something to do with bragging rights as well. A kill using guns was cherished most by Israeli pilots.

    in reply to: UK to ditch F-35B for F-35C? #2393297
    mabie
    Participant

    Is there any benefit in terms of SRVL reducing stress on the engines to extend their operational life and/or cut costs?

    in reply to: F-35 News Thread III #2396411
    mabie
    Participant
Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 529 total)