shoots brah where did you find that on the E model?
From a typical “fantasy alternate-future” fan-site.
Someone took the Northrop YF-23 planform and merged it with the F-35 and wrote out a completely fictional story to go with it.
It doesn’t exist, nor will it.
I still downloaded it to my files, though. 😀
She’s not leaking… she’s just “marking her territory”.


I had been reading of questions as to whether the first-of-class, QE, could make the planned ISD of 2014 anyway… that the contracts that had been awarded in October were on the schedule for ~7 years before ISD… which would put the ISD in mid-2015 without any pushbacks or the normal FOC “unplanned difficulties”.
It seems to me that this is actually more of an official acknowledgement of reality rather than an artificial delay in the program.
That link to a C-47 restoration didn’t seem helpful, so lets try this:
http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=26269
The assumption seemed appropriate… considering he listed the “Radius of lethality” in KM ONLY!
I expected he would be trying to show a comparable set of numbers, rather than throw out numbers in two differing and incompatible measurement systems without any attempt to relate them.
Obviously, I was mistaken (if your interpretation is correct).
Let’s also not forget the Super Hornet would hardly work alone either.
E-2C/D; EA-6B/EA-18G, satellite tracking/recon, etc.
Do any of you know what an IMB 360 is?
The IBM System/360 (S/360) is a mainframe computer system family announced by IBM on April 7, 1964. It was the first family of computers making a clear distinction between architecture and implementation, allowing IBM to release a suite of compatible designs at different price points.
In the early 1970s it was chosen (in a repackaged form) to be the heart of the new A-6E Intruder’s integrated attack-navigation system.
The same computer was still running them when they were retired from USN service in 1999.
We joked about it being obsolete in the 1980s when I was a USMC avionics tech on A-6Es… many of us had PCs then that had more RAM and greater processing speed.
I’m not worried about the F-22 at all.
but few unconfirmed report i repeat unconfirmed reports that Air intakes will also see some changes .
F404 airflow: 142-146 lb/sec
Inlet diameter 27.7″
F414 airflow: 169 lb/sec
Inlet diameter 30.6″
Maximum diameter of both: 35″
17% increase in air-mass flow may not be much, but enough to require different intake size/geometry.
Honest John M31 was deployed in 1954 with a range of 12 miles.
The improved M50 version was deployed in 1960 and had a longer range.

Little John M51 was deployed in 1961, and had a range of 18.2 km (11.3 miles), with a variable-yield W-45 nuclear fission (1-10 kT) warhead.
a range of 2.5/1.24miles
Ummm… this cannot be correct.
It is either 2.5km/1.56mi, or 2.0km/1.25mi.*
8 kilometers = 5 miles (approximately).
1 meter = 3.28 feet. 1 km = 3,280 feet. 1 mile = 5,280 feet. 1 km = .62 miles.
EDIT: *the latter…
The Davy Crockett could be launched from either of two launchers: the 4-inch (102 mm) M28, with a range of about 1.25 mi (2 km), or the 6-in (155 mm) M29, with a range of 2.5 mi (4 km).
The M-388 round used a version of the W54 warhead, a very small sub-kiloton fission device. The Mk-54 weighed about 51 lb (23 kg), with a selectable yield of 10 or 20 tons (very close to the minimum practical size and yield for a fission warhead) up to 0.5 kiloton.
Call me a ‘Murican heretic… but my thought on seeing the thread title was “a chromed Pratt & Whitney?”. 😀
No, the MOD isn’t considering it… the RAF Chief is proposing it as a way to save money… and the RN Chief is threatening to resign if it is done!
From The Sunday Times
December 7, 2008
Head of Royal Navy threatens resignation over push to scrap Harriers
Michael Smith
THE RAF is trying to use a major cash crisis within the Ministry of Defence to get rid of the Fleet Air Arm, defence sources said last week.
Its campaign, which is being fought under the slogan “one nation, one air force”, has led to the head of the Royal Navy, First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Jonathon Band threatening to resign.
Air Marshal Sir Glenn Torpy, chief of air staff, is attempting to push through proposals to scrap the 75 Harrier jump jets currently shared between the navy and the air force.
Torpy believes that the lack of a carrier-borne attack aircraft until the first of the new aircraft carriers comes into service, now 2015 at the earliest, will not be a problem.
He argues that with the main focus of UK military operations for the next decade likely to be land-locked Afghanistan, there is no current need for carrier-borne aircraft.
When the new carriers come into service the RAF can fly the Joint Strike Fighters that are currently due to fly off them.
Scrapping the Harriers five years early in 2013 is seen as a relatively painless way of saving £1bn, the cost of keeping the aircraft flying.
The £1bn is what the National Audit Office says will be the cost of two Harrier support contracts, one with BAE Systems and the other with engine supplier Rolls Royce.
It is the only aircraft support contract that has yet to be signed so the MoD could decide not to go ahead with it without incurring penalty clauses.
Getting rid of the Harriers will also lead to the closure of the Joint Harrier Force base at RAF Cottesmore in Rutland, adding to the cost savings.
Torpy is thought to have the support of Air Marshal Jock Stirrup, the chief of defence staff, for the measure which is set to lead to a major clash between the RAF and the navy.
But senior naval sources said last week that Band will resign if the RAF proposals are pushed through. “He’s had enough,” one said. “The navy has been cut and cut and cut again to get the carriers.”
The conflict comes amid what the sources said was the worst inter-service fighting since Labour’s notorious “east of Suez” defence cuts of the mid-1960s.
Band is furious that the navy is taking the brunt of the cutbacks caused by a £2bn black hole in the defence budget, the sources said.
John Hutton, defence secretary, will announce this week that the navy’s cherished two aircraft carriers will be delayed by up to two years.
The navy agreed to a string of cuts to its ship numbers to keep the carriers and is now facing not only the loss of all its fixed-wing aircraft but also major cuts to its submarine force.
One of a number of options designed to save money involves the accelerated retirement of the navy’s current Trafalgar-class attack submarines and delays to the Astute replacements.
This would leave the navy with only four attack submarines for the five years between 2020 and 2025, compared to the current eight.
It has also been told its new frigates, known as the future surface combatants, have been indefinitely postponed and plans to get rid of aging Type-22 frigates have been scrapped.
Hutton has told the defence chiefs that they must come up with a final plan to save the £2bn shortfall by a meeting of the defence board on Friday December 19.
The Ministry of Defence declined to comment on the issue ahead of Hutton’s anticipated announcement this week.
The numbers were originally put on during flight testing at the factory, they just weren’t cleaned off properly & tended to show up for quite some time.
Dave
Ahhh, the other “paint scheme” decision…
pristine factory paint-job or worn, “in-use” look.
Hmmm… 6 1/2 months ago they said “may”… and nothing since.
Sounds like there has been no formal decision to change, they are just considering different possible options.