Well, considering the Thales Cerberus System doesn’t have a blade/radar interaction problem. Frankly, I see no reason why another similar mounted system would????:confused: :confused:

Altitude and endurance are the most important factors for this kind of survailance. The higher the altitude the better the range of your radar. And endurance for longer time on station.

To achive the best results with a V-22 you would have to tilt the rotors fully forward. In doing so any top or bottom placed antenna would have interferance from the rotors. Possibly to the extent of uselessness.

To fully get away from the problem of rotor interferance you have two options:
1. Mount the antenna in a front and rear manner a la Nimrod AEW. Which apart from beeing extremly ugly would require a rather extencive R&D program strenghtening the airframe, repositioning the refueling probe, repositioning the stabs, (re)testing the handling charateristics etc.

http://www.fas.org/…/sys/ac/row/nimrod_aew3.htm

2. Mount the antenna just like the TOSS but never tilt the rotors fully forward and accept a lower max altitude and less endurance. Unless you are satisfied with only seeing the rear hemisphere.

Given todays political climate, bean counters and forseabel future option 2 seems to be the likely choice.

Don’t the French and Russians have a long rotating arrays that can mount from the bottom of Helocopters in such a role?:rolleyes:

The French Horizon is a battle field survailance platform like JSTARS.
http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/snias_cougar-aew.php

Kamov Ka-31
http://www.acig.org/exclusives/aero/acig_aero05_navy_heli.htm

But you would still have the propblades interfering witht the antenna signals. Maybe if you keep the rotors at say 45 degrees so the rotors dont come under the fuselage. But then you still wont be abel to go as high up as if you tilt the rotors to 90 degrees. Altitude is important for an AEW.

\Dan

One of the more realistic “what-ifs” – LTV A-7F.
Think it would have been a very useful machine.
…

Ad a pointed nose with a A/A radar and you have the ultimate last gunfighter!! 😛

btw YF-23 is my favorite. I would like to see a very similar aircraft in F-5 size with better roll rates :diablo:

Dan

….
gets ramped up so one would think they can figure this out.

DAVIS: BIGGEST JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER PROBLEM IS PRODUCTION COSTS

_______________________________________________

Date: February 22, 2008

…
“We’re scrapping probably 90 percent of the titanium it takes to build these airplanes because of the way the machines cut and drill and shape parts, and we’ve got to figure out what to do with that,” the two-star said. “We’ve got to reduce the cost of what it takes to build these airplanes.”
…

http://defensenewsstand.com

Forgive my ignorence but is it not possibel to remelt the titanium and/or slim down the parts production so you dont waste so much titanium?

\Dan

…
Wasn’t the whole purpose for the S designation to relate to the fact that it’s carrying the “S”parrow missile?

Actually the “S” was supposed to be for “Spey”. The Italians wanted to integrate it but the US said no. But you are still right about the Sparrow beeing used before the Aspide.

/Dan

….

Is the B-1 pilot going to be awarded with a technical kill? j/k

LOL. The cameraman didnt even notice the F-16 tipping over XD

Thx for sharing. ATFS_Crash I always find ur post interesting, now one of them is even funny :diablo:

/Dan

I heard a story of an aircraft (I think it was a U-2 but I’m not positive) …
….

Did you know that we occasionally flew armed reconnaissance missions and in some cases actually exchanged fire with the Soviets with the aircraft like the RB-47?
….

Hi AFTS_Crash.

Nice post. 🙂 I have read about these two stories in a magazine before. But I have never heard anything on the U-2 Glider and RC-130 mission over Armenia before. There is a story about a J-33 (Swedish Air Force Venom) making a similar long deadstick flight back to base. I will try to find some online reference about that.

/Dan