dark light

Lightndattic

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 349 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Typhoon In The Falklands, Argentine Enraged? #2438534
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    IIRC, The Typhoons that are being deployed to the Falklands are Tranche1 meaning air to air operations only (maybe A-G carrying dumb bomb or strafing). I also read that the F3’s are being boxed up and shipped home, not flown.

    in reply to: Nations weapons types and quantities #2415466
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    FAS.org is a good source on weapons of all sorts.

    in reply to: Drop Tanks #2456893
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    One last request, I’ve seen information on the B-1B pointing to six external fuel tanks and at least one bomb bay tank for ferry flights. Does anyone have specifics on that?

    There are external hardpoints, but I’ve never heard if they were plumbed for fuel. There is a fuel tank that can take the place of weapons in a weapons bay.

    in reply to: F-22B #2460962
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    What happened to the anti-satellite role of the F-15, will that be reroled to the Raptor. Also does the Mig-31 still perform this role?

    After the successful intercept, the project was shelved. The Mig-31 ASAT never got past concept phase although a couple of aircraft were partially modified with a solid nose and winglets.

    I don’t think the raptor would be modified into an ASAT carrier, at least not with the ASM-135. A better option would be to use the AL-1 to target satellites with it’s laser.

    in reply to: F-22B #2460964
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    two twins one port one starbord gives you four more missiles 😉

    Each of the 4 pylons can hold a twin launcher for a total of 8 external -120s. I’d HATE to see the scenario that would need that loadout, though.

    in reply to: Drop Tanks #2461595
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    One thing I found interesting was the picture of the Raptors interceptong Bears with ext. fuel tanks – does this mean the Raptors on alert always have ext tanks – seems strange that an aircraft designed to intercept Russian aircraft using stealth, has to compromise stealth in order to get to the Bears! May as well stuck with F-15s

    The Alert F-22’s don’t HAVE to carry the tanks, but they do in order to purposefully compromise their L/O signature. If they were to intercept a bear clean, then it’s possible for them to extrapolate the true RCS of the raptor in different aspects from the tail gun radar. In a shooting war, the raptors would either launch clean or punch the takes to be clean well before they get within range of any of the bear’s sensors.

    in reply to: Drop Tanks #2462650
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    1 nit-pic about the list for the B-52… The C through F models used the 3000 gallon externals. The G and H models use 700 gallon externals. The new “wet wing” introduced on the G model and carried over to the H, increased internal fuel enough that the large externals ere no longer needed.

    in reply to: F/A-18G Growler #2465273
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    I remember seeing something in the initial stories about the RAAF superbug deal that it WAS a stopgap measure and they would likely be bought back by the USN once the F-35 was operational. The theory being the USN would be happy to get relatively low hour, few arrested landing block 20 superbugs at about the time the first USN airframes were wearing out. Remember, the RAAF F-35 wasn’t meant to replace the legacy F-18 like the USN plans… it was to replace the F-111 while the legacy hornets were rebuilt and re-used.

    in reply to: F-35D #2466680
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    Really, at this stage only Japan and/or Israel are the only viable customers at this point……………

    IIRC Australia was interested, but switched to JSF when they were told no.

    in reply to: Impressive Weapons Load 2 (again) #2466916
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    Anybody know if the current production Eagles have the kinks worked out on the outer pylons? (They’ve never been used due to flutter IIRC even though they’re there in every Eagle AFAIK.)

    That’s the first time I’ve seen those carry anything other than an ECM pod. I’m dying to know too.

    in reply to: Impressive Weapons Load 2 (again) #2467088
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    and 26 Mk-82 on the F-15…

    1Saludo

    I only count 16- 4 MER (left & right wings, centerline and right conformal; doesn’t appear to have a rack on the left conformal) loaded with 4 each. That looks like the development F-15B that became the F-15E demonstrator testing carriage options. Notice the MER on the right (top in that pic) conformal, instead of the 6 pylons built into the conformal that became standard on the E.

    On closer inspection, it looks like the MER I thought was on the left wing is actually on the left conformal like the right, but I don’t see anything on a left wing pylon.

    in reply to: F-35D #2467090
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    Silly question, but weren’t there ideas of the liftfan being replaced with some sorta generator sometime in the future to provide power for some sorta directed energy weapon or laser?

    That has been thrown out there a time or 2. Just waiting for solid state lasers to mature.

    in reply to: F-35D #2467096
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    While, the F-35 doesn’t have the visibility of the F-16 Viper. It is hardly blind either………..

    That’s the A model. The Navy’s C model will have the same view, but the B’s rearward vision IS restricted by the mold line differences for the lift fan.

    in reply to: Unusual Sidewinder mountings… #2485337
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    Thats not an AIM-9. Looks more like a FFAR.

    It’s an AIM-9, it just doesn’t have the front fins. FFAR’s don’t leave that much smoke as they are fired. Must have been a test of concept firing of an unguided round.

    in reply to: Condition of B-52s #2498048
    Lightndattic
    Participant

    An “I don’t know” would have sufficed. 😉 (Or are you seriously suggesting an A380 broke Mach 1?)

    Seeing as how the 747 was tested to M 0.98, it’s not unreasonable to think the A380 was tested to a similar top speed.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 349 total)