LightndatticThat might be all very well but is the undersized warhead on the R-60 capable of doing much damage to a B-52? If a MiG-31 fires off all 4 APHIDS against a SAC bomber chances are, that only 2 will hit the target and that’s still no guarantee of destruction.
Those small missiles may not bring the bomber down by themselves, but a lot of little holes or damaged engine nacelles add up to greatly reduced performance and range. Remember, any instance where the Foxhound would encounter B-52’s would be quite a distance away from their preferred recovery runway, meaning you likely wouldn’t be facing that aircraft again on a second sortie (granted most likely encounters would be in a full nuclear war in which most aircraft wouldn’t make it back to do a second sortie anyway).
LightndatticDifferent aircraft, different situation. Tornado having issues with it’s design role is FAR different from the F-14 needing assistance to do something it WASN’T designed for.
Actually the situation with the Tornado is exactly the same as the Tomcat. The Tornado wasn’t designed to use PGMs in the Western Europe theater, it was designed to take out airfields with the JP233 or MW-1 or the antiship role in the Baltin/North Sea area.
Also, the F-16s in Norway would have been busy trying to interdict Backfire, Bears and Blinders rounding the cape trying to hit CVBGs in the N Atlantic.
As for the USAFE numbers, while it’s true that the numbers of units stationed there were not impressive compared to WP forces, the numbers that would have been sent in from their bases in the CONUS was.
I do know the main priorities for the USAF in the event of a battle in the Western Europe theater would be:
1. Strategic alert of all nuclear forces, likely even to the point of dispersing FB-111s to forward bases, and possibly airborne alert for the B-52’s.
2. Getting all the Tacair assets to Europe ASAP.
3. Transporting REFORGER units to Europe.
LightndatticI havent seen reliable date for the SH, but its said to have less range than planned. I have read 11% more than a legacy Hornet which is far less than the requirement was (40% more I think). Wikipedia currently says 350sm.
For the Strike Eagle i honestly dont know, but you can be sure it has the longest legs of all US fighters – with CFTs.
The Raptor has a subsonic radius of almost 600 miles: http://www.afa.org/magazine/jan2005/0105raptor.asp
The F-35 is said to have a “600+nm” radius, taken from JSF program brief at jsf.mil. Actually, I have also seen much less than 600 miles for the Raptor which is no wonder. It carries not much more fuel but has two engines with higher bypass ratio compared to the smaller single engined F-35 with lower bypass ratio.
I thought the F119 has a lower bypass ratio than the F-135? Since Turbojets (or leaky turbojets like the F119) perform better at high altitude than true turbofans like the F100 ot F110, it’s more suited to the Raptor’s likely flight envelope.
LightndatticDetachable you mean? On the close up of the J10 line from the right, there is no evidence of a compartment for a retractable IFR probe. But there does seem to be a neat little hole just about where you expect one to be. Looks like its of a similar design to those used on the J8s (which would make sense) and is a fixed detachable IFR probe.
It looks like these panels cover the internal workings of the detachable IFR probe.
LightndatticGotta admit that’s a hell of a sexy plane. Glad to see the Lavi finally make it into service.
😀
Is it just me or do the proportions of the J-10 just look wrong? The forward fuselage looks too small for the rest of the airframe; or the rear from the cockpit back it too large and slab-sided. The intake looks like it’s too far forward and the 2 ventral fins just look odd with the angle they stick out. I guess I just keep seeing the F-16 crosses with the X-31, which to me looked odd and too boxy as well.
The Rafale and Typhoon pull off the delta canard beautifully, but the J-10 just looks awkward to me.
LightndatticCan anyone make out the number on the ship in the video? It does look like the F-18’s sitting on the waist cats were launched, but who’s to say they were the alert 5 aircraft scrambling after the UAV.
Without positive ID of the ship, it could be any stock footage of a Nimitz carrier, albeit recent footage as there are no turkeys on deck.
LightndatticI’m not sure about the reduction tech, but the F-22 has a much smaller RCS than the F-35. While the F-22 has all-aspect stealth, the F-35’s stealth band is limited by the inlet and nozzle design.
One other thing to remember about the Raptor’s and Lightning’s stealth coatings- they are not maintained every day. The F-22 has as part of it’s maintenance avionics the ability to estimate it’s RCS as a percentage of it’s lowest possible signature. The signature is allowed to age and deteriorate through daily operation to a certain point and then the signature group restores it, usually during periodic maintenance. In the event of a combat deployment, the first thing done it get all the aircraft deploying into the signature repair process to restore full stealth. This drastically reduces the cost and effort to maintain it’s stealth coatings so much, the process is being implemented with the B-2. The lightning would likely use similar, but evolved processes developed for the F-22 which is based on the lessons learned from the B-2.
I remember reading that somewhere (Code One Magazine, Av Week, etc.) but can’t find it again.
LightndatticIs that a single lever for both engines? Can you not adjust power separately?
LightndatticMaybe you could explain how 1. a Cobra is going to take you from being 10 miles in front of an enemy aircraft to his “six” and 2. How the Flanker is suppose to know when to perform a Cobra when he doesn’t know he’s being looked at? I guess he just flip flops all over the sky huh “just in case”? Maybe you should rename the Flanker and call it the John Kerry in your comic book.
Or the aerial equivalent of a “Crazy Ivan”?
You’re right though… only an insanely stupid pilot would have so much overtake on his opponent to allow a cobra type maneuver to close the distance before realizing it. Even if you’re hauling butt with a bone in your teeth to kill the flanker, once his nose goes up, yours should as well so that when he’s finished the maneuver and falling out of the sky with zero airspeed, you’re on a high perch ready to pounce. Even if in the brief instant he’s got his nose pointed backwards or can see you with a HMS/HOBS heater, that missile is at a disadvantage since it doesn’t have the aircraft’s forward airspeed to add to it’s range. Personally, if I was a raptor or lightning pilot stalking Mr. Flanker, I’d pray that he’d do something like that. It’ll just make him meat on a stick.
LightndatticI saw a doco on the C5 on I think Discovery Ch.not long ago, It showed a C5 being refueled over the Indian Ocean at night ,it looked like a hairy experience ,those blokes really know their stuff.It took some time for them to hook up, & I was wondering what would happen if either plane made a mistake & the C5 had been speared through the fuselage by the tanker . Has this ever happened, I think planes have been unable to unhook from a Drogue but I dont know the aftermath of it.
Here’s one I can comment on…. As standard training for A-A refueling, both the receiver and tanker practice breakaway maneuvers where the tanker goes to full power and climbs while the receiver drops power and descends. With properly trained crews, it’s very effective at avoiding disasters, with one notable exception that I do know about (the B-52, KC-135 Crome Dome mission mishap over Spain where both aircraft were lost and 4 nuclear weapons were temporarily lost).
I personally have been on 3 flights in tankers (2 KC-10 and 1 KC-135) where I have witnessed both from the refueling station in the tanker and the receiver cockpit the whole refueling procedure. The offloading operation was very straightforward as the boomers on those flights were old pros refueling fighters (those guys make it look so easy), but 1 KC-10 flight where I was in the IP jumpseat behind the pilot while being refueled by another KC-10 with a rookie boomer was not so smooth. I swear that kid on the boom was trying to scrape every bit of the blue paint off the top of the KC-10 while trying to plug us. Eventually he got it done, but it was VERY disconcerting hearing something bang and scrape along the top of your aircraft; especially when there’s no easy way out if something does go wrong.
LightndatticGive me a CTOL, GE, big wing, landbased gear, probe & drogue refueling, internal gun, AMRAAM , 9X, JDAM, SDB, JASSM. And a couple of KC-130J’s to refuel and support.
LightndatticLast standard Kurnass went 1994.
Kurnass 2000 and RF-4E Oref retired May 2004. They were replaced by F-16I.
No F-4s in service anymore with Israel?
LightndatticThey’ll make good pre and post strike tankers for the F-35’s. 😀
LightndatticCurrently watching the livestream and the 1st flight is delayed an hour or so due to fog at FW.
You’re part of the industry team, right? Or are you watching a feed everyone else can see too?
LightndatticEspecially the British are pushing hard for this. They are the driving force behind the integration of a2g weapons. The Typhoon is a replacement for Jaguars in British service, and Tornados in German service.
I thought the Typhoon in German service was replacing the F-4F, not the Tornados?
Sign In
