Jump to content
Baseops Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Clark Griswold

Concept aircraft

Recommended Posts

MiG-29K and SU-33, both super shitty versions of the land versions. So wieght limited by the ramp launch, they’re nearly useless. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MiG-29K and SU-33, both super shitty versions of the land versions. So wieght limited by the ramp launch, they’re nearly useless. 

Yeah they leave a lot to be desired compared to other carrier based jets (max weight at carrier launch) but it’s just the point that a land aircraft design if rugged enough can be made carrier suitable. The Sea Gripen is probably not a bridge too far due to original design for STOL & dispersed basing.

What kills them (MiG and Su) in naval ops is the lack of a catapult system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MiG-29K and SU-33, both super shitty versions of the land versions. So wieght limited by the ramp launch, they’re nearly useless. 


Which is why anybody that knew better was laughing at the Russian demonstrations over Syria with the Kuz.

Yeah they flew a few sorties.... then wrecked a plane and immediately emptied the deck of the carrier onto land to fly them off a regular runway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Military version of a supersonic biz jet...

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/17039/lockheed-likely-sees-big-military-applications-potential-in-aerions-supersonic-bizjet

kskfksf42424.jpg?quality=85

message-editor%252F1513572840361-iaiai42

From the article:

By the images released by Aerion, the aircraft looks ideally suited for a weapons bay between the nose wheel gear and the main landing gear—basically where the cabin is located. But even if a relatively tiny set of weapon bay doors or stores ejection system could be fitted into a variant of the type, it could provide a form of regional time sensitive strike capability. And this is a very enticing capability for the U.S. military at this time. Even being able to drop Small Diameter Bomb sized weapons or a single stand-off weapon could provide a flexible and easily deployable quick-strike platform. 

This is a capability we need, supersonic multi-role with loooong legs.

Needs tactical radar, new avionics, new radios, datalink, defensive suite, ELINT/jamming suite, embedded EO/IR sensor, weapons bay, AR mods, e-seats, etc... so that'll be cheap but this would be worth it...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/15/2018 at 9:56 PM, Clark Griswold said:

Aerion is an interesting animal.  From what I can gather, its sole source of funding is its elderly, billionaire owner Robert Bass.

I can't decide if it's a case of someone using their wealth to drive innovation, or a company that's just spinning their wheels while draining their owner's bank account. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beautiful airplane.  Isn't there a YF-23 survivor out there somewhere sitting gate duty? Edwards maybe?

Edwards had one, but it went somewhere with DARPA.

I recall they only built 2 of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little Google fu shows the other prototype sitting outdoors in the Southeast corner of Zamperini Field in Torrance.  Viewable in Google Maps/Earth.  Shame its not indoors.  Looks like the Western Museum of Flight is taking donations to help preserve the airplane.  I'll have to get myself up there one of these days. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Blue said:

Aerion is an interesting animal.  From what I can gather, its sole source of funding is its elderly, billionaire owner Robert Bass.

I can't decide if it's a case of someone using their wealth to drive innovation, or a company that's just spinning their wheels while draining their owner's bank account. 

Didn't know the business story of the company.

Are they (new aviation startups) trying to work like tech start ups - invent or develop something valuable to the market and hope for the company or rights to the design to be bought and produced by an established, larger legacy company vs. having to take the risk of manufacturing yourself to make money? 

5 hours ago, Prozac said:

Beautiful airplane.  Isn't there a YF-23 survivor out there somewhere sitting gate duty? Edwards maybe?

Agreed, clean lines and just look fast.

Another vaporware with YF-23 inspiration:

https://www.snafu-solomon.com/2017/01/kfx-gsc-single-engine-stealth-concept.html

kfX_GSC_3+%25281%2529.jpg

 

kfX_GSC_2.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stealth-ish F-8 Crusader:

FBB8aWI.png

And on concept aircraft from the F-8 / A-7 family:

https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/can-we-learn-something-from-the-defunct-a-7f-strikefig-1591155307

0429_083.jpg

Reading Rogoway's article, the YA-7F sounded like the F-20, great aircraft but not expensive enough for the AF so they shit-canned it.  

There's just a tad bit of cynicism in that sentence but really, why not look for a system that brings quality in a focused mission set and is still affordable enough to buy in quantity?

Focused on the Attack Mission set but capable of self-defense / escort.  

Enough legs that it will not be a high consumer of AR resources.

Survivable enough to augment Air Dominance packages as a missile / jammer platform.

Enough Air to Air capability to perform the Air Sovereignty / Alert Mission.

Edited by Clark Griswold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No but there is/was some similarity... namely affordability, relevance and low technical risk vs. high technical risk, ballooning costs and large support costs in acquisition, MX and AR requirements.

Rogoway said it well in his article:

"By having a one size fits all strategy you get a grossly expensive "overkill" force for 80% of the missions we will face, and an inadequate and design-compromised force for the extremely high-risk 20% of missions that are crucial to our nation's ability to kick down the enemy's door and quickly gain air supremacy. 

In other words, we give up a lot of opportunity cost, not just money, in buying a one-size-fits all high-end fighter force."

A portion of the force that is affordable, no frills and focused on the Attack Mission set but capable of self-defense / air to air is what is needed.  

Now put billions into a modernized YA-7F...

mujvnoiu2fhefolrave4.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 1:10 AM, Clark Griswold said:

Stealth-ish F-8 Crusader:

FBB8aWI.png

And on concept aircraft from the F-8 / A-7 family:

 

They tried this once before, I always thought it would have been a good ac.

 

What is everyone's thought and obviously this is purely hypothetical at this point but if the YF23 had won would MD still be in business as MD today?

 

 

Chance-Vought-XF8U-3-Crusader-III.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, RegularJoe said:

They tried this once before, I always thought it would have been a good ac.

Chance-Vought-XF8U-3-Crusader-III.jpg

Yup, the XF8U-3 had some strong points, from Wiki: "NASA pilots flying at NAS Patuxent River routinely intercepted and defeated U.S. Navy Phantom IIs in mock dogfights, until complaints from the Navy put an end to the harassment." 

As to MD still being an independent corporation?  Unsure but I suspect not, industry trends and tacit gov policy to allow consolidation probably would have had it swallowed up by Big B anyway.

On the subject of 3rd Gen fighter variants:

https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-f-4-phantom-could-have-had-swing-wings-1737201833

1479936255779745424.jpg

 

Edited by Clark Griswold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2018 at 3:36 PM, Prozac said:

A little Google fu shows the other prototype sitting outdoors in the Southeast corner of Zamperini Field in Torrance.  Viewable in Google Maps/Earth.  Shame its not indoors.  Looks like the Western Museum of Flight is taking donations to help preserve the airplane.  I'll have to get myself up there one of these days. 

Yep its still there, I drive by the museum regularly. They used to occasionally open up the cockpit for viewing which was cool even though all of the avionics were stripped out, not sure if they still do. Theres also an ex dual-seat RAF harrier sitting in one of the hangars on the west end of the field

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...