A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Naval Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

USAF considers new anti-ship weapon.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #25  
Old November 6th 05, 04:29 PM
Fred J. McCall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default USAF considers new anti-ship weapon.

Michael Kelly wrote:

:Fred J. McCall wrote:
:
: :Just as likely that there's a little bad blood after the Air Force
: :changed its preference to WCMD-ER over JSOW, same range,
:
: Wrong. Shorter range.
:
:Just going off of what I've seen in the office.

"The WCMD-ER system adds a wing kit to the GPS version of the WCMD
tail kit to obtain a range of 30-40 miles."
-- http://www.f-16.net/f-16_news_article665.html

"The JSOW is a family of affordable, highly lethal weapons
revolutionizing strike warfare. This new generation glide weapon
ensures warfighter survivability by enabling precision air strike
launches from well beyond most enemy air defenses, at kinematic
standoff ranges up to 70 nm (130 km)."
http://www.raytheon.com/products/ste...s01_055754.pdf

Last I checked 70 is bigger than 40.

: :lower cost and
:
: Paper weapons are always cheap.
:
:Except WCMD-ER's are being dropped and integrated at Eglin right now.
:Probably only on paper though. It did get zeroed on my platform to pay
:for other upgrades.

I thought it got zeroed everywhere (although USAF was trying to get
some money put back for it). Did they get it refunded? Last I heard
they'd given up asking for procurement funds for '06 and were trying
to eke out $20-ish million to finish development.

Until it IOCs it's still a paper weapon.

: :much more bang for the buck.
:
: Especially when it's cut back to zero bucks.
:
:A strap on kit is more cost effective than a brand new weapon,
:especially when its a modification of a currently low cost guidance that
:straps on to the back end of a dumb bomb.

It's only more cost effective if you actually get to procure them.
Any time you start slapping things on bombs, that *is* effectively a
brand new weapon. Radical changes in aerodynamic behaviour. That's
why there are development programs for this stuff.

--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Air Ops North Atlantic - Ron Knott Greasy Rider© @invalid.com Naval Aviation 1 June 4th 05 06:52 PM
Naval Air Refueling Needs Deferred in Air Force Tanker Plan Henry J Cobb Military Aviation 47 May 22nd 04 03:36 AM
THOMAS MOORER, EX-JOINT CHIEFS CHAIR DIES Ewe n0 who Naval Aviation 4 February 21st 04 09:01 PM
THOMAS MOORER, EX-JOINT CHIEFS CHAIR DIES Ewe n0 who Military Aviation 2 February 12th 04 12:52 AM
P-47/51 deflection shots into the belly of the German tanks,reality ArtKramr Military Aviation 131 September 7th 03 09:02 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.