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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message ... In message , Kevin Brooks writes "John Cook" wrote in message .. . I've tried, and so far I can't find a single reference to an F-22 dropping any Bombs (JDAM or dumb), in fact theres only one recorded ground attack on record for the F-22 and that was due to a PIO error. Your whining is ceaseless in this regard. The USAF says the F/A-22 is JDAM capable. LMCO says it is JDAM capable. Hell, even Wikipedia says it is JDAM capable, IIRC! It flew the JDAM-capable Block 3.1 software back in 2002. You don't think it is JDAM capable--seems like you are in a distinct minority. When was the release clearance granted? "Capable" can mean as little as "1760 bus, and 14-inch lugs stressed for the weight". Sometimes it can mean less than that. Eight years ago I helped with a request from an aircraft manufacturer who for years had been widely advertising their maritime-patrol aircraft as "Sting Ray capable": it was only when they had a potential sale to a Sting Ray user that they bothered to talk to the manufacturer to find out what that claim would actually *mean* and what modifications to the weapon carriers were needed so that the potential customer could put their torpedoes on the aircraft. The sale didn't go through, they never modified the aircraft, it couldn't use Sting Ray as is, and yet it's *still* listed as Sting Ray capable despite the fact that it could only haul the torpedoes as jettisonable ballast: couldn't preset them, arm them or have them start up once in the water. (Maybe they could get the parachutes to open after release, but that's all) So take 'capable' with a generous pinch of salt. I'm sure the dummy JDAMs fit the bay: hopefully the wiring harnesses reach the relevant connectors within the snatch cone and with the correct lanyard angle, there are EMRUs or similar for the arming wires, and the drop characteristics have been properly explored to ensure the weapons will leave the bay cleanly across a range of airspeeds and attitudes (a frequent problem with bay-mounted weapons in fast jets). However, there's nothing mentioning any of this on the Web that I could find, other than the cheerful comment that the F-22 is 'JDAM capable'. Some flight and drop tests would help turn the notional "capability" into operational utility... so when were they carried out? Ask the USAF. I trust them a bit further in this regard than I do the peanut gallery. The software that is capable of handling the JDAM has been flying for a couple of years now; Arnold has done wind tunnel tests of the separation characteristics, and the F/A-22 was listed as one of the platforms to receive clearance in a fact sheet dated June 03 ( www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=108). Even Mr. Cook has acknowledged that dummy drop tests were conducted. Let's see--software is in place, dummy tests have been conducted...yep, seems like it is indeed capable of delivering the puppy. The USAF says the F/A-22 will be able to carry JDAM's when it enters into operational front-line service with 1st TFW--if you disagree, take it up with them. Brooks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|