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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"R. David Steele" wrote in message ... Should we be thinking of using the FB-22 Raptor as a replacement for the F/A-18 (and the F-14)? I know that the current F-22 was not designed to be heavy enough for naval use, but it could be re-engineered. They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future. Why not upgrade it then? This way there would be cross over between the FB-22 and the F-35 (engines especially). Also why not market the C-17 to the air freight community? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Should we be thinking of using the FB-22 Raptor as a replacement
for the F/A-18 (and the F-14)? I know that the current F-22 was not designed to be heavy enough for naval use, but it could be re-engineered. They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future. Why not upgrade it then? Not as easy as it sounds, re-engineering usually involves rather extensive redesign of the internal structures. The F-111 was designed multi-service from the get-go and we all know what a raging success the B model was. Do you really believe a fighter will carry 60,000 pounds of ordnance or is that a typo? R / John |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
R. David Steele wrote:
Should we be thinking of using the FB-22 Raptor as a replacement for the F/A-18 (and the F-14)? The Navy looked at adapting the original F-22 under the Naval Advanced Tactical Fighter program in the late 80s and early 90s. The work needed for the conversion was too much and the design ended up being basically the same engines and avionics in a new aircraft. For example, they needed swing wings to get the aproach speed down to carrier limits. The FB-22 strikes me as having some real problems in carrier compatability, even compared totthe base F-22. What's the approach speed of a heavy tailess delta like that, for example? -- Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail "If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed) |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 04:20:49 GMT, R. David Steele
wrote: Should we be thinking of using the FB-22 Raptor as a replacement for the F/A-18 (and the F-14)? I know that the current F-22 was We already have a replacement for the F-14 in service - the F/A-18E/F. The switch-over is well underway already. Since the F/A-18E/F is brand new, it won't need replacement for a long time yet. not designed to be heavy enough for naval use, but it could be re-engineered. They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future. 30x2000 pound bombs? Twice the payload of the B-2....very impressive. Why not upgrade it then? Because you can't just "upgrade" the aircraft to be carrier capable. This was studied a long time ago. The "upgrade" would be a complete redesign of the aircraft, which would be very expensive and time consuming, and entirely unnecessary. -- Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself" "Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today, Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/ |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 14:36:35 GMT, R. David Steele
wrote: The F-35 is basically the same plane as the F-22. It has been modified to be a carrier aircraft. Huh? The F-35 is absolutely nothing like the F-22. The F-35 was not "modified" to be a carrier aircraft, it was DESIGNED AS a carrier aircraft. -- Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself" "Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today, Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/ |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
R. David Steele wrote:
The F-35 is basically the same plane as the F-22. It has been modified to be a carrier aircraft. Nonsense. The F-35 only has some cosmetic resemblance to the F-22. It was designed from the ground up as a carrier aircraft and is very different internally. The C-17 was marketed to commercial users with the government offering incentives. The plane has design elements for its military missions that make it less economical to operate in the civilian world that civil designs. What is its civilian reference. It used to be called the MD-17, and is now marketed as the BC-17X. http://www.boeing.com/commercial/pd/bc17x/index.html -- Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail "If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed) |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"R. David Steele" wrote in message ... |The Tomcat is gone quicker than you can think.... |There is a big push by CNO to axe the F-14 sooner than planned, like |now is too late...watch and see. | |The F/A-18 (I assume you mean the B/C/D models) already has a |replacement, E/F. I don't think you are following current Naval |Aviation very well. | |There is no need to replace the E/F Hornet, it will be pulling |fighter/CAP/FAC/Bomber/tanker etc. duties for the next 10 years. |Totally capable of performing all the above, with no current or future |enemy threat that can match it. Yes, I am aware that the E/F variants are the upgrade to the current F/A-18 and the F-14. However by the time the FB-22 is online, even those versions will be dated. Less dated than the F-22. You are not considering the F-22's two greatest flaws, the pre-96 Ada and the Mil-spec components. The entire procurement of the F/A-18E is a generation ahead of the F-22. Remember that we are planning for a war with China by the end of the decade. What is the ability of the Chinese aircraft. Non-sequitur. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Tony wrote: "R. David Steele" wrote in message ... They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future. And to think that the B2 only carries 16 2000 lb bombs. Well then go one step further. B2N. Take one B2. put joints in the wings where they fold up like a F4U corsair. Put an arrestor hook on it. Doolittle would like it. Anyone want to photoshop a prototype up? Bob -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
R. David Steele writes: | They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber | version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future. | |Umm, not 30 x 2000 lb bombs. 30 x SDBs (small diameter bombs), that weigh |about 265 lbs each. Yes, I checked that out http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...raft/fb-22.htm | Also why not market the C-17 to the air freight community? | |Because the C-17 couldn't compete in the mainstream commercial air freight |business. Costs way too much when compared to 747s and such. From what I have read, the C-17 should be cost effective. After all the design costs are already paid for. And it is far less expensive to run than the C-5. But it it more cost-effective than the Il-76s and An-224s that are already in the market? Those have been already built & paid for. -- Pete Stickney A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures. -- Daniel Webster |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
This has been mooted, either as is or in a civil variant, at various
times. For some of the issues involved you might wish to read "C-17 -- How to Get More for Less": http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA357811 It's about 2 meg. And not a new idea, either. I was leafing through the FAA Type Dertificate Data Sheets one day, and discovered that the Lockheed C-141 had been certificated for civilian use. McD had been marketing the civil C-17 as the MD-17. Ron Tanker 65, C-54E (DC-4) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"C-175 SoCal Beware" Original Poster Replies | Bill Berle | Aviation Marketplace | 8 | July 8th 04 07:01 AM |
More LED's | Veeduber | Home Built | 19 | June 9th 04 10:07 PM |
Replace fabric with glass | Ernest Christley | Home Built | 38 | April 17th 04 11:37 AM |
RAN to get new LSD class vessel to replace 5 logistic vessels ... | Aerophotos | Military Aviation | 10 | November 3rd 03 11:49 PM |
Air Force to replace enlisted historians with civilians | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 1 | October 22nd 03 09:41 AM |