Read the forum code of contact
By: - 22nd September 2009 at 17:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yet another fallout of getting their butts kicked by MKIs at Cope India.
I'm sure you know it but the ROE's at Cope india, or do you mean they are capitalizing on the percieved failings and subsequent fallout from Cope India?
By: - 23rd September 2009 at 01:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
IRST's were common for interceptors of the 60's. So basically it's playing catch up.
By: - 23rd September 2009 at 01:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What country is Boeing quoting about the Silent Eagle and industrial participation?!
To fit a sensor pod to the F-15C/D is nothing special and a constant option. Even some targeting pods were used for that purpose by different fighters and some restrictions about the field of view of cause.
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/mfc/Photos/MFC_IRST-ProductCard.pdf
By: - 23rd September 2009 at 07:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Looks like USAF found some money to upgrade the old dogs. Yet another fallout of getting their butts kicked by MKIs at Cope India.I don't think that it has anything to do with Cope India. In an older DTI issue about Elmendorf F 15, there is a mention that those Golden Eagle will have an anti-cruise missile role. Cruise missiles fly at low level in dense air and will be easily visible in 9-12 µm band of the AAS 42.
Also in the article an equally interesting piece of information: it's possible for the F 15 C to skip the APG 63(V)3 and to jump directly to the APG 82(V)1 (the AESA retrofit for the F 15 E). The 82 would have way more powerfull processors (those of APG 79) and it would be cheaper. The only problem will be, probably, a delay in IOC.
By: - 23rd September 2009 at 07:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What country is Boeing quoting about the Silent Eagle and industrial participation?!The link you posted shows the "Shadow" poded version of the AAS 42. It is designed primarily for F16 and it's based on a modified Pathfinder navigation pod and actually mounted at the same station of the F 16that house the navigation pod. According to the article the F 15C will have the same AAS 42 version that was delivered to SK on the F 15 K (as a segment of the Tiger Eye suite, the IRST is mounted inside the pylon holding the LANTIRN targeting pod-of course this one won't be necessary on a "C"):
To fit a sensor pod to the F-15C/D is nothing special and a constant option. Even some targeting pods were used for that purpose by different fighters and some restrictions about the field of view of cause.http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/mfc/Photos/MFC_IRST-ProductCard.pdf
By: - 23rd September 2009 at 10:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Tiger Eyes IRST pod.
Funny thing is, the IRST is integrated onto a drop tank. That's right, a drop tank. You don't wanna jettison this heat detector.
By: - 23rd September 2009 at 10:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Tiger Eyes IRST pod.That's not the Tiger Eyes. TE is for F 15 K and F 15 SG and has, aside the IRST, the Lantirn navigation pod and the Lantirn targeting pod for S. Korea (Sniper targeting pod for Singapore). You can see it in the post above. What you attached is the new IRST on the SuperHornet. And yes, it wasn't the brightest solution, just the less expensive one - Boeing will not be forced to make structural changes in the nose of F 18 E/F.
Funny thing is, the IRST is integrated onto a drop tank. That's right, a drop tank. You don't wanna jettison this heat detector.
By: - 23rd September 2009 at 16:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I just fail to see why they didn't place it on one of the intakes, opposite to the FLIR pod....
The SH really seems to be the plane of all band aids :confused:
By: - 23rd September 2009 at 16:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That is easy Frank. If they drop the tank, they do not make it back to the carrier. :D
By: - 23rd September 2009 at 17:12 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Tiger Eyes IRST pod.Other funny thing is, is the quote on the picture: "The World leader In IRST Technology"....I guess they are when they stick it into a drop tank where as some from Europe & Russia have IRST internal on their aircraft, Typhoon, Rafale, Mig-29/35, SU-27, 36 etc etc...Makes me giggle that picture. :diablo:
Funny thing is, the IRST is integrated onto a drop tank. That's right, a drop tank. You don't wanna jettison this heat detector.
By: - 23rd September 2009 at 17:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Other funny thing is, is the quote on the picture: "The World leader In IRST Technology"....I guess they are when they stick it into a drop tank where as some from Europe & Russia have IRST internal on their aircraft, Typhoon, Rafale, Mig-29/35, SU-27, 36 etc etc...Makes me giggle that picture. :diablo:
The drop tank is merely the housing for the IRST and does not reflect on the actual quality of the IRST itself which should be an advancment from current systems in use.
By: - 23rd September 2009 at 21:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The drop tank is merely the housing for the IRST and does not reflect on the actual quality of the IRST itself which should be an advancment from current systems in use.
could is a more appropriate word;)
By: - 23rd September 2009 at 21:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
could is a more appropriate word;)
When you factor in how extremely capable the previous existing version of this system was it makes you think that this this new updated version should certainly be in with a good chance of being a leader in its group.
By: - 24th September 2009 at 01:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The SH really seems to be the plane of all band aids :confused:
Kind of reflects the company itself.
By: - 24th September 2009 at 03:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Other funny thing is, is the quote on the picture: "The World leader In IRST Technology"....I guess they are when they stick it into a drop tank where as some from Europe & Russia have IRST internal on their aircraft, Typhoon, Rafale, Mig-29/35, SU-27, 36 etc etc...Makes me giggle that picture. :diablo:
This may come as a shock to some but it's not like the US has never had IRSTs in the proper location. The F-8 Crusader, F-101, F-102, F-106, F-4, and F-14 come to mind. Hell, the YF-12A had TWO. Leave it to the damn Super Hornet to screw it up.
By: - 24th September 2009 at 03:57 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Does it require big redisgn ? The Lockheed guys put one in pretty easily in an F 16 for the UAE. Then again UAE paid for it.
By: - 24th September 2009 at 04:03 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Does it require big redisgn ? The Lockheed guys put one in pretty easily in an F 16 for the UAE. Then again UAE paid for it.
Obsolescence is an issue when attempting to repair old items or restart an assembly line. I would guess that the microcircuits for the 1980s vintage FPA converter and motor controls are no longer made. This means the electronics would need to be redesigned for current production parts you can buy from a catalog, instead of relying on questionable heritage parts obtained from surplus dealers or eBay.
By: - 24th September 2009 at 04:57 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This may come as a shock to some but it's not like the US has never had IRSTs in the proper location. The F-8 Crusader, F-101, F-102, F-106, F-4, and F-14 come to mind. Hell, the YF-12A had TWO. Leave it to the damn Super Hornet to screw it up.You can add that the world's first operational IRST was on F 101 (it was in 1961).
By: - 24th September 2009 at 06:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I'm surprised they never developed a big eye IR-homing missile that could dump it's information to the IRST to double it's effort. That could be like carrying two. But even now, with the existing Sidewinders it would add some serious situation awareness. If you had four external that would be that many more eyes looking out there for threats.
By: - 24th September 2009 at 06:12 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Obsolescence is an issue when attempting to repair old items or restart an assembly line. I would guess that the microcircuits for the 1980s vintage FPA converter and motor controls are no longer made. This means the electronics would need to be redesigned for current production parts you can buy from a catalog, instead of relying on questionable heritage parts obtained from surplus dealers or eBay.
Or they run the old bus to a computerized brain that negotiates between the two technologies, which is how they've always band aided things together. The manufacturer takes a simple microprocessor that's ots, does some low level engineering, then turns around and sticks it to the taxpayer as if he reinvented the wheel.
Posts: 5,396
By: djcross - 22nd September 2009 at 17:15
Looks like USAF found some money to upgrade the old dogs. Yet another fallout of getting their butts kicked by MKIs at Cope India.