Boeing Phantom Works unveiling on 19th?
So will it do traps using the second wire every single time?
I posted this elsewhere, but, in the interests of discussion will repeat here.
-----
I think the idea is for the MQ-25 to disappear off downrange with the F18 so the F18 can carry more ordnance to just outside the contested environment, top up with fuel, go do war type stuff in the contested environment and then come back out to refuel and head home with the tanker. Therefore, the Tanker has to keep a very low profile to avoid becoming a target and a known point for the F18s to return to.
I wonder, if you flew formation juuuust right with regard to the radar threat, you could actually decrease the RCS of the whole formation by using the MQ25 as a blocker/absorber.
ETA, so it has a kind of spade nose with a bevelled lower body (with what looks to be a retractable camera)and a smoothed double bubble type of upper forward fuselage. The big bay (weapons or fuel or sensors?) door doesn't have low RCS edge features like we're used to seeing and there doesn't appear to be any turbulator vanes at the front of the bay to help with separation. In fact, given the panel gaps on the lower body and wing root joint it doesn't look like a very low RCS vehicle from underneath.
-----
I think the idea is for the MQ-25 to disappear off downrange with the F18 so the F18 can carry more ordnance to just outside the contested environment, top up with fuel, go do war type stuff in the contested environment and then come back out to refuel and head home with the tanker. Therefore, the Tanker has to keep a very low profile to avoid becoming a target and a known point for the F18s to return to.
I wonder, if you flew formation juuuust right with regard to the radar threat, you could actually decrease the RCS of the whole formation by using the MQ25 as a blocker/absorber.
ETA, so it has a kind of spade nose with a bevelled lower body (with what looks to be a retractable camera)and a smoothed double bubble type of upper forward fuselage. The big bay (weapons or fuel or sensors?) door doesn't have low RCS edge features like we're used to seeing and there doesn't appear to be any turbulator vanes at the front of the bay to help with separation. In fact, given the panel gaps on the lower body and wing root joint it doesn't look like a very low RCS vehicle from underneath.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The light is not so the UAV can see the carrier, it's so the LSOs can see the UAV when it's on the approach. While the LSOs can't "talk" the UAV down like they can a pilot, they can give it a wave off command if there's a foul deck, the arresting gear isn't rerigged, or there's some other problem necessitating a wave off. The light also provides illumination on the deck after landing, so the folks controlling the thing on the deck can see the guidance from the yellow shirt (plane director). On the deck the UAV is not autonomous and is always under direct control of an operator.
Thank you Ken, for saving me the trouble on that one. I am pleased to see that the long standing problem of CV tanking assets is finally being addressed. About damned time.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Boeing have won the MQ-25A Stingray competition.
Alert 5 » Boeing wins MQ-25A competition - Military Aviation News
https://dod.defense.gov/News/Contrac...ticle/1617374/
The Boeing Co., St. Louis, Missouri, is awarded a ceiling price $805,318,853 fixed-price-incentive-firm-target contract to provide the design, development, fabrication, test, verification, certification, delivery, and support of four MQ-25A unmanned air vehicles, including integration into the carrier air wing to provide an initial operational capability to the Navy. The work will be performed in St. Louis, Missouri (45.5 percent); Indianapolis, Indiana (6.9 percent); Cedar Rapids, Iowa (3.1 percent); Quebec, Canada (3.1 percent); Palm Bay, Florida (2.3 percent); San Diego, California (1.5 percent); and various locations inside and outside the continental U.S. (37.6 percent), and is expected to be completed in August 2024. Fiscal 2018 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy) funds in the amount of $79,050,820 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via an electronic request for proposals; three offers were received. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00019-18-C-1012).
Alert 5 » Boeing wins MQ-25A competition - Military Aviation News
https://dod.defense.gov/News/Contrac...ticle/1617374/
The Boeing Co., St. Louis, Missouri, is awarded a ceiling price $805,318,853 fixed-price-incentive-firm-target contract to provide the design, development, fabrication, test, verification, certification, delivery, and support of four MQ-25A unmanned air vehicles, including integration into the carrier air wing to provide an initial operational capability to the Navy. The work will be performed in St. Louis, Missouri (45.5 percent); Indianapolis, Indiana (6.9 percent); Cedar Rapids, Iowa (3.1 percent); Quebec, Canada (3.1 percent); Palm Bay, Florida (2.3 percent); San Diego, California (1.5 percent); and various locations inside and outside the continental U.S. (37.6 percent), and is expected to be completed in August 2024. Fiscal 2018 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy) funds in the amount of $79,050,820 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via an electronic request for proposals; three offers were received. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00019-18-C-1012).
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Really? You see a technological connection between the KC-46 and MQ-25? And you see an engineering and industrial connection between Boeing's commercial aircraft operation in Seattle and Boeing's military aircraft operation in St Louis?
So, 'One Boeing' only when it suits them then.
Actually the 737 MAX was pretty much on time and on budget, as was the original 777 (and at least so far, the 777X is looking pretty good).
If you're going to start disqualifying manufacturers due their having a project that's late and/or overbudget, you'll have a awfully short list to choose from.
If you're going to start disqualifying manufacturers due their having a project that's late and/or overbudget, you'll have a awfully short list to choose from.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Three Wire is the target!
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey, it all depends on how you define "One Boeing". And as an FYI, "One Boeing" does NOT mean one pay scale, one retirement program, or even one set of company holidays. Pay scales vary hugely by region and country. The commercial group (legacy Boeing) has a different retirement program than the defense group (legacy McDonnel Douglas). And here in San Antonio we get fewer company paid holidays than they do in Seattle (commercial) or in St Louis (defense). Further, the notion that technical problems in Seattle with a commercial derivative program (an airliner turned into an aerial tanker with a whole host of other non tanker related functions) somehow must mean problems in St Louis with a clean sheet design of a pure tanker drone is (I'm sorry, there's just no polite way of saying this) simply absurd.
Last edited by KenV; 12th Sep 2018 at 14:51.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,555
Likes: 0
Received 42 Likes
on
29 Posts
Joy of joys. As well as ignoring all of the ACO procedures when a new carrier joins an operational theatre, the USN will now be able to do it with drones with no look out!
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To what are you referring with "ACO"? I don't believe you mean Aircraft Certification Office, which is what I'm familiar with.
