High flyer multi mission platform

[Clark Griswold]

So question...  as BO dot net is a highly secure forum we'll be able to discuss technical details and numbers /s but...

I saw this, historical photo of a RAF Canberra bomber with ASW missiles:

and wondered what the 11F crowd thought of instead of a loyal wingman (unmanned) why not a manned high flyer (above 50K) with another fighter radar in its nose, node in the link, BLOS that data up and other data in and X-teen missiles to call on from the high ground?

One platform, optionally manned, crewed not solo, that does high altitude ISR, C2, BACN, UCAV LOS C2 and arsenal missions.

Too much for a community to do all those missions?  

 

[12xu2a3x3]

there's one community that already does most of that alone...

[ClearedHot]

1 hour ago, Clark Griswold said:

So question...  as BO dot net is a highly secure forum we'll be able to discuss technical details and numbers /s but...

I saw this, historical photo of a RAF Canberra bomber with ASW missiles:

and wondered what the 11F crowd thought of instead of a loyal wingman (unmanned) why not a manned high flyer (above 50K) with another fighter radar in its nose, node in the link, BLOS that data up and other data in and X-teen missiles to call on from the high ground?

One platform, optionally manned, crewed not solo, that does high altitude ISR, C2, BACN, UCAV LOS C2 and arsenal missions.

Too much for a community to do all those missions?  

 

Do it with a Bizjet for a LOT less.  Modern jets like the 6500 can easily park at FL550 for 12 hours, multiple consoles, provisions for "shapes" and room to get up and move around.

[jice]

11F here. Sign me up, with caveats:

Make the radar point sideways as well as forward. Backwards would be great too.

Optionally manned: This is the worst of both worlds.  You have to build in the life support systems, and then don’t get the benefit of a difficult to hack EMC (electrical, meat, chemical) OS. “Risk reduction” due to no pilot doesn’t count when you can deny control and feeds for $0 (cyber/EW) preventing data from reaching people who might die without it.  At least make the mission kill cost a million bucks or two.
 

When you’re talking peacetime recce missions: when is the last time a third world country shot down one of the US’s manned recce platforms? Same question for droids is an easy answer. 
 

Just now, ClearedHot said:

Do it with a Bizjet for a LOT less.  

You’re not wrong. Also: Do (most of) it with an existing platform for even less. WTF is the plan for E-11 BACN other than BACNing? Seems like a massive waste of compute power and meat-based data fusion. 

[Majestik Møøse]

Hmmm…let’s continue this thought process. You want a high altitude jet, a guy in it, that’s extremely reliable, and has a lot of indigenous connectivity, maybe some 5th gen datalinks, maybe a sideways AESA upgrade in development…

[ThreeHoler]

Hmmm…let’s continue this thought process. You want a high altitude jet, a guy in it, that’s extremely reliable, and has a lot of indigenous connectivity, maybe some 5th gen datalinks, maybe a sideways AESA upgrade in development…

Dargon Ladee? Never heard of her

[Danger41]

The long pole in the tent (to me) with this concept is lifting the weapons that high in significant numbers to matter. All the sensor stuff that is mentioned above is true, but shooting up that high in a platform designed to loiter for a long time means you won’t have the ability to maneuver much and/or loft the shots. Probably don’t need much loft up in the bozosphere, but it’s an interesting math problem. And the maneuvering isn’t that important if the red air sleds right at you, but when you start having to maneuver to set geometry, it can get interesting.

[jice]

9 minutes ago, Danger41 said:

The long pole in the tent (to me) with this concept is lifting the weapons that high in significant numbers to matter. All the sensor stuff that is mentioned above is true, but shooting up that high in a platform designed to loiter for a long time means you won’t have the ability to maneuver much and/or loft the shots. Probably don’t need much loft up in the bozosphere, but it’s an interesting math problem. And the maneuvering isn’t that important if the red air sleds right at you, but when you start having to maneuver to set geometry, it can get interesting.

Nailed it. The value isn’t in placing weapons, it’s placing sensors and then providing that data to shooters and weapons directly… not to a battleship sized crew of nerds. 

[HuggyU2]

1 hour ago, ThreeHoler said:

 

Dargon Ladee? Never heard of her

 

Weaponize it, and it will be the FU-2. 
 

On that note, funny story:

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/how-the-iconic-u-2-got-its-name-test-pilot-tony-levier-gave-kelly-johnson-the-finger-johnson-returned-giving-levier-the-finger-and-yelled-u-2/amp/

Edited November 11, 2022 by HuggyU2

[Clark Griswold]

3 hours ago, 12xu2a3x3 said:

there's one community that already does most of that alone...

True, but for the active sensor(s) for this mission, a second engine for power and cooling at the sacrifice of operational altitude might be the ticket.

2 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Do it with a Bizjet for a LOT less.  Modern jets like the 6500 can easily park at FL550 for 12 hours, multiple consoles, provisions for "shapes" and room to get up and move around.

Maybe, modifying a design like the Saab Swordfish for a new mission might be a COA.

 

Hardpoints, bumps and blisters are already worked out to look down at the ocean, probably not too far of a stretch to modify to be A2A focused.

2 hours ago, jice said:

11F here. Sign me up, with caveats:

Make the radar point sideways as well as forward. Backwards would be great too.

Optionally manned: This is the worst of both worlds.  You have to build in the life support systems, and then don’t get the benefit of a difficult to hack EMC (electrical, meat, chemical) OS. “Risk reduction” due to no pilot doesn’t count when you can deny control and feeds for $0 (cyber/EW) preventing data from reaching people who might die without it.  At least make the mission kill cost a million bucks or two.

Concur on sideways looking radar - two ideas

Swivel plate mounted AESA like the Gripen E has

Extended length radar cone should let it rotate beyond 90 degrees

Or a side fixed AESA radar antennae like the Felon

Optionally manned might have some inefficiencies built in by having more equipment than is absolutely necessary but I think a platform that could do both, maybe not on the fly but after a relatively quick field configuration could be useful, just a thought.

[Clark Griswold]

31 minutes ago, Danger41 said:

The long pole in the tent (to me) with this concept is lifting the weapons that high in significant numbers to matter. All the sensor stuff that is mentioned above is true, but shooting up that high in a platform designed to loiter for a long time means you won’t have the ability to maneuver much and/or loft the shots. Probably don’t need much loft up in the bozosphere, but it’s an interesting math problem. And the maneuvering isn’t that important if the red air sleds right at you, but when you start having to maneuver to set geometry, it can get interesting.

Maybe arsenal would be a dedicated mission with some equipment removed to enhance loadout, launch maneuver capability (a lofting maneuver).  Might be multi mission, just not on every mission.

[Majestik Møøse]

4 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Do it with a Bizjet for a LOT less.  Modern jets like the 6500 can easily park at FL550 for 12 hours, multiple consoles, provisions for "shapes" and room to get up and move around.

I can’t think of a better way to kill 6-9 EWOs and ABMs. Bizjets will get fucked pretty quick by any weapon.

[ClearedHot]

52 minutes ago, Majestik Møøse said:

I can’t think of a better way to kill 6-9 EWOs and ABMs. Bizjets will get fucked pretty quick by any weapon.

Not when they standoff.  You would be surprised just how far you can see when you are up at FL550.

[jice]

2 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

Optionally manned might have some inefficiencies built in by having more equipment than is absolutely necessary but I think a platform that could do both, maybe not on the fly but after a relatively quick field configuration could be useful, just a thought.

I’m truly trying to think of one engineering (not policy) use case where optionally manned would actually be beneficial. I can’t, other than taking a deep sleep in the cockpit on the way to and from the mission area.  That’s still a manned aircraft, able to transit without intervention. 

[Majestik Møøse]

1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:

Not when they standoff.  You would be surprised just how far you can see when you are up at FL550.

I’ll have to take your word for it, never ran a LOS plot that low.

Edit: looking at the dozens of bizjets currently flying on ADS-B exchange (with zero extra military hardware), not one is flying above FL470. I’m not really buying the idea that a military version is going to get much above that, especially carrying RTB gas.

Edited November 11, 2022 by Majestik Møøse

[jice]

4 minutes ago, Majestik Møøse said:

I’ll have to take your word for it, never ran a LOS plot that low.

Rough math: 1.3 x square root of altitude in feet = radar horizon in nautical miles. Since the earth is flat, works at all altitudes. 

Edited November 11, 2022 by jice

[Majestik Møøse]

38 minutes ago, jice said:

Rough math: 1.3 x square root of altitude in feet = radar horizon in nautical miles. Since the earth is flat, works at all altitudes. 

Worldview confirmed, there is no such thing as “over the horizon”, just increasingly smaller graze angles where the calculations don’t work anymore

[12xu2a3x3]

we used to have jets for this that weren't biz jets

Edited November 11, 2022 by 12xu2a3x3

[Clark Griswold]

I’m truly trying to think of one engineering (not policy) use case where optionally manned would actually be beneficial. I can’t, other than taking a deep sleep in the cockpit on the way to and from the mission area.  That’s still a manned aircraft, able to transit without intervention. 

Fair enough
I’m not adamant about it but intrigued by the idea, it’s on the Firebird concept jet that NG has developed

https://www.northropgrumman.com/what-we-do/air/firebird/the-flexibility-of-firebird/

Their website doesn’t really give any reasons why you would want that just touts that you can, you might be right that it’s just a party trick, any hooo…

Maybe optionally manned in this sense is not one that is field switchable but at the factory/depot level can be configured manned or unmanned.

Now thinking a bit more on this and considering Danger41’s point on the need for performance if you want a good arsenal platform, would this be a candidate for a modern swept wing platform?

Sweep for supersonic loft maneuver to launch VLRAAMs, egress then extend for endurance orbit?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Standby]

Unpopular opinion…it doesn’t matter. We didn’t stand up an entirely new force just to provide the navigationally impaired with directions from their flat to the local watering hole. 

[Springer]

2 hours ago, 12xu2a3x3 said:

we used to have jets for this that weren't biz jets

And some of these had Side Looking Radar (SLAR)

[Majestik Møøse]

2 hours ago, Standby said:

Unpopular opinion…it doesn’t matter. We didn’t stand up an entirely new force just to provide the navigationally impaired with directions from their flat to the local watering hole. 

True, but if your airplane is dependent on space to do it’s job you’re going to have a shitty time during the war.

[8BC]

This is an interesting discussion of the bozosphere and how military capes can be expanded at these altitudes. At maximum takeoff weights, inherent to the mission sets described, a heavy BizJetJobs can initially climb to FL410; step climbs are advantageously slow in their development. Sure, a manufacturer Opslimit of Fl510 or even FL550 would increase the envisioned capability. Hello, these Flight Levels are achievable 10+ hours after takeoff and not realistic until only 2 hours of fuel remaining. That is why ADS-B doesn’t find these jets above FL470. Hang some hard points and blisters, maybe a device or two, lower the altitudes by 2000-4000’ in their overall operational envelope. 

[ClearedHot]

14 hours ago, Majestik Møøse said:

I’ll have to take your word for it, never ran a LOS plot that low.

Edit: looking at the dozens of bizjets currently flying on ADS-B exchange (with zero extra military hardware), not one is flying above FL470. I’m not really buying the idea that a military version is going to get much above that, especially carrying RTB gas.

G6500 can easily do it, and does.

[di1630]

I’m trying to figure out what problem is trying to be solved here.

An armed bizjet at 55k in a beam orbit with side radars isn’t going to last very long if someone doesn’t want it to be there.