You can transfer fuel while midair but what about ammo? Can you

Sure, but only for its guns.

Imagine there is a port on the back which can accept a large box which is a magazine for 30mm or 20mm or something. The refueling plane extends a rigid structure that holds the new magazine to be installed on rails, and it slides down into the port on the fighter plane. Then some motors in the fighter plane move it into position, and the old magazine box thing that is empty is jettisoned (and probably guided down safely with a parachute because it costs several million dollars and should be reused).

Something similar could be done with missiles and bombs, but only if the plane keeps them internally like on F-22s and F-35s, I can't imagine this would work for wing mounted weapons.

I can see a future in which drones can loiter around an area to transfer missiles and bombs to jets while they are in the air

>>33433364
A drone complex enough to transfer missiles could certainly fire them don't you think?

>>33433060
The main issue I see is that you couldn't just attach bombs from the top, since they are mounted underneath. On the other hand, I can see bombers with a top hatch that would allow it to be filled with bombs. It would be more difficult than fuel though.


The real question is what would be the point? Fuel limits the range of the aircraft, which means refueling allows aircraft to do something they couldn't otherwise. Aircraft can land and get a whole new load of bombs, meaning that transferring would just make logistics much more complex. Now you have aircraft to bring the bombs, which also need their own fuel. And aircraft being rearmed also waste fuel during that operation, which means they need even more supply from refueling aircraft.

Quite sure that in principle this technical challenge can somehow be adressed.

The limiting factor here is more about a pilot that might just be exausted at some point, in particular after he got rid of all his ammo.

>>33433679
Shove a catheter up his ass and give him some more meth.

>>33433582
This is probably the way things will go, a drone loaded up with ordinance, getting targeting info from manned aircraft, and executing the attack. very simple, and relatively cheap. Plus, the technology is already there, it just needs to be refined a bit.

>>33434660

This is more or less already there with the F-35. Not only between the F-35 and other aircraft, but also SAMs from an Aegis warship, for example.

File: Ace-Combat-6-Mission-9-02-P-1112-AIGAION_P.png (894KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

894KB, 1280x720px

>>33433060
Just make the P-1112 Aiagon, land planes, profit.

It's very simple OP, you have multiple planes, and send them out in waves. When the mission is over (you did pack accordingly right?) You land it and have it serviced.

throw boolit down barrel
that means less time spent in magazine and more time spent shooting

>>33433060
The latest news from the DARPA Gremlins program (where they want to develop MALD-sized drones that can launch from the back of a C-130, do a mission, come back and land back in the C-130) is that General Atomics and their partner have a solution that will allow them to perform drone launch and recovery off almost anything, including pylons of a C-130, MQ-9, the internal bay of their Avenger UCAV, etc.

If they can do that, you've won half the battle; the other half is the connection with the jet - attaching a bomb means connecting connectors of flexible wires, tightening screws, etc. To make it automated and keep it simple, you'd have to pay for new pylons and weapons that are easier to connect (eg, with motors that tighten / loosen sway brace screws, a set of plugs that can connect via a sliding tray or something, etc).

>>33433615
invert the plane

>>33437708
is this GTA?

>>33435466
>crosswind
>plane hits wing and everyone fucking dies

>>33433060
aan F-35 could turn on it's belly, dock at a bay of the bomber via a docking socket, open the bay, rockets and ammo is inserted, bay closed. it's not really hard and the pilot should be able to take 5 minutes of sitting upside down.

>>33437800
>eject
pilot is now going at like 200 km/h directly down, once his parachute deploys it will tangle up the seat, certain death

File: XF-85 Goblin trapeze mishap.webm (1MB, 517x382px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 517x382px

>>33433060
>You can transfer fuel while midair but what about ammo? Can you think of a way you could reload a flying plane?
Yes... sort of
Not that there's any point...

>>33437822
Why would the pilot need to eject?
If he's attempting to refuel, then he should at least be in relatively safe airspace

>>33437862
perhaps a spark sets off a fire in the loading compartment, the engine of his jet explodes, the mother aircraft starts to randomly oscillate and he doesn't want to risk it, he's somehow been targeted by the enemy anyway, another aircraft has just hit the mother aircraft, etc. many reasons.

there's also the problem of loading ordinance into a jet that is currently online with the pilot in it. a few ordinance guys aren't a very big loss if a bomb blows them up, a pilot dying is a big loss.

>>33437862
Few ejections over the past few decades have had anything to do with combat.
>>33437822
Ejection seats are specifically designed to work in any orientation; ejecting upside down is fine so long as the they're not doing this procedure at something like 1000ft.

>>33437822
he deserves it for flying such a shit plane

>>33433060
I love watching airplanes fuck

>>33437947
really? how does the parachute deploy when he's upside down then? does it come out from the back of the seat instead of the top or something?

>>33437966
https://youtu.be/vBdcNdKxTs8?t=30

>>33437991
so by the looks of it the entire seat is balanced so that it rotates into the upright position upon ejection? that's neat.

>>33438009
Partly - it works mainly because the pilot is moving mainly forward, not downward, so when the parachute does deploy (even if they're still upside down), it's immediately going rearward of the seat, not under it. If you ejected with no airspeed and upside down you might be in trouble, but even then there's a drogue chute that gets deployed first, and it would probably help orientate the seat a bit better.

>>33437862
Most ejections occur during non-combat mishaps. And mishaps during refueling are not that uncommon.

>>33437910
>there's also the problem of loading ordinance into a jet that is currently online with the pilot in it. a few ordinance guys aren't a very big loss if a bomb blows them up, a pilot dying is a big loss
Hot loading is a thing, and it's pretty hard to fuck up. None of the bombs you're loading should be capable of detonating until after they're securely mounted.

>>33435466
>planes are recovered.
>center of gravity shifts rearward
>uncontrolled climb occurs, everyone fucking dies.
OR
>Center of gravity shifts forward
>plane becomes over stabilized or a lawndart.
>everyone fucking dies.

>>33439081
something something hyper-responsive ballast tanks

>>33437822
ejection seats have pilot chutes to prevent this EXACT thing.

>>33437825
...wat

File: 1483686019370.webm (648KB, 494x360px) Image search: [Google]

648KB, 494x360px

>pilots do some crazy shit involving piping flammable fuel in fucking mid air
>hey guys how do we invent even more crazy shit

File: 1483686134606.webm (1MB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 640x480px

>let's transfer some fucking missiles now guys

File: 1483684343496.webm (2MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x720px

>I'll get it I'll get it

File: 1483684897807.webm (1MB, 656x480px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 656x480px

>>33440995
wrong webm

>>33439099
something something control authority