DARPA is asking for a Flying Missile Rail

>>35176317
Looks like a response to that Chinese torpedo drone.

File: C_mVtsZUAAA4Wav.jpg (168KB, 1200x875px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1200x875px

>>35176370
That WIG drone?

>>35176434
yes,but actually reusable therefore called "flying rail"

>>35176434
This looks like on of those early Soviet recon drones

File: 2017-05-13-La-CAAA-conçoit-un-drone-à-effet-de-sol-02.png (1MB, 4000x2250px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4000x2250px

>>35176504
Just a small caspian sea monster carrying a heavy torp.

>not VLO
Didn't know we were still living in 1998

>>35176605
Not sure it actually matters, this is probably smaller than a cruise missile

>>35176317
2017. not a flying tube launch folding fin missile.

>>35176504
>>35176434
Unironically thought someone shopped some strange vibrator into the picture at first.

>>35176689
>Ivan ! Set course to this woman's vagina !

>>35176701
China is bringing your mom jokes on a whole new level.

>>35176317
FUCK

I had that idea in like 2004

shoulda patented it

File: 437056.gif (152KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 320x180px

>>35176317
Imagine a formation of C5s deploying hundreds of these. That's ace combat level madness

>>35176457
It's intended to be expendable.

It's simply one more way to separate sensor and launch positions for 5th air gen war.

>>35177126
You'd still need guidance and control from the host aircraft, so that would mean a fuckhuge radar on the C5

>>35177451
Could an AWACS aircraft be modified to do such a thing?

>>35177798
I don't know of any AWACS with an AESA.

F-35 will run the fuck out of these things though. Fuck a B-1R, just send up a wing of 35s with 16 of these.

>>35177451
>>35177798
Or you know, with modern datalinking, an F-35 can provide all of the targeting data remotely.

>>35177798
I'm pretty sure the main dish of an AWACS is its Early Warning radar, which is more oriented toward long rande detection than targeting.

What would be more realistic is having a fighter track and lock the target, transmit the data through L-16 and have the missile truck fire.

>>35177838
Exactly. It's still mechanically scanned, usually at around 1RPM. You can't lock up a missile at all with that.

>>35177798
>>35177824
>>35177838
E-2D Advanced Hawkeye

Once considered for replacement by the "Common Support Aircraft", this concept was abandoned. The latest E-2 version is the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, which features an entirely new avionics suite including the new AN/APY-9 radar, radio suite, mission computer, integrated satellite communications, flight management system, improved T56-A-427A engines, a glass cockpit and later changes should enable aerial refueling by 2020.[11] The APY-9 radar features an active electronically scanned array, which adds electronic scanning to the mechanical rotation of the radar in its radome. The E-2D will include provisions for the copilot to act as a "Tactical 4th Operator" (T4O), who can reconfigure his main cockpit display to show radar, IFF, and Link 16 (JTIDS)/CEC, and access all acquired data. The E-2D's first flight occurred on 3 August 2007.[12] On 8 May 2009, an E-2D used its Cooperative Engagement Capability system to engage an overland cruise missile with a Standard Missile SM-6 fired from another platform in an integrated fire-control system test.[13] These two systems will form the basis of the Naval Integrated Fire Control – Counter Air (NIFC-CA) when fielded in 2015; the USN is investigating adding other systems to the NIFC-CA network in the future.[14]

>>35176370
Don't they also have missile delivery systems that are expendable?

>>35177926
There's still a mechanical rotation though.

What would be needed is an airframe with huge fixed AESA radar.

>>35176317
DARPA doesnt ask... They make things asked for....

>>35176317
YAAS IVE ENVISIONED SOMETHING LIKE THIS FOR YEARS

>>35177855
Can you fire an active missile though in the general direction and then it would lock on when it gets close enough?

I mean obviously this should work but idk if the AMRAAN can?

File: common_support_aircraft.jpg (5KB, 275x183px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 275x183px

>>35177926
>Common Support Aircraft
sex

File: RAAF_(A30-003)_Boeing_E-7A_Wedgetail_aerial_display_at_the_2015_Warbirds_Downunder_Airshow_at_Temora[1].jpg (1MB, 2000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x1333px

>>35177937
J-7s?
>>35178251
>>35177824
The E-2D has an AESA, but yeah it does rotate. The E-7 operated by Australia, South Korea and Turkey is fully solid-state though, has reduced drag and still does 360 degree scanning.

>>35179217
You need to give the missile a 3D coordinate for a target - that doesn't have to be a precise / correct coordinate, but if you don't continually update it with the target's motion, or if you have a really poor resolution, the missile will take longer to find the target with its own radar and then have to use more energy to shift back onto the target, reducing its pK.

>>35179155
DARPA does plenty of asking.

File: IMG_1311.jpg (24KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 640x427px

>>35178251
>>35177824

>>35180439
Oh, too late.

>>35180033
>The E-7 operated by Australia, South Korea and Turkey
>Australia and Turkey
I keep seeing these two countries acquiring the same military gear, like how both got the LHD from Spain, is there a reason for this?

>>35176434
How is this any better than just a shitty cruise missile?

Considered big the trend now is that missiles are cool again, why even need a fighter plane? I thought to myself that a platform like this would be a logical conclusion, but taken to the extreme why not just have a flying brick loaded with missiles? In the intermediate time frame does this mean that light agile fighters are sour but ironically heavier missile carrying fighters like the f4 phantom will be in?

>>35183000
> why not just have a flying brick loaded with missiles

Because agility still matters for keeping NEZs small and moving around the battle area. And putting all your eggs on one basket would be retarded.

>>35182925
obviously Turkey has been infiltrated by Australian agents and is in fact a puppet state designed solely for the purpose of geopolitical shitposting

>>35177451
wake up grandpa, its not 1980 anymore

>>35183000
> why even need a fighter plane?
You don't?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmGRn7GirS0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3VUK7h6x8A

>>35182925
Both spend a fair bit on their military (relative to other nations), so they're both buying fairly high-end stuff (eg: F-35As as well).

The E-7 is one the best AWACS aircraft out there at the moment and Spain is a pretty good shipbuilder. I'm not at all a naval expert, but I'd assume that the Juan Carlos in particular just happened to have an appropriate tonnage and decent price. It's also possible that each country was thinking about the possibility of upgrading their ships later to handle F-35Bs.

>>35176878
Lol same and also made some designs, I just realised that I'm not special

>>35182979
flies even lower and the entire way, and not just the last dozen or so nautical miles.

also, torpedo warhead means that interception is very hard with conventional means.

>>35176878
>>35183491
I drew up a retarded idea of 4 pulsejet flying doritos linked up with a lone FA-50. They serve as flying bombs/decoys.

>>35183497
The ground effect also gives it a small but real fuel efficiency boost.

>>35183242
NEZ?

>>35184011
No Escape Zone

>>35183872
Post the sketch?

>>35176434
>>35183887
>>35176523
At the altitude shown in that image, I'm skeptical this is actually a ground effect missile.

Russian Ekranoplans all had a ground effect altitude / wing-length ratio of less than one, meaning their wings were longer than the vehicles could fly under ground effect (some of them could fly much higher, the Lun Class could go up to 7.5km, but that was operating as a regular aircraft. Under ground effect it would fly at 5m, maybe as high as 10m. It had a wingspan of 44m.

That missile seems to be flying much higher, relative to the side of it's wings (and relative to the length of the lifting body portion of the fuselage).

>>35184959
Tomorrow perhaps, I'll find a way to scan/photograph it.

>>35177855
The radar on the E-3 is supposed to do 6RPM when used, but it can be spun down to something like 0.3RPM when not in use.

File: turkish lhd with f35B on it.jpg (126KB, 640x426px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 640x426px

>>35183444
Turkey has requested Spain to modify the LHD so that F35B can take off from it.

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/focus-analysis/naval-technology/2692-turkish-navy-future-lhd-model-showcased-with-f-35b-stovl-aircraft-at-idef-2015.html

I don't think Australia has any plans to upgrade their LHD for F35Bs.

>>35176317

It's a decent idea when patched in with AWACs

>>35177451

AIM-120 can fire blind if it wants.

It's got a radar onboard and will lock up post launch if there's no lock before launch.

File: hqdefault.jpg (20KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 480x360px

>>35176317
>We sidekicks now

>>35188856
>tfw will never have a cute little f35b model

File: 82dfb839105baf7c3aaebcfdd1984ab4.jpg (86KB, 1076x700px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1076x700px

你好兄弟们

>>35193191
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=F-35B+1%3A72