Aviation Pictures Part Trois

[Kidd]

EA-18 Growlers do have a lot of bits and pieces all over them, don't they?

[Feenix74]

Nature of the beast.

I always thought that the E-7A Wedgetail probably took the extra bits and pieces thing to the extreme.

[Cannonshop]

a 737... with MISSILE RACKS!!! (and a bomb-bay)

[HobbesHurlbut]

what bomb bay? The one between the wings? with the landing gears folded up there and a few ports maybe for chaff or bouys?

[Feenix74]

Psst . . . it is not located between the wings . . .

[I am Belch II]

The P-8 has the raked wingtips like the 787's and the newer 777's.
Airbus is thinking of doing the same thing with a A320 model to replace some of the patrol planes for France and Germany.

[Cannonshop]

The P-8 has the raked wingtips like the 787's and the newer 777's.
Airbus is thinking of doing the same thing with a A320 model to replace some of the patrol planes for France and Germany.

yeah, but you know what?

It won't be nearly as cool, since it's just imitating an approach Boeing took and Airbus didn't, until it was successful.

[Euphonium]

Although the original converted jetliner was the the Comet/Nimrod family, which came with a full-sized bomb bay.

I'm not sure how much further you'd have to go back to find the earliest piston-engined airliner to maritime patrol conversion but things like the Short flying boats and similar would probably qualify

[Kidd]

Well, according to Wiki, the "first airliner for commercial use" is the Curtiss JN-4, a small biplane which was used by the Elliot Air Service. (For certain definitions of 'airliner' I guess.) It was also the first American mail delivery aircraft, and the first aircraft to make a successful dive bombing attack.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airliner#History

The Curtiss JN-4 saw service with many emerging air arms as a trainer, but a variant, the Curtiss N-9, was turned into a floatplane for maritime patrol, amongst other proposed duties.

So it would seem that conversion of civilian commercial airliners into maritime patrol aircraft is a hallowed tradition going all the way back to the very first of its kind...

[Feenix74]

As Kidd has pointed out if the A320 MPA gets off the drawing board it will be just carrying on a very long tradition that is almost as old as commercial aviation itself.

Another example is the Short Empire flying boat that were built as commercial flying boats but then pressed into service during WW2. In this case "Coolangatta" was originally flown by Imperial Airways and then QANTAS before being pressed into service by the RAAF for anti-submarine patrols and for general transport duties.



It is also possible to go the other way, as demonstrated by the Short Sunderland flying boat that was originally built as a military flying boat patrol bomber but were also used during WW2 as unarmed civilian airliners. After WW2 a number of Sunderlands were converted for use by civilian commercial aviation, which were known as Short Sandringham; in this configuration, the type continued in airline operation until 1974.

An RAAF Sunderland Mk.III operating from Rose Bay Flying Boat Base, Sydney during WW2.


An Ansett Airline operated Short Sandringham operating from the same Rose Bay Flying Boat Base, Sydney decades after WW2.

[JadeHellbringer]

The Sunderland made me remember a story I read from one of the pilots of those behemoths flying out of northern Australia- apparently as they were preparing for their takeoff run, the tail gunner started yelling to gun the engines RIGHT NOW- the cockpit luckily didn't ask questions and lumbered into the air immediately...

...and good thing they did, as a torpedo from what they believed was a Japanese midget-submarine streaked under where they'd been moments earlier.

Which would undoubtedly be one of the strangest kills on an aircraft ever.

[SethsMatches]

A Sunderland! So that's the plane Lara Croft crashes into Tibet in Tomb Raider II. (Or at least it looks like it inspired what was in the game)

Thanks  :) I always wondered.

[Kidd]

Which would undoubtedly be one of the strangest kills on an aircraft ever.

Quite beats the Intruder that guided an LGB onto a flying Iraqi chopper

[Sharpnel]

Quite beats the Intruder that guided an LGB onto a flying Iraqi chopper

That's hilarious.

[Kidd]

That's hilarious.

Wait I'm sorry, it was an F-15 Strike Eagle

https://theaviationist.com/2016/02/14/f-15e-shot-down-iraqi-mi-24/

But at some point the bomb appeared on Chewie's display: it was angled nose high, then started down and penetrated through the rotors, and the scintillation of the rotors as they disintegrated was easily discerned in the LANTIRN pod.

The GBU-10 then entered into the cockpit of the helicopter, and while it was coming out of the bottom of the aircraft the fuse delay functioned. Then a tremendous explosion disintegrated the helicopter in a huge fireball.

[Weirdo]

Interesting bit to me was the difficulty the radar was having due to the rotors. Is/was that a common thing?

[grimlock1]

Interesting bit to me was the difficulty the radar was having due to the rotors. Is/was that a common thing?

The radar on an F-15 is often set to disregard targets that are moving away from the plan.  After all, someone who is running away from you is pointing in the wrong direction to shoot you.   This is a trivial filter using Doppler radar.   When viewed from anything but straight above or below, some of the rotors will be moving away from you, and some will be moving toward you.  In close enough proximity, that probably flummoxed the computer.  Similar to how two planes in tight formation can appear like one plane.   In this case, there was a target moving toward the plane at some 200+ mph, and an equal size target moving away at the same 200+ mph.   

Assuming the rotor blades are fiberglass or some other composite, I suspect the radar was actually seeing the control arms, the pitch rotation joint, and all the other kibble on the rotor head, but INAE.

[I am Belch II]

torpedos used to sink a flying boat. That would be very different. Would that count as a ship or a plane kill?

[Feenix74]

Ship kill because it is a "flying" boat. It would be an aircraft kill if it was a "sea" plane  ;)

[Feenix74]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-20/cathay-pacific-spells-name-wrong-on-own-plane/10285748  ;D

[I am Belch II]

Ship kill because it is a "flying" boat. It would be an aircraft kill if it was a "sea" plane  ;)

That makes sence

[grimlock1]

Ship kill because it is a "flying" boat. It would be an aircraft kill if it was a "sea" plane  ;)

Didn't the USS Kitty Hawk have a kill marker for a submarine on her flank after a collision?  I've found a 1984 NY Times article verifying the incident, but it doesn't mention the crew claiming it as a "kill." 
https://www.nytimes.com/1984/03/22/world/soviet-sub-and-us-ship-collide.html  One of these days I'll learn how to insert a link and have it appear as something other than the full URL....

[glitterboy2098]

make the 1st URL tab with URL= and then whatever your link is (all of that as one word inside the [] brackets), then put your desired text followed by the /URL in brackets. it is fairly easy, just counter intuitive.

like so (quote to see how i did it)
Soviet Sub and US Ship Collide


in question related to carriers, i've been trying to figure out what CATOBAR aircraft were around in the 90's and early 2000's for an alternate universe project of mine. especially stuff that was either fairly new or was still in recent enough production that you could have an updated model come out. i need a multi-role strike fighter that isn't a Super Hornet, basically. non-US is fine.. this is for a multinational group.

[Kidd]

i need a multi-role strike fighter that isn't a Super Hornet, basically. non-US is fine.. this is for a multinational group.

Why not a Super Hornet?

Well then it's not a long list, you have:

US - F-18 Hornet, F-14 Tomcat
British - Harrier sorry, you said CATOBAR
French - Super Etendard, Rafale M (beginning 2000)
Russian - Su-33

[Ruger]

Why not a Super Hornet?

Well then it's not a long list, you have:

US - F-18 Hornet, F-14 Tomcat
British - Harrier sorry, you said CATOBAR
French - Super Etendard, Rafale M (beginning 2000)
Russian - Su-33

A-7 Corsair II was retired in 1991 from the IS Navy. guess that would not work, not really a fighter...

A-4 Skyhawk is still technically being flown by the Brazilian navy last I heard (at least as of 2017), so it's served in some capacity with various powers for 60+ years...

Edit: what about the MiG-29K?

Ruger

[grimlock1]

make the 1st URL tab with URL= and then whatever your link is (all of that as one word inside the [] brackets), then put your desired text followed by the /URL in brackets. it is fairly easy, just counter intuitive.

like so (quote to see how i did it)
Soviet Sub and US Ship Collide


in question related to carriers, i've been trying to figure out what CATOBAR aircraft were around in the 90's and early 2000's for an alternate universe project of mine. especially stuff that was either fairly new or was still in recent enough production that you could have an updated model come out. i need a multi-role strike fighter that isn't a Super Hornet, basically. non-US is fine.. this is for a multinational group.

From the Easter Bloc, there is stuff like the Su-33.  England only operates Harriers. If this is an AU, then the USN was only a few billion away from having a navalized Raptor .

[glitterboy2098]

you see some of my problem. the AU i'm doing this for isn't entirely mine (actually expanding on an RPG's stuff) and the source has some aircraft that never existed in reality.. but which when looking at how the timeline shakes out, one of them would only really work as an alternate result to the programs that got the Super Hornet. only the plane in question is more of an a fighter/interceptor without much strike ability. i'm trying to fill in some backstory stuff, so trying to find something that can fill a strike role has been a tough choice when also trying to avoid using the stuff that isn't three decades old airframes in the late 90's early 2000's.

seriously tempted just to use the Rafale-M, since that would at least avoid the "all american all the time" problem.. kinda wish they'd made the carriers in this STOBAR. ah well.

hmm..  Harrier might be worth looking at.. VTOL ability has been shown to work off American Amphib's without a skijump, would probably work in this case.

[hoosierhick]

If you're thinking VTOL, what about the YAK-141?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-141

[Kidd]

you see some of my problem. the AU i'm doing this for isn't entirely mine (actually expanding on an RPG's stuff) and the source has some aircraft that never existed in reality.. but which when looking at how the timeline shakes out, one of them would only really work as an alternate result to the programs that got the Super Hornet. only the plane in question is more of an a fighter/interceptor without much strike ability. i'm trying to fill in some backstory stuff, so trying to find something that can fill a strike role has been a tough choice when also trying to avoid using the stuff that isn't three decades old airframes in the late 90's early 2000's.

seriously tempted just to use the Rafale-M, since that would at least avoid the "all american all the time" problem.. kinda wish they'd made the carriers in this STOBAR. ah well.

hmm..  Harrier might be worth looking at.. VTOL ability has been shown to work off American Amphib's without a skijump, would probably work in this case.

Well, I initially thought you've got some pretty tight parameters, but if you're looking at Harriers then its not so bad. The Harriers are old though the Harrier II Plus was still in production.

Looking at your other parameters, it does look like the Rafale-M would be your baby. Su-33, if Russian aircraft is in the running, maybe the Shenyang J-15 copy.

Talking about imaginary proposed aircraft, you could take the JAS-39C Gripen stats for a "naval Gripen".

[chanman]

The French operated F-8 Crusaders right up until they were replaced by Rafales