Jump to content

MQ-25


Phantom88

Recommended Posts

A Purpose built tanker ?

Yes, obviously that's what it is - a purpose built stealthy tanker that needs to carry external tanks to do the job & can only refuel 1 (2 max?) aircraft per sortie...

 

Or maybe it's someone trying to find another role / revenue stream for an existing project ?

 

Cool UAV though

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, anyone that believes the propaganda that this is a single (or dual with ISR) mission airframe in this day and age is seriously deluding themselves. Of course it has to be a better tanker than the Super Hornet just by virtue of its flying wing design with associated large internal tankage plus the buddy store. Organic carrier based tankers are mostly concerned with recovery operations so it doesn't need to give away more than a few thousand pounds at a time anyway. Mission tanking requirements would need a larger fuel giveaway fraction so the extra tankage looks like it makes the MQ-25 a more ideal solution. Having a drone do it instead of wasting precious airframe hours/cat's and traps of the manned tactical aircraft of which, as far as tanking is concerned, they are poorly suited for to begin with seems like a smart move.

 

I wonder if the Sea Control Squadrons will be unfurling the colors when these things make it to the fleet... I did just over 10 years in S-3B's when I was in the Navy... Would be interesting to see what happens with the squadrons involved.

Truly superior pilots are those that use their superior judgment to avoid those situations where they might have to use their superior skills.

 

If you ever find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

 

"If at first you don't succeed, Carrier Landings are not for you!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sea Control Wings have been disestablished since around '09... but I guess today's closest equivalent is the Patrol and Reconnaissance Wings (P-8s), specifically in line with their newest addition, VUP-19, the Navy's first unmanned squadron. I don't see that happening, though, since their background is Maritime aviation (P-3,) rather than tailhook.

 

A Purpose built tanker ?

Yes, obviously that's what it is - a purpose built stealthy tanker that needs to carry external tanks to do the job

The use of the existing buddy pod is a current requirement of the RFP. That's easy. LO and growth capacity is how the companies will be competing. I don't see how you can turn that into a complaint. Compatibility now, capability for the future.

 

& can only refuel 1 (2 max?) aircraft per sortie...

15000 lbs at 500nm. Yes, if you're imagining the max fuel capacity of the Rhino that sounds like a small number, but that's not how fuel conservation in a jet works. That tanker can definitely serve more than 2 jets, because it will do so at altitudes where fuel burn is significantly reduced. Set a division of tankers at close range to top off tanks after launch and climb, and another division closer to threat to further extend range.

 

At the end of the day, saving strike jets for strike is a huge benefit regardless of the finer details of the platform that relieves them. Launch and recovery cycles with 5-wet configurations is an airframer's waking nightmare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find a little bit strange to design a seemingly stealth UAV, and then to hang everything externally :huh:

 

But sure, even non stealth carrier tanker will ease the burden on Super Hornet fleet. And what has been demonstrated with X-47B ia already amazing :thumbup:

Mirage fanatic !

I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2.

Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find a little bit strange to design a seemingly stealth UAV, and then to hang everything externally :huh:

 

The heritage of UCLASS I think. They probably started working on these designs before it was canceled in favor of a tanker drone. By keeping a potentially stealthy shape they have more options later and it is cheaper than starting from scratch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What surprise me are the 2 x JSOW on external pylons.

I can understand that the air-air tanker system wouldn't fit in the bomb bay of stealth UCAV, bit it's like the bomb bay was never there to begin with ?

Mirage fanatic !

I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2.

Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

 

LOL

 

Yes, obviously you're right, and this is exactly what a purpose designed tanker looks like in this day and age.

Just building to the requirements.

 

I expect soon we'll hear the KC-X competition has been won by the KC-2 Petroleum-Spirit :)

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Under Current laws, Autonomous Drones are not allowed to be Armed,

 

it's the same w/ the X-47B.

 

Only Job it could possibly do is Tanking, and Maybe overwatch.

Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR x2),

ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate, XFX RX6800XT Merc 310 (RX-68XTALFD9)

3x ASUS VS248HP + Oculus HMD, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Under Current laws, Autonomous Drones are not allowed to be Armed,

 

it's the same w/ the X-47B.

 

Only Job it could possibly do is Tanking, and Maybe overwatch.

 

Surely a direct response to PLAN/PLAAF anti-access CONOPS in the Pacific.

 

USN CVNs would have to operate from a greater distance nowadays to (somewhat) safely contribute if things went south in the region. The Chinese arsenal of subs and air/land based AShMs is becoming quite formidable. Meanwhile the PLAAF have made it pretty obvious that they would aggressively target high RCS, airliner derived tankers with the likes of VLRAAM, J20 etc...


Edited by Boogieman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's your opinion. Reality is somewhat different. LOAC still applies, but nothing currently stops the arming of autonomous drones other than self-regulation. First world or peer level adversaries might give lip service to the concept of AI drone disarmament, but come crunch time; they'll most likely use whatever assets they have available. Rogue nations will be completely unchecked. I expect, IMHO, that AI drone restrictions will be about as effective as current international chemical/biological weapons regulations.

 

https://www.nato.int/docu/review/2017/Also-in-2017/autonomous-military-drones-no-longer-science-fiction/EN/index.htm

 

As for the MQ-25, the US Navy fighter mafia is hell bent to extend the lifespan of carrier-based manned fighters for decades to come. Can you blame them? The horse Calvary did not embrace tanks or helicopters either ... icon12.gif

 

Under Current laws, Autonomous Drones are not allowed to be Armed,

 

it's the same w/ the X-47B.

 

Only Job it could possibly do is Tanking, and Maybe overwatch.


Edited by Backy 51

I don't need no stinkin' GPS! (except for PGMs :D) :pilotfly:

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

As for the MQ-25, the US Navy fighter mafia is hell bent to extend the lifespan of carrier-based manned fighters for decades to come. Can you blame them? The horse Calvary did not embrace tanks or helicopters either ... icon12.gif

 

You vastly over-estimate the readiness of AI to handle the complexity of employing a multirole fighter. Get ready to see UAVs as dumb, missile-launching wingmen.

 

Also the Navy doesn't have a "fighter mafia." That's some Air Force stuff. Among other reasons, Navy fighter pilots are universally strike fighter pilots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...