Jump to content

ATFLIR vs LTENING


VDV

Recommended Posts

Super Hornets use ATFLIR because the Navy uses ATFLIR. The Navy does not have any LITENINGs in it's inventory, it never purchased them. Doesn't mean the ATFLIR is inherently better, it's just been deemed by the Navy to be good enough for the job intended and that moving to LITENING or Sniper currently would not grant any significantly enhanced capabilities.

 

TLDR; the Navy/USAF/etc does not always choose the single "best" pod, they have to take into account cost, availability, reliability, supply line, etc etc when they make these decisions. All the pods, ATFLIR, LITENING, Sniper are roughly of the same generation and very comparable in their capabilities, they are all very good pods that represent generational leaps over older pods like LANTIRN and the Nighthawk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

They should get their shit together and just use the same item all across the armed forces. If they're all basically the same, then why use 3 different pods? Because they enjoy incompatibilities, spare parts not being present or trippe R&D costs?

Why invent the wheel 3 times?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ATFLIR also has NAV FLIR built into it's support pylon. In regards to the hornet, it allows for center-line fuel tank configurations, freeing up more A2G stations. However I've heard RAAF hornets can mount LITENING on 4 as well.


Edited by Wizard_03

DCS F/A-18C :sorcerer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should get their shit together and just use the same item all across the armed forces. If they're all basically the same, then why use 3 different pods? Because they enjoy incompatibilities, spare parts not being present or trippe R&D costs?

Why invent the wheel 3 times?

 

Under the table deals with Senators and General Officers, thats why....

I7-8700 @5GHZ, 32GB 3000MHZ RAM, 1080TI, Rift S, ODYSSEY +. SSD DRIVES, WIN10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should get their shit together and just use the same item all across the armed forces. If they're all basically the same, then why use 3 different pods? Because they enjoy incompatibilities, spare parts not being present or trippe R&D costs?

Why invent the wheel 3 times?

 

Remain calm.

 

Navy needs a pod with significantly different spec than the Air Force. The Navy lands on carriers and deals with much harsher operating environments, so tradeoffs have to be made. You can imagine the delicate lenses and articulations of a targeting pod would not mix well with carrier arrested landings.

 

The F-35’s integrated EOTS has some of those tradeoffs as a “one-size-fits-all” solution, and it’s already been a growth issue. Sometimes diversity is worth the costs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remain calm.

 

Navy needs a pod with significantly different spec than the Air Force. The Navy lands on carriers and deals with much harsher operating environments, so tradeoffs have to be made. You can imagine the delicate lenses and articulations of a targeting pod would not mix well with carrier arrested landings.

 

The F-35’s integrated EOTS has some of those tradeoffs as a “one-size-fits-all” solution, and it’s already been a growth issue. Sometimes diversity is worth the costs.

 

To say nothing of placing all of your bets on one horse . The military needs multiple suppliers , otherwise one's failed design could prove catastrophic . It's why we had multiple concurrent aircraft designs during WW2 for every aircraft type .

9700k @ stock , Aorus Pro Z390 wifi , 32gb 3200 mhz CL16 , 1tb EVO 970 , MSI RX 6800XT Gaming X TRIO , Seasonic Prime 850w Gold , Coolermaster H500m , Noctua NH-D15S , CH Pro throttle and T50CM2/WarBrD base on Foxxmounts , CH pedals , Reverb G2v2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remain calm.

 

Navy needs a pod with significantly different spec than the Air Force. The Navy lands on carriers and deals with much harsher operating environments, so tradeoffs have to be made. You can imagine the delicate lenses and articulations of a targeting pod would not mix well with carrier arrested landings.

Yes that can be an issue with some items, having said that, the F-14 used the older AAQ-14 targeting pod from carriers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

Its somewhat a matter of circumstances why 3 pods were adopted.

 

 

the only reason the USAF went with Litening 2 was as basically an off the shelf product intended an interim solution until Sniper XR ( which unlike L2 was a signed official contract to replace Lantirn) could be produced in enough numbers. Ultimately since the L2 works they still kept around all those procured in service till today, although by this point in time 2019 it seems Sniper XR followed by the improved Sniper ATP are much more predominant in availability.

 

USMC chose both because they need ATFLIR when operating from carreries for commonality with the navy , and chose the Litening 2 for land operations ( which constitutes about 60% of USMC operations) because it was cheaper and also greater available for procurement in the early years of adoption, meaning more deliveries in shorter periods of time relative to the ATLFIR.

 

Im not aware of newer versions of the ATFLIR or them being purchased, so at this point int time the Litening 2 and Sniper versions available are superior to what the navy has. the USAF and USMC ended up also purchasing a number of Litening 2 G4 ( already purchased older L2 AT models are up gradable to this standard), a successor to the Litening 2 AT which when first introduced 2008 had a better resolution then either ATFLIR or the Sniper XR

( 1024x1024). in 2014 the USAF had the newer SNiper ATP come into service, so it seems like the USN ATFLIR is the most aged technologically of the pods that the USMC and the USAF have available. It seems they are the ones in need of an update today.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should get their shit together and just use the same item all across the armed forces. If they're all basically the same, then why use 3 different pods? Because they enjoy incompatibilities, spare parts not being present or trippe R&D costs?

Why invent the wheel 3 times?

Because of money maybe? Share the project to other company to keep it alive and competitive. Same thing happened with USAF new F-15 order to Boeing.

Mastering others is strength. Mastering yourself is true power. - Lao Tze

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s true, the problem is that they need a system that can handle CATOBAR. It’s niche market.

 

Lantirn was initially developed for usaf, for strike eagles, not for naval aviation yet found it's way to tomcats, and the lantirn was successful in naval use.

 

A totally new pod isnt needed just a sensor update to currently existing ones for higher resolutions among some other things to match current standards. So raytheons ATFLIR doesn't have to be replaced by a different system

 

Ultimately from what I gather it's not that the atflir is some sort of super beefy system and that others options on the market cant handle carrier operations but it's just purely due to usn hardware requirements need a tgp that can lase targets from 40 nautical miles away and up to 50, thousand feet in altitude. ( or more)

 

If this was achievable in early 2000,s then it's certainly achievable today.

 

 

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/us-navy-looks-to-replace-or-improve-f-a-18-super-hornets-atflir-targeting-pod/


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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