US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
gpt said:
The Navy has never stopped soliciting terminal guidance technologies for high mach vehicles (for CPS/LRHW).
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


U Notre Dame and several other companies have worked on aero-optics program for both Navy and the Air Force (AFRL funded). All of this was going on while ARRW was supposedly on the chopping block.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

This enhanced capability is likely a new type of EO/IR seeker for future US hypersonics to strike moving targets and to be able to sense its environment. The NUDT professor who solved the issue of aerooptics in Chinese vehicles cites Notre Dame researchers work heavily:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
Without a reliable terminal guidance system, glider or not they are just dumb bomb, worse than a ballistic missile.
 
manqiangrexue

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
siegecrossbow said:
What’s the point of showing those off at an Airshow? The defining attributes of a growler are not something you can see via naked eye.
Click to expand...
I'm thinking exactly the same thing as you. As far as I know, China's J-10 aerobatics team uses lighter stripped down airframes that are actually more maneuverable but not combat ready because they don't have to be. I'd understand if the US just used standard F-18 cus they want to keep them combat-worthy but I really don't understand why they would use Growlers which are the most expensive F-18 variant with weight and maneuverability penalties due to the added EW equipment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top