KC-97 refueling A-10s. I had forgotten about that aircraft.
Posted on 05/04/2019 6:44:38 AM PDT by BenLurkin
According to U.S. Central Command, the target was an “entrenched tunnel network and a weapons cache” in Iraq’s Hamrin mountain range. Two F-35As dropped a Joint Directed Attack Munition on the target, described as a “location able to threaten friendly forces.” JDAMs are regular unguided “dumb” bombs fitted with a GPS-based guidance system and steerable tail fin kit. The pilot enters the GPS coordinates of the target into the JDAM and the guided munition will steer itself to the target. Military GPS is typically accurate to within 3 meters, making JDAMs extremely accurate.
The Air Force is considering purchasing the OA-X light attack aircraft, a cheaper to buy and cheaper to fly plane better suited for such low-threat missions, but the program has dragged on for years with no decision in sight.
(Excerpt) Read more at popularmechanics.com ...
“We dropped $100k bombs on a $1 tent again didn’t we.”
They hate us because we’re free.
“How do you know all this?” [Vision, post 61]
Spent years as B-52 aircrew, then B-1B initial cadre when that hit the inventory.
Also spent a decade performing operational tests for various aircraft defense systems: B-52, FB-111, U-2, SR-71, and later B-1B. Additionally, we worked closely with other major commands, the other US service depts, and allied personnel.
By default, our branch did a lot of work in on-airframe electromagnetic compatibility: preventing one system from interfering with another, or fixing things when interference did occur. Necessarily involved broad reaches of systems knowledge outside immediate concerns for our particular systems.
Air refueling systems have enjoyed technical treatises published about them. Boeing likes to brag about the flying boom. They’ve earned the right.
KC-97 refueling A-10s. I had forgotten about that aircraft.
“SAC was using air refueling in the 50’s using the KC-97 prop driven aircraft...” [Don_Ret_USAF, post 62]
Boeing developed the KC-97 from the C-97, which was a development of the B-29 and later the B-50 bombers. It was the mainstay of the Air Force aerial refueling fleet for years.
The Air Force also acquired KB-29 and KB-50 tankers.
The performance mismatch between the basic KC-97 and jet bombers like the B-47 and B-52 induced USAF to install jet pods on their KC-97s, helping the tanker fly fast enough to keep the jet bombers from going outside their safe performance limits.
World’s ugliest aircraft!
KC-97, that is!
Love the A-10 Warthog!
A crafted non-answer answers a lot....
Seriously, I have zero interest in whatever disturbed thought process you got going on. Go away.
Exactly...the Taliban posses no serious AS threat so why use a billion dollar stealth plane to drop a couple of bombs. Certainly we have less costly aircraft that could do this job.
“...Did See a unicorn B-47 land. Had a broken boom stuck in the fueling receptacle.” [Don-Ret_USAF, post 71]
Any close formation entails elevated risk, no matter the conditions, the crew training level, and the capabilities of the aircraft involved.
While assigned to Bldg 500, I made the acquaintance of numerous retired personnel living in the Bellevue area. Some had crewed KC-97s while on active duty; a couple told us about refueling B-47s from the KC-97. Tanker and receiver would enter the A/R track at the top of the altitude block. In contact, the two birds would enter a dive, thus upping the airspeed beyond what the KC-97 could attain in level flight at max power settings. Helped keep the B-47 above min controllable airspeed - a figure that increased as the receiver took on fuel and became heavier.
The B-47 had a reputation: hotter, trickier, less forgiving than the B-52. A number of fighters of its day could not keep up.
“...the Taliban posses no serious AS threat...Certainly we have less costly aircraft that could do this job.” [The Great RJ, post 70]
One assumes you mean surface-to-air threat. Can one also assume you are equally well-informed about the current order of battle?
An intel estimate is just that - an estimate. And there are probably details the military isn’t disclosing to us average citizens. Given the mobility and engagement capabilities of modern air defense systems, surprises are always a possibility - which can be lethal for the aircrews.
The fact that you are so breezy about trading the lives of flight crews for the odd billion in savings is curious.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.