Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates

Raven22 said:
Considering that the US has airbases of their own that are as hot as anywhere in Australia, plus have had aircraft based in the Middle East for decades, I'm sure the planes won't fall out of the sky at 50 degrees Celsius.
Click to expand...

Agreed, and you'd certainly hope not! but i'd be interested to know the safety factor beyond 49C?

How will extended exposure to extreme heat impact maintenance, reliability and stealth/infrared signature of the aircraft?

How will the warm fuel affect the aircraft? Is their a solution other than painting the trucks white. (See Link)

I am sure these questions have been asked internally, or at least i hope they have. But would be nice to see our politicians asking them also.
 
Last edited:
Bluey 006 said:
I am sure these questions have been asked internally, or at least i hope they have. But would be nice to see our politicians asking them also.
Click to expand...

its actually RAAF who ask the questions - as they drive them
public domain material can be close to nonsensical at times - so I would not be quoting the 49c as an empirical figure with any level of confidence

CREF Ravens comments
 
gf0012-aust said:
its actually RAAF who ask the questions - as they drive them
public domain material can be close to nonsensical at times - so I would not be quoting the 49c as an empirical figure with any level of confidence

CREF Ravens comments
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I figured as much and good to hear! But felt like they were/are valid questions based on open source information.
 
Bluey 006 said:
Lockheed Martin Corp’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will start “ski-jump testing” at a Maryland air base this week, while another B-model jet wraps up six months of tests at temperatures as low as minus 40 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 40 Celsius) to as high as 120 F (49 C)
Source: Global Aviation

is 49C really all that extreme in Northern-Central Australia?
Temperature ranges at Tindal

Temperatures climb towards 50C at start of 2014

Have they done testing as to what happens after 49C? Few hours in the sun on the runway at Tindal and an aircraft could easily reach 49C

Just a thought....
Click to expand...

Where is Fort Worth, where F-35 has been designed, built and largely tested?

Texas... Apparently it gets a bit warm and humid thereabouts apparently...
 
ADMk2 said:
Where is Fort Worth, where F-35 has been designed, built and largely tested?

Texas... Apparently it gets a bit warm and humid thereabouts apparently...
Click to expand...

Coincidentally, According to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) the highest recorded temperature ever! in Texas is 120F or 49C (see link)
 
Bluey 006 said:
Coincidentally, According to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) the highest recorded temperature ever! in Texas is 120F or 49C (see link)
Click to expand...

-40 to +120f is pretty common for testing. While it is possible that temperatures can exceed 50degrees c its not that common (only a few hours during the day) to be a huge headache and usually not by much. At the 49 degrees C no doubt they will measure performance and fluid temps etc. The will most likely be able to see if any issues exist operating in the 50 degree range. The biggest issue I would imagine would be things like engine performance while taking off, possibly taking an extra few meters.

The bigger issue would be to find consistent days above say 55 degrees to be able test the aircraft. Not so much of an issue for the A but for the B there are no doubt quiet strict rules on temperature ranges and max tax off weight.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_weather_records"]List of weather records - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
The hottest temperature actually recorded by BOM in Australia is 50.8 degrees in Australia in 1960 (in a white box 1.5 m above the ground in the shade). So 49 degree c measured the same way should be fine.
 
RAAF Wedgetail

I was recently looking at this site's picture database. They refer to the RAAF Wedgetail as a 737-800 Wedgetail. I thought the Wedgetails were based on the -700 series B737. Perhaps with -800 series wings though. Can anyone confirm?
 
Oberon said:
I was recently looking at this site's picture database. They refer to the RAAF Wedgetail as a 737-800 Wedgetail. I thought the Wedgetails were based on the -700 series B737. Perhaps with -800 series wings though. Can anyone confirm?
Click to expand...

Per the RAAF site and a Boeing PDF, the E-7 Wedgetail is based off a B737-700 IGW airframe. From memory though (and listed in Wikipedia, for what that is worth...) the design was based off the Boeing Business Jet 1 AKA the BBJ1, which itself is a version of the B737-700, which has a couple of features of the B737-800, such as winglets to improve fuel efficiency. Something I noticed thought looks at the RAAF photo, I do not see winglets on the E-7. Making things more confusing, when I searched though other sources, it appears that some B737-700's have winglets, while others do not. If winglets can be retrofitted to the RAAF E-6 Wedgetails, and result in either improved fuel efficiency, improved flight handling characteristics, or both, without degrading the operating characteristics of the E-7 (and it will not cost an arm and a leg...) then I would like to see winglets added.

-Cheers
 
Todjaeger said:
Per the RAAF site and a Boeing PDF, the E-7 Wedgetail is based off a B737-700 IGW airframe. From memory though (and listed in Wikipedia, for what that is worth...) the design was based off the Boeing Business Jet 1 AKA the BBJ1, which itself is a version of the B737-700, which has a couple of features of the B737-800, such as winglets to improve fuel efficiency. Something I noticed thought looks at the RAAF photo, I do not see winglets on the E-7. Making things more confusing, when I searched though other sources, it appears that some B737-700's have winglets, while others do not. If winglets can be retrofitted to the RAAF E-6 Wedgetails, and result in either improved fuel efficiency, improved flight handling characteristics, or both, without degrading the operating characteristics of the E-7 (and it will not cost an arm and a leg...) then I would like to see winglets added.

-Cheers
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'm sure they're based on the 700 fuselage. They looked a little short when parked next to USN P-8s during last year's search for
MH-370.
 
Todjaeger said:
Per the RAAF site and a Boeing PDF, the E-7 Wedgetail is based off a B737-700 IGW airframe. From memory though (and listed in Wikipedia, for what that is worth...) the design was based off the Boeing Business Jet 1 AKA the BBJ1, which itself is a version of the B737-700, which has a couple of features of the B737-800, such as winglets to improve fuel efficiency. Something I noticed thought looks at the RAAF photo, I do not see winglets on the E-7. Making things more confusing, when I searched though other sources, it appears that some B737-700's have winglets, while others do not. If winglets can be retrofitted to the RAAF E-6 Wedgetails, and result in either improved fuel efficiency, improved flight handling characteristics, or both, without degrading the operating characteristics of the E-7 (and it will not cost an arm and a leg...) then I would like to see winglets added.

-Cheers
Click to expand...

Fuel efficiency is all well and good, but the ALR-2001 wingtip ESM receivers currently on the Wedgetail will have to go somewhere...

;)
 
ADMk2 said:
Fuel efficiency is all well and good, but the ALR-2001 wingtip ESM receivers currently on the Wedgetail will have to go somewhere...

;)
Click to expand...

Hence my line, quoted below.

Todjaeger said:
...without degrading the operating characteristics of the E-7...
Click to expand...

Depending on weight, shape, etc. they, or a different but comparable model might be able to be positioned on a wingtip, but even that could have a potentially negative impact on the operating characteristics of an E-7. Or it could have no improvement in any area of E-7 operations. Or be just plain, outright too expensive.

All of these would make such a modification not worthwhile. What would be interesting to see, is if the Turkish or South Korean versions of the B737 AEW&C are kitted with wingtips or not, and the reasoning behind the decision.

One of the other things I have been wondering, is whether the kit aboard an E-7 could be fitted aboard a P-8, with the aircraft able to utilize all the onboard electronics for battlespace awareness?

-Cheers
 
Todjaeger said:
One of the other things I have been wondering, is whether the kit aboard an E-7 could be fitted aboard a P-8, with the aircraft able to utilize all the onboard electronics for battlespace awareness?

-Cheers
Click to expand...

P8 briefs I attended had the P8 geeks stating openly that they were superior platforms at the COP level than a lot of AEW and AWACs contemporaries. (incl E7 which rankled the E7 geeks somewhat :))
 
Todjaeger said:
Hence my line, quoted below.



Depending on weight, shape, etc. they, or a different but comparable model might be able to be positioned on a wingtip, but even that could have a potentially negative impact on the operating characteristics of an E-7. Or it could have no improvement in any area of E-7 operations. Or be just plain, outright too expensive.

All of these would make such a modification not worthwhile. What would be interesting to see, is if the Turkish or South Korean versions of the B737 AEW&C are kitted with wingtips or not, and the reasoning behind the decision.

One of the other things I have been wondering, is whether the kit aboard an E-7 could be fitted aboard a P-8, with the aircraft able to utilize all the onboard electronics for battlespace awareness?

-Cheers
Click to expand...

Nope.
MB
 
Todjaeger said:
Hence my line, quoted below.



Depending on weight, shape, etc. they, or a different but comparable model might be able to be positioned on a wingtip, but even that could have a potentially negative impact on the operating characteristics of an E-7. Or it could have no improvement in any area of E-7 operations. Or be just plain, outright too expensive.

All of these would make such a modification not worthwhile. What would be interesting to see, is if the Turkish or South Korean versions of the B737 AEW&C are kitted with wingtips or not, and the reasoning behind the decision.

One of the other things I have been wondering, is whether the kit aboard an E-7 could be fitted aboard a P-8, with the aircraft able to utilize all the onboard electronics for battlespace awareness?

-Cheers
Click to expand...

Without a detailed technical engineering analysis and flight test program, there far too many variables including weight, cabling, operational effectiveness, antenna position and probably 1000 other considerations (and trade offs) that would have to be fully understood before one could actually consider the pros and cons of whether or not winglets would be a cost effective improvement to the aircraft.

Reduced fuel burn and increased range / loiter time are obvious benefits. Losing ESM coverage in a critical combat node, most certainly isn't in what is afterall a combat aircraft...
 
gf0012-aust said:
P8 briefs I attended had the P8 geeks stating openly that they were superior platforms at the COP level than a lot of AEW and AWACs contemporaries. (incl E7 which rankled the E7 geeks somewhat :))
Click to expand...

Personal preference? :)

I doubt any would concede that the P8 has better radar coverage than the E7, which is of course its primary purpose. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top