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

[Bluey 006]

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.

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.

 

[gf0012-aust]

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.

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

 

[Bluey 006]

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

Fair enough, I figured as much and good to hear! But felt like they were/are valid questions based on open source information.

 

[ADMk2]

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....

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...

 

[Bluey 006]

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...

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)

 

[StingrayOZ]

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)

-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.

 

[Oberon]

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?

 

[Todjaeger]

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?

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

 

[Oberon]

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

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.

 

[ADMk2]

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

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

 

[Todjaeger]

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

Hence my line, quoted below.

...without degrading the operating characteristics of the E-7...

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

 

[gf0012-aust]

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

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 )

 

[Milne Bay]

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

Nope.
MB

 

[ADMk2]

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

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...

 

[ADMk2]

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 )

Personal preference?

I doubt any would concede that the P8 has better radar coverage than the E7, which is of course its primary purpose.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Personal preference?

I doubt any would concede that the P8 has better radar coverage than the E7, which is of course its primary purpose.

some of it was IMO well founded

eg inputs

 

[ADMk2]

If anyone is looking for a good laugh this Easter Monday, there is this...

No Cookies | The Advertiser

(Submitted in this thread due to the predominant F-35 coverage).

 

[phreeky]

TBH I'm not sure you should be linking to that, I feel guilty for increasing the hit count.

 

[aussienscale]

If anyone is looking for a good laugh this Easter Monday, there is this...

No Cookies | The Advertiser

(Submitted in this thread due to the predominant F-35 coverage).

OMG !! I am speechless

 

[protoplasm]

If anyone is looking for a good laugh this Easter Monday, there is this...

No Cookies | The Advertiser

(Submitted in this thread due to the predominant F-35 coverage).

I don't have the words to describe the ridiculousness contained in that