Stealth Eagle?

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

skyhigh

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 467
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2009, 11:01

Unread post20 Mar 2009, 12:53

Unless the Boeing technicians have developed plasma stealth and engine noise cancellation for the Silent Eagle.
Offline

asiatrails

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 863
  • Joined: 30 Aug 2005, 02:11

Unread post20 Mar 2009, 14:23

parrothead wrote:I was pretty shocked, too - but it's real :)

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/200 ... 7a_nr.html



Another good reason to bring back the Tomcat
Offline

skyhigh

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 467
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2009, 11:01

Unread post22 Mar 2009, 08:30

It's a bit too late for that.

Maybe the Silent Eagle should be navalized.

F-15SEN (Silent Eagle Navy)
Offline

Guysmiley

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1496
  • Joined: 26 May 2005, 19:39

Unread post22 Mar 2009, 17:09

Heck, while you're at it, let's "navalize" the SR-71. And the Saturn V. Or how about:

Image
"Yo dawg, I herd you like navalizing things so we navalized your navy!"

:poke:
Offline

geogen

Banned

  • Posts: 3123
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2008, 15:28
  • Location: 45 km offshore, New England

Unread post23 Mar 2009, 01:02

skyhigh wrote:It's a bit too late for that.

Maybe the Silent Eagle should be navalized.

F-15SEN (Silent Eagle Navy)


I think it would be much cheaper and more efficient to just Silent the Super Hornet? (SSH).
The Super-Viper has not yet begun to concede.
Offline

cywolf32

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 623
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2005, 12:04
  • Location: USA

Unread post23 Mar 2009, 01:07

TOOOO F$#$%#%%#% funny Guysmiley :lmao:
Offline

TC

F-16.net Moderator

F-16.net Moderator

  • Posts: 4002
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2004, 07:06

Unread post23 Mar 2009, 02:41

skyhigh wrote:plasma stealth.


No, they're actually saving the "plasma stealth", photon torpedos, and warp drive for McAir's next fighter, the Klingon Bird of Prey.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3139
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post23 Mar 2009, 12:32

WooT!
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

skyhigh

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 467
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2009, 11:01

Unread post23 Mar 2009, 13:26

I wonder why there are no photos of the Silent Eagle's engine nozzles? Maybe they're either a radically different shape, have TVC or both?
Offline

Tinito_16

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 764
  • Joined: 31 May 2007, 21:46

Unread post23 Mar 2009, 15:02

If they really have something, it figures the nozzles would be a different shape. Seems round holes are really bad for stealth, you gotta have something with straight lines.
"Like the coldest winter chill, heaven beside you...hell within" Alice In Chains
Offline

strykerxo

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 394
  • Joined: 21 Mar 2008, 04:40

Unread post23 Mar 2009, 18:33

TC wrote:
skyhigh wrote:plasma stealth.


No, they're actually saving the "plasma stealth", photon torpedos, and warp drive for McAir's next fighter, the Klingon Bird of Prey.


Don't forget the Flux-capacitor :lmao:
Offline

Goodwin

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 28
  • Joined: 20 Sep 2007, 18:29

Unread post23 Mar 2009, 20:20

Appears that Phantom Works pulled a rabbit out of its hat. They would not make a single prototype but two of them (maybe the second prototype a single seat fighter interceptor) and they would not make a F-15SE without getting the permission of the USAF as the US Government is the only one legally authorized to "own" a fighter aircraft. Point appears to be the construction of CFTs with embedded missiles inside it - sacrifice fuel and some range but you have tankers and preserve stealth ability of the aircraft by eliminating the hanging of missiles outside aircraft. That is why first flight is 2010 to give them time to apply stealth coatings to the F-15SE demonstrator prototype.

I see that prototype as a replacement for hte company F-15E which was the first F-15E built and flown in December 1986.. Hopefully that aircraft will reside in Boeing's cavernous hangar as a museum piece. They already have a AVB-8B and a Phantom garaged there and those aircraft are seldom flown.

Long range, I see the USAF as a buyer of up to 125 F-15SE's to deal with aging aircraft issues among F-15C/D's and early F-15E's and to encourage other foreign buyers to join the queve. I do not see the aircraft as taking away from F-22's as it looks more likely than only a single order of 20 aircraft will be authorized this year to bring it up to 207 airframes and we will need additional aircraft of the "heavy" class F-15 to help augument F-22 inventory.
Offline

skyhigh

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 467
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2009, 11:01

Unread post23 Mar 2009, 22:46

It's not just RCS reduction that provides stealthiness, it's the IR signature reduction, reducing the tracking capability of IRSTs and heatseekers.
Offline
User avatar

That_Engine_Guy

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2299
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2005, 05:03
  • Location: Under an engine somewhere.

Unread post24 Mar 2009, 00:08

skyhigh wrote:I wonder why there are no photos of the Silent Eagle's engine nozzles? Maybe they're either a radically different shape, have TVC or both?

One of the photos from the front actually looked like light shining through the engine bays, which would indicate there weren't even engines in that "example" or because there are just plain ole' PW-220s or PW-229s installed... :shrug:
Tinito_16 wrote:If they really have something, it figures the nozzles would be a different shape. Seems round holes are really bad for stealth, you gotta have something with straight lines.


Like the LOAN developed for the F100 series engines for reduced signature? (not thrust-vector)
Low-Observable Axisymmetrical Nozzle :cool:
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article20.html

...and yes it was 'axisymmetrical' meaning "along one axis" not 'asymmetrical' as in "along any axis"

PW's thrust-vector nozzle was known as the P/YBBN, and did not have "stealth" features.
Pitch/Yaw Balanced Beam Nozzle
http://www.f-16.net/gallery_item46797.html

Now they may be able to integrate technologies from BOTH the LOAN and P/YBBN into one nozzle; Who should we send the bill too? :shrug:

The USAF obviously didn't deem either nozzle beneficial enough to the aircraft (Viper and/or Eagle) to fund the projects past prototypes.

I must admit though, it would be a great to see hanging on the back of a PW-229 or PW-232! :evil:

Keep 'em flyin' :thumb:
TEG
[Airplanes are] near perfect, all they lack is the ability to forgive.
— Richard Collins
Offline

JetTest

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 564
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2007, 00:22

Unread post24 Mar 2009, 00:21

F100-PW-232 is not happening. Not enough business out there to justify the cost of bringing it to production.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests