MQ-25 US Navy Stingray Program

sferrin · by **sferrin** » 05 Jan 2018, 14:12

johnwill wrote:I wonder if that inlet might be a variation of the NACA flush inlet duct.

The attachment vdsvrvre.jpg is no longer available

AGM-129 (stealth cruise missile - that they retired) used one:

Dragon029 · by **Dragon029** » 06 Jan 2018, 03:55

Looking at this screenshot:

If you check out the top left of the image (which is towards the nose) you'll notice that the line (which goes up over the top of the fuselage) that's part of the "JET INTAKE DANGER" box, seems to be distorted, curving downward and then upward again, with there being odd shadows and reflected light that shouldn't be present on something like the Tacit Blue's intake or on a normal NACA intake.

Here's a zoom-in on the area if that's not clear; again see the top-left of the image:

I wouldn't be surprised if the design resembles more of a flattened DSI style intake, where there's a central bump and the intake begins to deepen first at the sides. The intention with such an intake could be to capture and control the vortices coming off the nose / fuselage chines, particularly when this aircraft is coming in for a carrier landing at an elevated angle of attack.

blain · by **blain** » 01 Mar 2018, 23:38

SM-6 for the Super Hornet to restore Navy's long range interception capabilities.

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articl ... 13137.html

What about a long endurance UCAV which would loiter several hundred miles from the carrier?

element1loop · by **element1loop** » 02 Mar 2018, 07:16

blain wrote:SM-6 for the Super Hornet to restore Navy's long range interception capabilities.

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articl ... 13137.html

What about a long endurance UCAV which would loiter several hundred miles from the carrier?

What a bad idea (SM6 as AAM I mean ... and article shows a classic hornet image ...).

~400 nm radius increases to just 510 nm radius?

The F-35C with AIM-120 can do ~760nm radius now.

Just buy F-35Cs, with C7s.

AIM-120C7 has more range than AIM-54 and is far more lethal.

marsavian · by **marsavian** » 02 Mar 2018, 18:30

AIM-120C7 has about 60-65% range of the AIM-54, the AIM-120D is about 90-95%.

element1loop · by **element1loop** » 03 Mar 2018, 07:53

marsavian wrote:AIM-120C7 has about 60-65% range of the AIM-54, the AIM-120D is about 90-95%.

I can go with the D, even better.

blain · by **blain** » 08 Mar 2018, 00:43

More info on Boeing's proposal for the MQ-25A. Interesting...

http://aviationweek.com/aviation-week-s ... 5-stingray

The aircraft seems small. I am curious to see how they plan to carry enough fuel to offload 14,000 lbs at 500 nm. I am guessing that in addition to a refueling pod that the aircraft will carry from two to four external fuel tanks. 480 gallon or 600? I am also curious as to the maximum take off weight and the internal fuel volume.

zero-one · by **zero-one** » 08 Mar 2018, 05:12

blain wrote:More info on Boeing's proposal for the MQ-25A. Interesting...

http://aviationweek.com/aviation-week-s ... 5-stingray

Its behind the pay wall.
But anyway heres the picture

blain · by **blain** » 08 Mar 2018, 23:52

I thought the internal volume looks larger than a fighter. It seems about the size of a legacy hornet or super hornet. I'd guess the latter. Likely one engine. In the class of the F414?

rheonomic · by **rheonomic** » 09 Mar 2018, 00:57

blain wrote:In the class of the F414?

Probably is an F414 for commonality with the Rhino.

zero-one · by **zero-one** » 09 Mar 2018, 17:19

Non afterburning F414 maybe, or does it need to go break the barrier?

SpudmanWP · by **SpudmanWP** » 09 Mar 2018, 17:23

NWIH that goes mach+

blain · by **blain** » 10 Mar 2018, 00:25

Non after burner, high bypass? Ideally you'd want it to be able to escort the package at a cruise speed close to a fighter. So what't the likely take off weight? +50,000?

And where's the intake? At the top of the fuselage like Tacit Blue?

SpudmanWP · by **SpudmanWP** » 10 Mar 2018, 00:35

Tankers typically meet them to either top them off only once on ingress or egress. They do not typically "escort".

zero-one · by **zero-one** » 10 Mar 2018, 10:00

Paul Metz said that when the ATF program was conceptualized the contractors said to the DOD, Range, maneuverability, speed. Choose 2, you can't have all.

They cut range out of the equation. Now there are talks that maneuverability would be cut on the next program.

I have a hunch that this idea doesn't sit too well within the fighter community. Now whenever I see programs like this or the advent engine, I'm thinking some guys in today's fighter mafia still have some influence so that their next new toy won't be a stealth F-111 or YF-12