(Full Disclosure) I saw Executive Decision once. In the 10 years since, I’ve slept safely with the knowledge that somewhere, somehow Navy Seals are jumping from F117’s to Boeing 747’s. So when I read that the Air Force Research Lab have finally developed a “concept of a rearming aircraft capable of reloading the wing stores of a combat aircraft while in flight,” I couldn’t help but think, “Wow, what a totally safe idea clearly based on years of success.“
The need is definitely there. The vast distances between allied airbases and missions deep within Afghanistan and Iraq affects the 75 or so daily requests CENTAF gets for things like Close Air Support and UAVs (CENTAF says it gets about 75 such requests a day). During the invasion phase of OIF, approximately 40,000 missions were split between 1800 coalition aircraft.
But couldn’t the Air Force make their rearm scheme look less dangerous, at least? The design system would consist of “a boom attachable to and extendible from the rearming aircraft; a weapons mount that is attachable to the host aircraft, and a weapons platform attached to the boom which is capable of positioning and orienting the munition for transfer from the boom to the weapons mount.” Gulp.
A similar set-up (pictured above) using a C-130 appeared in Defense Update last autumn.
Despite (my) concerns about its safety in flight (which I’ll leave for the pilots and boomers to debate) the benefits are certainly appealing. Air-to-Air reloading would enable longer flights with less maintenance, much needed heavy weapons backup for ground troops and if applied to UAV’s — ‘sentinels’ could persist for days without interference. It’s like an Air Force version of Sea Strike, providing the capability to conduct offensive operations “on demand”.
AFRL have yet to comment on the negative consequences of transferring thousands of pounds of munitions at high altitude, but I can think of one — and it rhymes with schmucking frightmare.
In the mortal words of ED’s Sgt ‘Cappy’ Matheny: “I think we’re looking up the ass end of a dead dog…but it’s worth a try“
Chocks away Cappy — chocks away.
– Steven Snell
(Big ups: Special Operations Technology)
Drones: Reloaded
Previous post: Homeland Cash: More Trash (Updated)
Next post: Rapid Fire 06/06/06
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
A cool idea. In the meantime, though, it’s worth remembering that the problem of airborne refueling of an unpiloted vehicle has yet to be proved, so my guess is we’ll see this used with planes before we see it with drones (if that).
God bless the test pilot who gets assigned this job.
Reminds me of the parasite fighter idea back from the Fifties (the Goblin?) That was dangerous as hell.
If they can get it to work, it would be worth it- IF.
Yow!
Like to see them make that work.
Yeah, it was called the Goblin (an MD product I believe).
And yeah, it was EXCEEDINGLY hard to make it work.
Anyway, best of luck to them with this project.
Most people probably wouldn’t think of this, but
it probably saves a TON of jet fuel. Jets burn
a significant amount of fuel just taking off and
climbing to cruising altitude, which is one
reason they usually top off their tanks
immediately afterwards.
If arming could be done in the air, the jets
could take off much lighter, and with much lower
drag due to the lack of external stores. You
save a bunch more fuel when rearming, too, as
the jet doesn’t have to descend, land, and take
off again.
(Yes, the stores still have to be carried to the
same altitude, but it is much more efficient to
do it with a larger jet that carries them
internally. This is the same reason why aerial
refueling is such a big win).
Haninah is on the right track. Picture this with a UCAV drone.
After all, what’s the biggest obstacle to longer aerial presence? Pilot fatigue. Put the pilot in a Vegas room, and missions can be 50 hours long with multiple pilots. All you need now is refueling in the air – check, easy. Now the UCAV is in an orbit where most of its flight time is over the target zone, not flying to and from. The remaining need? Aerial rearming. Get that right, and you’ve just invented near-constant aerial presence over target area… and that target area can be fairly deep in enemy territory if the UCAVs have stealth features (which most designs on the drawing board now do).
Many miles to go before all this is a reality, but it’s intriguing.
I dreamt of mid-air rearmament and thought it be really cool if they could do that. Damn it, just when I thought my idea was original, and here I read someone already thought of it.
Except in my concept (drawn on a restaurant napkin) it involves a probe and drogue design. The probe is on the pylon and when you bring it to the basket, the basket clasps it. Then the missile or bomb will roll down the line.
this is an Israeli invention (check the patent)don’t take this as your own invention! pictured is an F-16 receiving re-armerment not a UCAV