F-117 possible AtA capability

a reply to: mightmight

i dont think it would be that big of a mod to make granted you could carry one bomb and MAYBE two sidewinders or more likly an AMRAAM



with all the talk of the 117's shadow that is still classified apparently, makes you wonder what one was really the more useful aircraft seeing as they let the nighthawk out but not its friend.

i dont remember if it was from this DS or DS1 where they flew from the US to Baghdad and back....maybe im thinking of the B2's

a reply to: penroc3

B-2 headed nonstop to Kosovo. They didn't take part in Desert Storm. F-117's flew out of Khamis Mushait.

a reply to: RadioRobert

ahh yes Kosovo.....i feel like people forgot about that whole mess here in America.


and funny enough the only counter force to shoot down a stealth aircraft(not including the U2 )

tom clancy IMO is a tech prophet and even with no direct information seems to just grasp military tech in a truly gifted way.

in his book "red storm rising" the way the "f-19" was used was EXACTLY how it could be an air to air platform
but in same way he also clearly shown its massive limitations..

in the book by ben richards "the skunk works" you see the development , operational missions and limits (im sure some things kept secret) of the f-117. along with some of its desert storm missions.

the problem outside of an "ambush and run" on air to air targets that dont fight back (like tankers and awac type planes) is the limits of the aircraft design..

one ... it is SUB SONIC . it cant run away very fast..

two.. being sub sonic the evasive capabilities are VERY LIMITED

three .. its internal bays have limited weapons stores... they could only take on a few targets (maybe two or at best 4 depending on the air to air missile ) and no gun... along with adding any exterior rails would destroy the stealth qualities...more on that next

four...everything on the plane was designed to maximize stealth.. from the sub sonic speed (to also help with ir detection) , limited active radars, no exterior parts (like adding rails) , making weapons internal and completely smooth surfaces..
in fact one mission the iraq almost tagged one because the bomb door got stuck open and it increased its delectably ALOT.. in so much that the plane had a lock on with missile on the way until they got it shut...

hell even in some tests if the screw heads were just a tad up or they didnt have flush panels (some had a putty that had to be added every time) the radar signature went up alot..

so as a air to air fighter vs fighter... unless ambush and last ditch lucky self defense, not the plane for that...

as an ambush role on high value (but not fighter type) type like tankers, command and control , transports, and maybe bombers or unarmed recon... could be very effective..

just like in red storm rising

scrounger

a reply to: scrounger

The problem with this mission, even against targets like AWACS, is that they'd need a light task force in support.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Was the PESA added for the Naval F-117 that lockmart wanted or was the idea more general? I recall them wanting the Naval nighthawk to have a more multirole missionset

a reply to: hawkguy

It started for the XA/F-117 for the Navy, then was proposed for the F-117B for the Air Force and RAF.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I think your timeline is wrong, but I'm not going to dig things out right now. Maybe later. Not saying you're wrong, because I don't trust my memory as much as I used to.

a reply to: RadioRobert

It may be. Some F-117 guys were talking about it, so I may have put the pieces together wrong.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
One aircraft had an LPI PESA radar installed as a test article, but it was never used operationally. That would have given them access to the AIM-7 and -120. There were rumors of a test firing of an AIM-9 on the ground, but the aircraft suffered damage to the RAM around the weapons bays.

Other than tests like this, the F-117 never had any on board radar, right?

a reply to: wirehead

Correct. They used systems like FLIR, and warning receivers. Once they were stealthed up they were passive on emissions.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I am sure I read a report or an interview, where when maintenance crews would go into the hangar in the morning where B2's were stored; there would be dead insects all over the place due to the RAM>

Or is that just one of those urban legend / myths?

a reply to: pigsy2400

They were bats during Desert Storm. They'd fly into the F-117 fins mostly and be found around the aircraft in the morning. I think it was the then squadron commander that said, "That's when I knew this stealth # worked".

So when did the AIM-9X come out? Could it be slaved to the FLIR? The problem there is the AIM-9 series fires its motor while on the rails.

AIM-7 and HARM are the same basic body, can you fire a HARM at an AWACS? You only need to kill the radar.

What about mad dogging an AIM-120 or using another aircraft for guidance data? I hate to say it: Companion?

The whale could loiter about with an active radar unseen, could that type of system provide guidance for an AMRAAM?

a reply to: Flipper35

The -9X entered service in 2003.

a reply to: Flipper35

can you fire a HARM at an AWACS? 

You can. If it's radiating, the HARM will home. You'd have to hope they keep radiating, I suppose. Not ideal, but plausible. Much better range than the contemporary Sidewinders, for sure.
There was a dedicated Sparrow ARM development for air-to-air trailed, and.Seekbat, and ERASE all happening roughly around the same time or before the F-117 development. So it's not impossible that there was a limited run of a still classified anti-AWACS ARM.

If you've got a LO companion that can illuminate for Sparrow or AMRAAM, there's no real reason to use the F-117 to carry an extremely limited loadout of AAMs.

It was possible and in the books for an AIM9. Self defense just in case. However the lock on after launch and getting the jet with no radar or comm or visibility to a stern aspect didn’t make sense. Dropping altitude was more effective.

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: Flipper35

can you fire a HARM at an AWACS? 

You can. If it's radiating, the HARM will home. You'd have to hope they keep radiating, I suppose. Not ideal, but plausible. Much better range than the contemporary Sidewinders, for sure.
There was a dedicated Sparrow ARM development for air-to-air trailed, and.Seekbat, and ERASE all happening roughly around the same time or before the F-117 development. So it's not impossible that there was a limited run of a still classified anti-AWACS ARM.

If you've got a LO companion that can illuminate for Sparrow or AMRAAM, there's no real reason to use the F-117 to carry an extremely limited loadout of AAMs.

I was thinking something like the whale. The F117 could fly close enough for the missile range and the whale would be targeting at a distance directing attacks. You could be right that a whale could be used as a missile truck for the same purpose. AWACS and tankers.

a reply to: Flipper35

or just pop the ordnance doors open and shut to get a blip every once and awhile to keep the RADAR's looking for whatever is out there.

and as long there is something pinging the radars they will be looking and either the 117 or its buddy could shoot a a radar homing missile.


i know they made a hypersonic AIM-120 kind of like a pre-meteor

www.thedrive.com...