Article

2004-02-17

Expanding the F-1117 Nighthawk mission: JDAMS, daylight flights

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by rkb 2004-02-17 3:08:06 PM|| || Front Page|| [11127 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Cool, now they won't have to hang around painting the target with a laser.

Posted by Steve 2004-2-17 3:19:25 PM|| 2004-2-17 3:19:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 imagine that say F-117s, Raptors, JSF's, B-2's, Global Hawks, Locass, and god knows what other high tech shit hidden in the black world America could well prove utterly invincible in the air by say 2015, Also consider say 8 b-2 bombers and say 24 F-22's as a quick reaction force. you wouldn't want to be thier enamy

Posted by Jon Shep U.K 2004-2-17 3:20:13 PM|| 2004-2-17 3:20:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 I don't get the bit about daylight missions - stealth warplanes are invisible to radar, not to eyes of enemy fighter pilots. I've also never understood how the F-117 is described as a fighter - stealth warplanes do not seem to have the performance characteristics of fighters - rapid climb rate, rapid acceleration, maneuverability, high top speeds, etc.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2004-2-17 3:24:40 PM|| 2004-2-17 3:24:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 trials that could see the F-117 taking on a daylight attack role

That's plain nutz or disinformation.

Posted by Shipman 2004-2-17 3:30:35 PM|| 2004-2-17 3:30:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 The F-117 is stealthed with regard to its electromagnetic and radar signatures. It is also "low observable" visually, with black paint for night runs.

The Nighthawk is a fighter-bomber, not an ace-to-ace shoot-out fighter. A handful of them dropped a significant proportion of the bombs in Gulf 1 without suffering any losses.

Posted by rkb 2004-2-17 3:33:06 PM|| 2004-2-17 3:33:06 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 You can see some photos of the Nighthawk here

Posted by rkb 2004-2-17 3:34:43 PM|| 2004-2-17 3:34:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 i think the Nighthawk would be up so high and with a very low sunlight reflective paint job, apparently its scientifly proven that grey is the best colour for low visibility and a large plane can be rendered almost invisible to the human eye.There was also a method once tryed successfully a few decades ago that involved fighters being equiped with some sort of real bright lamp or lamps that when switched on would make the aircraft 'inviable' to the human eye or at least very difficult to see, think the tests were by either Lockheed or the USAF.

Posted by Jon Shep U.K 2004-2-17 3:35:16 PM|| 2004-2-17 3:35:16 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 Lt Col Buck Rogers It took a while but the Captain finally got his promotion.

Posted by domingo 2004-2-17 3:35:28 PM|| 2004-2-17 3:35:28 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 on deployment timing, Jane's is now saying "an initial JDAM capability for the Nighthawk fleet in early 2005, while the fleet is due to be fully capable to operate the munition in early 2006".

Assuming Bush is re-elected, expect an interesting next few years. 24-hr stealth presence over battlefields with UAVs doing armed escort as well as surveillance / reconnaisance, JDAM stocks replenished by the end of this year and Special Ops guys beefing up.

Posted by rkb 2004-2-17 3:44:23 PM|| 2004-2-17 3:44:23 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Actually, Shep, we owe most of this to your country. The majority of work done to render a plane optically invisible (or at least extremely difficult to see) by playing tricks with light was done by that famous Brit magician Jasper Maskelyne. The man actually made the Suez Canal impossible to see! (Granted, you knew where it was, but when you went there, you couldn't find it with ENOUGH accuracy to hit it with the bombs of the time...)

Hats off to one of your very best, Shep.

Ed.

Posted by Ed Becerra 2004-2-17 3:44:40 PM|| 2004-2-17 3:44:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 yeah good point about old jasper, a very clever guy he was, interesting if rather worrying is there was nothing about the future intergration of the Small diamiter bomb on the NightHawk, a weapon like that would be a huge force multipler.

Posted by Jon Shep U.K 2004-2-17 3:54:44 PM|| 2004-2-17 3:54:44 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Zhang Fei: I seem to recall watching a History Channel show that claimed that the F-117 was classified as a fighter in order to get the pilots excited about testing it. IIRC, it has no air-to-air capability.

Posted by BH 2004-2-17 4:33:53 PM|| 2004-2-17 4:33:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 Am i paranoid, or could there be more reasons to the fact that the three most interesting articles (J-dam, increase in spec ops and this) from today, all speak of things that come into service in 2005-2006?

Posted by Evert Visser 2004-2-17 4:45:50 PM|| [http://chinditz.blog-city.com/] 2004-2-17 4:45:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 re: fighter vs. bomber, it is true that the Nighthawk does not carry a cannon and is not believed to be capable of firing air to air missiles. It can carry 2 Mark 2 nuclear weapons if desired. It also has been retrofitted with the ability to disperse smaller munitions charges over an area, so it can serve to suppress ground to air attack on itself or B-2s, which Nighthawks sometimes accompany.

Re: paranoid, well you just got my cull of interesting articles from Janes (smile) but yes, by a year from now there will be replenished stockpiles, lessons-learned that are integrated into new training and tactics and some reorg of forces.

Posted by rkb 2004-2-17 4:51:41 PM|| 2004-2-17 4:51:41 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 I like the sound of that.
I like the sound of that very, very much.
;-)
Thx.

Posted by Evert Visser 2004-2-17 4:55:10 PM|| [http://chinditz.blog-city.com/] 2004-2-17 4:55:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 Invisible airplanes overhead 24/7 . . . armed with a 1,000-pound bomb that can literally be put into a pickle barrel from 30,000 feet. You could take down any target before they even knew you were there. Any target--or any person.

I love this.

Feeling safe, Mr. Kim? Mr. Arafat? M. Chirac?

Posted by Mike 2004-2-17 5:05:05 PM|| 2004-2-17 5:05:05 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 Now all we need is to make sure we have political leadership with the stones to use the hardware where it's needed the most.

Posted by Matt 2004-2-17 5:14:53 PM|| 2004-2-17 5:14:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 Hear! Hear! Matt. What's the fun of having all this cool stuff if you can't use it because the frogs and the krauts won't go along with the plan? For me, there is only one issue in this election -- who will kill more of America's enemies (before they kill us)? The answer is obviously GWB, especially now that Lieberman, the only Donk candidate serious about the WoT, is out of the race.

Posted by Tibor 2004-2-17 5:29:18 PM|| 2004-2-17 5:29:18 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 U.S. Air Force museum at Wright-Patterson AFB,Ohio has an F-117 stealth fighter and a B-2 stealth bomber on display. That's an awesome museum for anyone interested in aviation history.

Posted by GK 2004-2-17 6:19:19 PM|| 2004-2-17 6:19:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 Shipman, I believe testing daylight stealth capability is preparation for long duration loiter UAVs that can stay on station for 24 hours plus. Just hang around waiting for a target of opportunity to drop a JDAM on.

This will severely curtail out door activities for the likes of Kimmy and Osammy. No dictator will feel safe when he knows there is an aircraft up there he cant see, carrying a bomb with his name on it.

Posted by phil_b 2004-2-17 7:45:41 PM|| 2004-2-17 7:45:41 PM|| Front Page Top

19:55 KLange
07:00 Shipman
06:50 tipper
04:51 Evert Visser
03:08 Lu Baihu
02:18 Jennie Taliaferro
02:13 Jennie Taliaferro
01:14 Rex Mundi
00:25 Anonymous
00:18 Anonymous
00:16 Traveller
00:04 Old Patriot
23:59 Lucky
23:42 Lucky
23:27 Angie Schultz
23:05 GK
22:37 Mike Sylwester
22:36 GK
22:34 Atomic Conspiracy
22:30 Mike Sylwester
22:28 Mike Sylwester
22:27 Mr. Davis
22:27 Carl in NH
22:12 Robert Crawford