Author Topic: AWACS competitors  (Read 19088 times)

Offline The Big Gimper

  • Any model will look better in RCAF, SEAC or FAA markings
  • Global Moderator
  • Cut. Cut. Cut. Measure. Cut. Cut. Crap. Toss.
    • Photobucket Modeling Album
AWACS competitors
« on: November 21, 2012, 05:47:53 AM »
Found this over at Secret Projects. Includes DC-8 with camo, C-141, E-3 with the UFO, I mean dome on top of the tail.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2012, 06:21:34 AM by The Big Gimper »
Work in progress ::

I am giving up listing them. They all end up on the shelf of procrastination anyways.

User and abuser of Bothans...

Offline jschmus

  • Aims to please.
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2012, 12:54:55 PM »
That E-3 with 8 TF-34s is tasty.
"Life isn’t divided into genres. It’s a horrifying, romantic, tragic, comical, science-fiction cowboy detective novel. You know, with a bit of pornography if you're lucky."-Alan Moore

Offline Diamondback

  • SC
  • Head of the crew dog fan boy club
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2012, 01:39:21 PM »
IIRC, the reason the TF33 was selected as a J57 replacement on the B-52H was that at the time an 8xTF33-powered AWACS was being planned.

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #3 on: November 22, 2012, 03:01:51 PM »
IIRC, the reason the TF33 was selected as a J57 replacement on the B-52H was that at the time an 8xTF33-powered AWACS was being planned.
I'm afraid the B-52H predates AWACS by several years.  The last B-52H was constructed in 1964.  The replacement of the J57 by the TF33 was a natural since the TF33 is a faned version of the same basic core engine (civil equivalents are the JT3C for the J57 and the JT3D for the TF33).  The 8X TF34 arrangement was to allow a fuel-saving cruise on four engines while having all eight available for takeoff and landing.

Offline Daryl J.

  • Assures us he rarely uses model glue in dentistry
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #4 on: November 22, 2012, 03:08:33 PM »
Turbopropped DC-7
Convair 880

kwyxdxLg5T

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #5 on: November 22, 2012, 03:12:11 PM »
Turbopropped DC-7
Convair 880
Or do the P-3AEW rather earlier.  If you need more room, develop it from an Electra directly.  Mind you, neither, nor the DC-7, has as wide a cabin as the first generation jetliners but, on the other hand, they do have more comfortable cabins than the E-2 (speaking from experience, I've been in both E-2 and EP-3 cabins).

Offline Daryl J.

  • Assures us he rarely uses model glue in dentistry
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #6 on: November 22, 2012, 04:48:39 PM »
C-133 then.
kwyxdxLg5T

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • Holding Pattern
  • *
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding...
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #7 on: November 22, 2012, 10:49:41 PM »
I've had this idea of an EB-52, it would have a E-3 sized radome but not above the fuselage.  My idea is that the aircraft would fly at extreme altitude so to make the radome more effective it would hang out under the fuselage on a streamlined boom.  When on the ground the radome is stuck away in what was the bomb bay area so that the bottom of the radome is about flush with the bottom of the fuselage.  I did some 'match-up' of parts sometime ago and I don't see any real issues with the installation. The boom would be 'flyable', taking some design idea from the refueling booms of the C-135's. Instead of having a room full of operators and to save space inside the cabin, the whole system would be "real-time' data-linked to a ground operations room, something like how UAV's operate.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2012, 10:58:30 PM by kitnut617 »

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2012, 02:11:00 AM »
Hmmm...take one E-3...add engines from B-52....
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline The Big Gimper

  • Any model will look better in RCAF, SEAC or FAA markings
  • Global Moderator
  • Cut. Cut. Cut. Measure. Cut. Cut. Crap. Toss.
    • Photobucket Modeling Album
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2012, 02:45:33 AM »
Go fast or go home ...



Source: http://www.edwardsflighttest.com/b70.html
« Last Edit: November 23, 2012, 02:47:04 AM by The Big Gimper »
Work in progress ::

I am giving up listing them. They all end up on the shelf of procrastination anyways.

User and abuser of Bothans...

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #10 on: November 23, 2012, 03:51:50 AM »
I've had this idea of an EB-52, it would have a E-3 sized radome but not above the fuselage.  My idea is that the aircraft would fly at extreme altitude so to make the radome more effective it would hang out under the fuselage on a streamlined boom.  When on the ground the radome is stuck away in what was the bomb bay area so that the bottom of the radome is about flush with the bottom of the fuselage.  I did some 'match-up' of parts sometime ago and I don't see any real issues with the installation. The boom would be 'flyable', taking some design idea from the refueling booms of the C-135's. Instead of having a room full of operators and to save space inside the cabin, the whole system would be "real-time' data-linked to a ground operations room, something like how UAV's operate.
Why use a long  boom?  What you describe is very close to the installation of the "M&M" antenna and radome in the underside former "weapons bay" of the EP-3.  In use it deploys down just far enough to clear the bay and retracts for takeoffs and landing.  There's quite the hydraulic and drive set-up to do all that and it's actuated from a simple lever tucked into a corner of the pressure cabin.

Offline Diamondback

  • SC
  • Head of the crew dog fan boy club
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #11 on: November 23, 2012, 04:10:00 AM »
Evan, you're right--misremembered, it was the A-10 that had its engines chosen for commonality. (Pro experience burns things in pretty well, but one of the hazards of being a knowledgeable amateur is that if you spend too long away from the subject fragments of information start blending together in memory.)

And, IIRC, one of Dale Brown's mutant "Old Dog" B-52s in his novels had a radar mounted on its spine that gave it some AWACS capability, but it was an ISAR system, and probably an AESA rather than moving antenna--it was described as a wedge on top of the bird.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2012, 04:23:41 AM by Diamondback »

Offline Cliffy B

  • Ship Whiffer Extraordinaire...master of Beyond Visual Range Modelling
  • Its ZOTT!!!
    • My Artwork
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #12 on: November 23, 2012, 05:06:48 AM »
Oh man, I wonder how long it would take the engineers to rig the rotodome and its support struts for Mach 3  ;D
"Radials growl, inlines purr, jets blow!"  -Anonymous

"Helos don't fly.  They vibrate so violently that the ground rejects them."  -Tom Clancy

"If all else fails, call in an air strike."  -Anonymous

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • Holding Pattern
  • *
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding...
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #13 on: November 23, 2012, 06:39:43 AM »
I've had this idea of an EB-52, it would have a E-3 sized radome but not above the fuselage.  My idea is that the aircraft would fly at extreme altitude so to make the radome more effective it would hang out under the fuselage on a streamlined boom.  When on the ground the radome is stuck away in what was the bomb bay area so that the bottom of the radome is about flush with the bottom of the fuselage.  I did some 'match-up' of parts sometime ago and I don't see any real issues with the installation. The boom would be 'flyable', taking some design idea from the refueling booms of the C-135's. Instead of having a room full of operators and to save space inside the cabin, the whole system would be "real-time' data-linked to a ground operations room, something like how UAV's operate.
Why use a long  boom?  What you describe is very close to the installation of the "M&M" antenna and radome in the underside former "weapons bay" of the EP-3.  In use it deploys down just far enough to clear the bay and retracts for takeoffs and landing.  There's quite the hydraulic and drive set-up to do all that and it's actuated from a simple lever tucked into a corner of the pressure cabin.

That's interesting to know Evan, I was thinking that it had to be well clear of the fuselage like how the top mounted system is.

Offline Diamondback

  • SC
  • Head of the crew dog fan boy club
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #14 on: November 23, 2012, 06:54:26 AM »
I'd suspect, since most of an AWACS radome's radiation is emitted downward, it's at least partially for crew safety--the high standoff above keeps the cabin out to minimum safe distance to avoid crew cooking, belly radomes don't have that problem.

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #15 on: November 23, 2012, 11:32:22 AM »
Just a thought for an EB-52, a Phalcon phased-array system mounted on those slab sides, a pressurized capsule in the weapons bay as on the ERB-47, and a couple crew stations in the cockpit converted to command and control positions.  Add in a satellite link to network command and control and you'd have a formidable aircraft.  Personally, though, I think you really need to add modern engines but that's another arguement.

Offline Diamondback

  • SC
  • Head of the crew dog fan boy club
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #16 on: November 23, 2012, 11:41:33 AM »
Or stretch the fwd crew compartment for a couple extra rows of seating (at least one, moving the Offense/Nav team upstairs gives you the whole lower deck as a control compartment), and use the bomb bay for fuel, electronics and defensive weaponry. A prof and I once hatched a dedicated fighter-killer BUFF that would've had "Combat AWACS" capability...

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #17 on: November 23, 2012, 11:56:03 AM »
*laughs* On the B-2, some of us wiled away some time looking at what variants the modular construction method would allow.  While the most obvious are RB-2 and KB-2 variants, we did look at others.  But, given what Tacit Blue was originally intended for (the radar portion of Pave Mover), we did discuss some EB-2 variants, though you'd likely need the satellite relay back to a control center to properly use the data.

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • Holding Pattern
  • *
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding...
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #18 on: November 23, 2012, 11:16:38 PM »
Just a thought for an EB-52, a Phalcon phased-array system mounted on those slab sides, a pressurized capsule in the weapons bay as on the ERB-47, and a couple crew stations in the cockpit converted to command and control positions.  Add in a satellite link to network command and control and you'd have a formidable aircraft.  Personally, though, I think you really need to add modern engines but that's another arguement.

I'm not up on radar systems Evan, is that Phalcon system in addition to the dish system ? or are they two different systems ?  I'm thinking four CF6's for engines (Aircraft in Miniature now sell these separately, with pylons)

I've had this plan on making a version of every B-52 (in 1/72 scale), and for the RB-52 I started to make a recon' pressurized capsule.  I found that a HO/OO train fuel tanker car body is just about the right size for the capsule, suitable modified with camera ports etc ---

Offline Diamondback

  • SC
  • Head of the crew dog fan boy club
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #19 on: November 23, 2012, 11:25:14 PM »
Kitnut, my understanding is that the Phalcon system is flat-panel antennas for air-search, and just like any other aircraft with it existing weather/nav/etc nose radar would be retained.

Re engines, CF6 or JT9D are both plausible, BUFF testbeds have flown with them replacing J57's on the #3 pylon... for Go Big or Go Home, my prof (who used to command a fighter squadron) and I went with an uprated GE90 at 125k# thrust since we were rewinging anyway. (Personal bias: "enough power" is when you can accelerate straight up even loaded.LOL)

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • Holding Pattern
  • *
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding...
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #20 on: November 23, 2012, 11:30:26 PM »
Kitnut, my understanding is that the Phalcon system is flat-panel antennas for air-search, and just like any other aircraft with it existing weather/nav/etc nose radar would be retained.

DB, I didn't phrase that very well, would the Phalcon system be in addition to the E-3 dish system, as I understand it the E-3 is an AWAC system and not a dedicated air-search system.

Offline Daryl J.

  • Assures us he rarely uses model glue in dentistry
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #21 on: November 24, 2012, 12:51:08 AM »
In this day of electronic miniaturization, can that huge disc be reduced in size or eliminated altogether?

[edit].  Answer pleasantly found below, thanks!
« Last Edit: November 24, 2012, 03:08:48 AM by Daryl J. »
kwyxdxLg5T

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #22 on: November 24, 2012, 02:40:28 AM »
Kitnut, my understanding is that the Phalcon system is flat-panel antennas for air-search, and just like any other aircraft with it existing weather/nav/etc nose radar would be retained.

DB, I didn't phrase that very well, would the Phalcon system be in addition to the E-3 dish system, as I understand it the E-3 is an AWAC system and not a dedicated air-search system.
Phalcon is instead of the dish.  the rotating dish is replaced by large AESA transmitter-receiver flat-panel antenna arrays giving considerably more capability.  In theory, you could combine AWACS and JSTARS into one antenna fit that way and a few more algorithms could give an air-search mode, too.  *grin* Replace the nose radar with a full-up fighter radar and be able to add guidance to missiles launched from your platform or other platforms.  Part of my thought for a P-3AEW mod'd for interceptor missile operations would be an AN/APG-71 or, a bit farther back in time, AWG-9, and carrying Phoenix missiles as well as being able to take hand-offs on ground-launched Nike-Phoenix missiles or Sea-Phoenix missiles.

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #23 on: November 24, 2012, 01:24:08 PM »
One thought for mods to late-model B-52s, B-1s, and B-2s; all there are set up to use the CSRL (Common Strategic Rotary Launcher) (B-1 and B-2 can each carry one in each weapons bay, making for 3 and 2 respectively, and I'm not certain how many a B-52 can carry).  These can be loaded with a wide variety of stores for different missions.  In addition, all three can be configured to carry "conventional" bombs with different guidance packages.  This could make for interesting options in conjunction with an AEW&C option (fill the potential third seat in the B-2 with a battle coordinator working with the sat-linked control center as well as what ever armament options the B-2 has (I've one variant of the B-2 in mind where the RH weapons bay has the aux. tank fitted and the LH one has a radar pallet with a large LO AESA radar installed in a suitable fairing (shaped much like an enlarged TSSAM with the front contours mirrored to the back).  With a bit of care, you could even add some long-range electro-optical systems behind a LO window or windows.

Offline Diamondback

  • SC
  • Head of the crew dog fan boy club
Re: AWACS competitors
« Reply #24 on: November 24, 2012, 02:07:51 PM »
Stock B-52 is one CSRL, the "stretch" my ex-fighter-jock prof and I pitched would take two. CSRL is only used on 2000-lb-size bombs (Mk 84, JSOW, JDAM) and ALCM, 500-pounders are loaded into conventional racks (sadly, the space-wasting low-density ones they were built with, the high-density clips made for Project Big Belly are all scrapmetal as far as I can find).

Hardcore BUFF-geek who's actually had 15 minutes of pilot-seat time in a parked -D, over here. :) (55-094, Kansas Aviation Museum in Wichita at the 50th Birthday party. Got the photo, too...)
« Last Edit: November 24, 2012, 04:11:29 PM by Diamondback »