[FoRK] "Two faces of the Tea Party"

J. Andrew Rogers andrew at ceruleansystems.com
Sun Jun 27 11:21:48 PDT 2010

On Jun 27, 2010, at 10:19 AM, mdw at martinwills.com wrote:
> This is an important issue that you fail to understand.  When the external
> hardpoints are populated, the F-22 loses ALL STEALTH capabilites and
> becomes a $138 million dollar target.

You aren't the first person to think of this. The design intent is that the external stores are covered with a disposable shroud or pod that maintains the stealth characteristics. Working through the engineering details and testing of a stealthy bomb shroud that could be deployed in supersonic flight was something planned for after the basic platform was released.

> This is wrong.  The SAM's in the 70's were truck mountable only and not
> shoulder mounted.  

MANPADS were generally introduced in the 1960s. The A-10 was designed in the 1970s. Some design elements of the A-10 only make sense in the context of resisting the MANPADS of that era.

> This is also incorrect. The major funds being spent, are for kinetic kill
> devices and rail guns.  They have a several hundred miles range, can be
> LAV/Tank mounted and have the potential to be guided to target in route.

Railguns are a long way from battlefield deployment, they haven't even worked out the kinks under optimal deployment parameters never mind in a form factor that would work on a conventional battlefield. 

The current hyperkinetic battlefield platforms are based on a new kind of compact rocket motor. Range is around 10km. While a longer range version could be built, I am not aware of any such program (not that I really follow these things).

More information about the FoRK mailing list