It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Interesting F-15 Payload

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 11:23 AM
link   
This came across my Facebook feed today. Very interesting payload on a Strike Eagle. It looks like a modified Gorgon Stare pod system. But not quite. Any guesses?

It has to be an ISR system, the question is which one. And rather interesting that they'd put it on a Strike Eagle. This means they're evolving the mission of them beyond just strike missions.





posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 11:27 AM
link   
It's an ATIMS III pod
www.air-and-space.com...
edit on 18-1-2016 by Benzer because: Added link



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Infra-red Measurement System (ATIMS) III pod? maybe?



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Holy cow! That pod is ginormous. The drag would be horrendous. And it's gotta weigh over 1000 lbs. I hope that's just for testing and not an operational configuration. The TARPS pod on the Tomcat really changed how it flew and I'm sure these would do the same to the F-15.



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 11:52 AM
link   
See, this is why I love this forum. All of four minutes.



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 11:57 AM
link   

If the margins are less than expected the test team may decide to terminate the test and re-evaluate the
predictions. Second, if a round strikes the dispensing aircraft the chase aircrew can advise the test aircraft
aircrew about the condition of their aircraft. Finally, the chase aircrew can provide additional photographic
documentation about the separation events.
Figure 3-25: Airborne Turret IR Measurement System III – (NAVAIR Photo).
3.7 LOW OBSERVABLE SYSTEMS
LO technology is a passive form of EA and has become a significant contributor to aircraft survivability
and mission effectiveness. RCS and IR signature are the two areas most relevant to EW T&E. Signature
reduction reduces the detectability of the subject aircraft. It also benefits any aircraft employing or
benefiting from RF or IRCM, as the lower signature results in higher J/S ratios at the victim sensor.
3.7.1 LO Concepts
The most important RCS consideration in aircraft design is vehicle shaping. The air vehicle is designed to
minimise the incident energy that is backscattered toward the radar, that is, the energy is directed in
CMDS performance and payload effectiveness are evaluated by testing against ground-mounted missile
seekers and radiometric measurement systems, airborne pod-mounted missile seekers and radiometric
measurement systems, and live-fire testing as discussed in active IRCM section. Figure 3-25 shows the
Airborne Turret IR Measurement System III (ATIMS III) carried by an F-15 conducting a test on an F-18
aircraft dispensing flares. The ATIMS III pod carries up to four fully instrumented missile seekers.




Page 3-32 of THIS doc.



edit on 18-1-2016 by Sammamishman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

That's not a strike eagle...just a D model. Look at the paint job. Strike eagles are all grey with conformal fuel tanks (aka CFT).



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: darkwarrior

So it is. Damn I'm having an off morning. Not enough caffeine and trying to do too many things at once.



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

OK! So something to do with electronic warfare testing.


My tax dollars at work!



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Thats some sensor capability. I see a laser there, too. Designator for painting targets?


Image



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

It's for testing stealth aircraft. It carries various missile seekers and tests the IR and LO of stealth aircraft.



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 12:58 PM
link   
From further up…


Signature reduction reduces the detectability of the subject aircraft



Edit: Doesn't reduce signature of the aircraft employing it?
edit on 18-1-2016 by intrptr because: changed pic



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

It's only for testing. Carrying that into combat would destroy the range, payload, and maneuverability of the carrying aircraft.



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Did they ever finish the countermeasure system with the laser that can burn incoming missiles? Was some testing going on back in the day.



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Xeven

The DIRCM system? There are several of them. Northrop is designing one for the F-35 that maintains its VLO characteristics, there's Guardian which was being tested as a bolt on package for KC-135s, there's an Israeli system that's been marketed to airlines.



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 03:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I would give my left n*t, J U S T to be able to take a ride in that birtd....sigh...

only 182's for this guy....





edit on 18-1-2016 by ReadLeader because: *



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: ReadLeader

I did an engine run in the back seat of a D model. That was fun.



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Speaking of interesting payloads on F-15s, I saw this the other day.



That's supposed to be one of the first pictures of Talon HATE.



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Xeven

The DIRCM system? There are several of them. Northrop is designing one for the F-35 that maintains its VLO characteristics, there's Guardian which was being tested as a bolt on package for KC-135s, there's an Israeli system that's been marketed to airlines.


Yeah, I guess so, I was working AC-130U and H back when they installed those, but I remember they had something more advanced they tested for awhile on one of our birds. It supposedly could burn through missiles rather than just blind IR missiles. DIRCM just blinds them if I remember? It may have just been people speculating. Was many years ago.
edit on 18-1-2016 by Xeven because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2016 @ 05:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Xeven

There's been talk of a system that could destroy them for years, but between power requirements and size issues they've never really gone anywhere. DIRCM is a lot easier.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join