Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
And So It Begins: The QF-16  
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2952 posts, RR: 1
Posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 7051 times:

So sorry to distract you all from the ongoing A400M and KC-X soap operas.

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1109

FROM THE ARTICLE
ST. LOUIS, March 9, 2010 -- Boeing [NYSE: BA] has been awarded a U.S. Air Force contract worth approximately $69.7 million for the initial engineering, manufacturing and development of QF-16 Full Scale Aerial Targets to replace the QF-4 fleet. Under the terms of the remainder of the contract, expected to be awarded in coming years, up to 126 QF-16 drones will deliver beginning in 2014.

Would be fun to see a 10-12G turn without the meatbag in front to worry about.


The last of the famous international playboys
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinesasd209 From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Oct 2007, 642 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 7053 times:

Well, I suppose we knew this day would come.....at least they will die for a useful cause!!

User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29805 posts, RR: 58
Reply 2, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 6987 times:

Any body notice that most of these drones seem to be built from Air Force frames?

No QF-18's. I don't remember hearing anything about QA-7's, QF-8's, QA-4's or QT-2's.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlinesasd209 From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Oct 2007, 642 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 6972 times:

Wow....a QF-8.. That would be a heck of a target!!

User currently offlineBeta From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 295 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 6968 times:

Quoting L-188 (Reply 2):
Any body notice that most of these drones seem to be built from Air Force frames?

No QF-18's. I don't remember hearing anything about QA-7's, QF-8's, QA-4's or QT-2's.

Good point! I've never thought of that. Maybe the Navy's and Marines Corps's airframes were all "well-used" and rusted, hence more expensive to modify? I do not know. I'm curious as to how they go about building those drones? Take out the oldest, highest mileage frame from storage and mod it? What about the engines? Anyone in the know how can educate an ignorant here. Thanks.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29805 posts, RR: 58
Reply 5, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 6933 times:

Quoting Beta (Reply 4):
Maybe the Navy's and Marines Corps's airframes were all "well-used" and rusted, hence more expensive to modify?

You think that wouldn't be that big of a deal on a airframe that is built to be destroyed.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5716 posts, RR: 44
Reply 6, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 6911 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting L-188 (Reply 2):
Any body notice that most of these drones seem to be built from Air Force frames?

As it is pretty much an Air Force program it might make the airframe ownership paperwork easier to handle.
Another consideration is just a numbers thing, when the QF-4 program started I would expect that the F-4 was available in considerably larger numbers than the other types mentioned, similarly today with the F-16.

[Edited 2010-03-09 22:01:27]


If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31130 posts, RR: 85
Reply 7, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 6906 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting sasd209 (Reply 3):
Wow....a QF-8.. That would be a heck of a target!!

I'm waiting for a QB-52.  


User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1772 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 6785 times:

Quoting L-188 (Reply 2):
No QF-18's

That's because of a number of issues with the F/A-18 fleet... namely early airframe fatigue on the centre fuselage barrel (where the wings, tail, and cockpit meet) is forcing the USN to dredge out early model F/A-18A's and B's with avionics upgrades and placing them back into active carrier wings, so they can take the C's and D's to have the time consuming and costly centre fuselage barrel swap done to extend their lives.


User currently offlinemechatnew From United States of America, joined May 2005, 102 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 6658 times:

The US Navy has used many drones over the years, and used the Q designation for drones, and D for drone directors.F6F-5K Hellcat, QP-4B [PB4Y-2 Privateer], QT-33A, QF-8A, QF-9s [F9F-6K Cougar], QF-86F/H, and the last of there Phantoms drones, QF-4B/N/S, were retirer in 2004. Airborne drone controlers were DB-26 Invaders, DT-33A, DF-9 Cougars, DT-2 Buckeye, DF-8F Crusader, DP-2 Neptune.

User currently onlinemoose135 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2351 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 6638 times:

Quoting L-188 (Reply 2):
No QF-18's.

That's only because they would need the to do an inflight refueling between takeoff and reaching the range...  Wow!



KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2952 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 6497 times:

Quoting mechatnew (Reply 9):
The US Navy has used many drones over the years, and used the Q designation for drones, and D for drone directors.F6F-5K Hellcat, QP-4B [PB4Y-2 Privateer], QT-33A, QF-8A, QF-9s [F9F-6K Cougar], QF-86F/H, and the last of there Phantoms drones, QF-4B/N/S, were retirer in 2004. Airborne drone controlers were DB-26 Invaders, DT-33A, DF-9 Cougars, DT-2 Buckeye, DF-8F Crusader, DP-2 Neptune.

Yep, and also DC-130As that were used to launch Ryan Firebee target drones.

The USAF also had a good run, using QF-80, QF-86, QF-100, QF-102 and QF-106 fleets before the Phantom.

I'm actually surprised that nobody saw a market for all of the ex WP MiG-21/23s rusting in the weeds as low cost target drones.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlinevenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1443 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 6473 times:

I don't know why the just used F-4E's and G's and not the the C and D's. I know the Navy droned up J's and S's.


I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2952 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 6441 times:

Quoting venus6971 (Reply 12):
I don't know why the just used F-4E's and G's and not the the C and D's. I know the Navy droned up J's and S's.

Dunno. They're all out of G/Es now, and have gone over to the RF-4C fleet, but even those are running out.

Isn't South Korea the only ones that still use F-4Ds? Well, besides Iran?



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7703 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 6349 times:

How many QF4 or unconverted F4 does the USAF have?.

What about USN/USMC?.


User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4680 posts, RR: 19
Reply 15, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 6034 times:

The 'Meatbag'




Seriously.... ?!!!



The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
User currently offlinesprout5199 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1855 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 5926 times:

Ryan Firebee target drones

Don't forget Talos missiles used in the Vandal exercises, my ship (an FFG) shot two down in 1989, much to the suprise of the tico- class CG captains that couldn't fire.

Dan in Jupiter

[Edited 2010-03-11 04:57:34]

User currently offlinemechatnew From United States of America, joined May 2005, 102 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 5897 times:

The US Navy F-4 Phantom drone program was 1972-2004 They started with QF-4Bs, then QF-4N/Ss. I think there was only one QF-4J. Not sure of the total number, maybe 100. The US Navy was also using QF-86F/H from the early 1970s, to the early 1990s.

The USAF F-4 Drone program started is 1991, to replace the QF-106. The number is over 250, with a few more QRF-4Cs to be converted.


User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2952 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 5889 times:

Quoting Max Q (Reply 15):
The 'Meatbag'

Seriously.... ?!!!


No not seriously, just invoking the zombie spirit of Bender.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineebj1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5178 times:

I have to wonder why there never were any QF-105s or QF-101s.


Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3552 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 5158 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ebj1248650 (Reply 19):
I have to wonder why there never were any QF-105s or QF-101s.

Not sure about the F-101 but many F-105s were lost in Vietnam - probably not worthwhile to convert the survivors.



Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29805 posts, RR: 58
Reply 21, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4983 times:

Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 20):
but many F-105s were lost in Vietnam - probably not worthwhile to convert the survivors.

about 75% of them.

At the time those frames would have been available, there where a lot moore F-100's still around.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3552 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4648 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting L-188 (Reply 21):
about 75% of them.

At the time those frames would have been available, there where a lot moore F-100's still around.

Not to mention the F-105 was designed for the nuclear strike mission - not terribly manueverable as a result. The lack of manueverability was less than desireable for a target.



Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2952 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4642 times:

Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 22):
The lack of manueverability was less than desireable for a target.

Is that really much of a criteria back then? The F-102 wasn't too much of a turnin' n burnin' fighter either, nor was the F-106.



The last of the famous international playboys
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic And So It Begins: The QF-16
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
RAH-66 Commanche-Why Can't It Replace The Apache? posted Sun May 13 2007 05:12:53 by AirRyan
Did I Hear A KC-135A, And Was It At March ARB? posted Sun May 7 2006 21:37:06 by 747400sp
It's Offical, The Wedgetail Is Ugly! posted Thu May 20 2004 05:53:49 by L-188
Need Info On The Polish F-16 Aqusition posted Wed Nov 12 2003 06:43:00 by Cancidas
Well I Am Off To Saudi So It Is Ciao For A While posted Sat Aug 24 2002 07:56:10 by Lt-AWACS
New To Forum And Enjoying It! posted Fri Jan 18 2002 05:34:21 by Airforce1995
Contract Losers - Y23 And The Y34 Was It? posted Fri Feb 15 2008 02:23:40 by Phil K
Pakistan And The F-16 posted Mon Dec 31 2001 01:17:47 by Spacepope
Article On Eads And Germany - Is It Accurate? posted Thu Aug 6 2009 13:08:44 by Tugger
Why The Galley And Toilet On Su-34? posted Sat Jul 25 2009 08:37:47 by LHCVG

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format