Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
N328KF
Topic Author
Posts: 6024
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Jun 07, 2005 1:21 pm

“In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”
-Donny Miller
 
monteycarlos
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:16 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Jun 07, 2005 1:31 pm

Is that the MMA platform?

I am guessing (and its only a guess) that because the endurance levels of this plane are going to be quite high then it is more efficient to have raked wing tips instead of the standard winglets. Might also be something to do with the radar signature but that is less likely.
It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
 
Ozair
Posts: 5582
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Jun 07, 2005 2:08 pm

Looks good to me, I wasn't aware that it was an -800. The AEW&C that Australia are getting are the -700 with the -800 wing but no winglets or raked tips due to sensors.
Can't wait to see these in Australian service as well.
 
planespotting
Posts: 3026
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:54 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Jun 07, 2005 2:34 pm

i like the submarine skillfully added to the upper left corner of the picture....

for what purpose i do not know.
Do you like movies about gladiators?
 
kaniksu
Posts: 189
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 12:54 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Jun 07, 2005 2:40 pm

Quoting Planespotting (Reply 3):
i like the submarine skillfully added to the upper left corner of the picture....

for what purpose i do not know.

I didn't even notice the sub... the plane looks awesome!
 
Ozair
Posts: 5582
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Jun 07, 2005 2:51 pm

Quoting Planespotting (Reply 3):
i like the submarine skillfully added to the upper left corner of the picture....

for what purpose i do not know

It is the MMA as Monty said. Used as replacement for the P-3c Orion as well as about 6 other aircraft around the world for ASW and maritime patrol.

I do see what your saying though, sub on the surface just casually sailing by!
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10134
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Jun 07, 2005 3:02 pm

standard winglets. Since when where winglets standard on the B738 or any B73G/8?
Head Forum Moderator
[email protected]
Flown: 1900D,S340,Q300,AT72-5/6,DC3,CR2/7,E145,E70/75/90,A319/20/21,A332/3,A359,A380,F100,B717,B733/4/8/9,B742/4,B752/3,B763,B772/3, B789
With: NZ,SJ,QF,JQ,EK,VA,AA,UA,DL,FL,AC,FJ,SQ,TG,PR
 
Amy
Posts: 1109
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 9:48 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Jun 07, 2005 3:02 pm

looks blissfulyl like a 707 to me, that's a good thing mind.
A340-300 - slow, but awesome!
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15135
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Jun 07, 2005 3:07 pm

There is already a thread about this started by me only a few days ago...
"737" Raked Wingtips Better Than Blended Winglets? (by Ikramerica Jun 4 2005 in Civil Aviation)
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Jun 07, 2005 3:12 pm

Quoting Amy (Reply 7):
looks blissfulyl like a 707 to me, that's a good thing mind.

It's the color I think that invokes memories of 707s and KC-135s. It does seem to make the 737 look a lot larger.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
N1120A
Posts: 26659
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Jun 07, 2005 6:46 pm

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 9):
It's the color I think that invokes memories of 707s and KC-135s.

Actually, the aircraft are damn near the same size, so the resemblance should not be hard to understand. After all, they have exactly the same nose and fuselage width (707 and 738 that is, the KC-135 is narrower)
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
columba
Posts: 5252
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:12 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Jun 08, 2005 1:33 am

Will the Orions be fully replaced with the 737 or will some P-3s continue to fly with the US Navy ?
Air Berlin - gone but not forgotten
 
CX747
Posts: 6596
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Jun 08, 2005 1:37 am

Over time, the 737 will replace the P-3s along with a smaller fleet of UAVs.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14337
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Jun 08, 2005 5:24 am

The switch from the Winglet to the raked wing tip is because of the icing conditions the aircraft will have to deal with flying for hours on station at low altitudes, for whatever reason the raked wing is easier to protect from ice than the Winglet.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
Cheshire
Posts: 110
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2001 11:48 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:31 am

I was told by a Boeing rep at the Avalon airshow that winglets were deleted from the Wedgetail because they interfered with 'The Surfboard's' radar signal.

As for the MMA, it would be spending most of its time at low altitude, so winglets would only produce drag instead of improving the cruise efficiency for which they were designed.

And that looks like a Soviet sub in the corner- probably a Typhoon class. Gee, the MMA will be hard pressed tracking the three of those things that still work.
 
pilotpip
Posts: 2844
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 3:26 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Jun 08, 2005 12:45 pm

Aviation week stated the icing issue. Since the aircraft will be flying in the low teens, where ice is common. Apparently it's easier to duct the leading edge of a raked wingtip than a blended one.
DMI
 
Ozair
Posts: 5582
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Jun 08, 2005 4:39 pm

Quoting Cheshire (Reply 14):
And that looks like a Soviet sub in the corner- probably a Typhoon class

I would have said the SSGN Oscar class myself, the tower is a bit far forward for a typhoon. Could also be an Indian Akula II but it appears a bit wide for that.

Quoting CX747 (Reply 12):
Over time, the 737 will replace the P-3s along with a smaller fleet of UAVs.

The global Hawk is really the related UAV program with this, esp in Australia. We certainly will not have a one for one replacement but I have a feeling it will get close as well as 6-8 global hawks over a ten year period.
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:21 pm

Quoting Kaniksu (Reply 4):
I didn't even notice the sub... the plane looks awesome!

Spoken like a true airplane geek!  Smile

Quoting Ozair (Reply 5):
do see what your saying though, sub on the surface just casually sailing by!

Just to make it easy to track the thing. Boeing had to agree to make all subs travel on the surface to win the contract.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
There is already a thread about this started by me only a few days ago...

"737" Raked Wingtips Better Than Blended Winglets? (by Ikramerica Jun 4 2005 in Civil Aviation)

Yeah, but this is a military aviation thread about the MMA, not a civil aviation thread about the 737. You guys who want to take all the military stuff and put it in CivAv ought to not worry too much about the MilAv threads that are actually talking about military aviation.

Quoting Cheshire (Reply 14):
Gee, the MMA will be hard pressed tracking the three of those things that still work.

Not if they're on the surface as shown in the excellent and realistic illustration!  Wink

Quoting Ozair (Reply 16):
I would have said the SSGN Oscar class myself, the tower is a bit far forward for a typhoon. Could also be an Indian Akula II but it appears a bit wide for that.

The artist may have drawn from the following image:

or this

Look at the comparison. It's an Oscar.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
garnetpalmetto
Posts: 5352
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:38 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:36 pm

Quoting DL021 (Reply 17):
Look at the comparison. It's an Oscar.

As warships are my other love, Ian and Ozair are right - it's an Oscar, or as they're called in Russian service, the Granit (Oscar I) or Antey (Oscar II)-classes. The sail is too forward to be a Typhoon and the bit of rudder you can see looks like it has an Oscar-style towed array mounted on it.
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
 
aeroweanie
Posts: 1576
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:33 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Jun 08, 2005 11:48 pm

Quoting Pilotpip (Reply 15):
Aviation week stated the icing issue. Since the aircraft will be flying in the low teens, where ice is common. Apparently it's easier to duct the leading edge of a raked wingtip than a blended one.

The blended winglets on the 737NG are certified for use without anti-icing. They have been flown with ice shapes and have no negative impact when flown as such.
 
F14D4ever
Posts: 306
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:20 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:20 am

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 19):
They have been flown with ice shapes ...

What are "ice shapes"? Simulated ice buildup?
"He is risen, as He said."
 
aeroweanie
Posts: 1576
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:33 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Jun 14, 2005 5:15 am

Quoting F14D4ever (Reply 20):
What are "ice shapes"? Simulated ice buildup?

Yes. They are usually made of plastic.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 30125
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:07 pm

Looks Great.
Any plans for Civilian use ie the raked wingtips.
regds
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 7151
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:34 am

I think that the raked wingtips on the MMA replacing the 738 winglets are quite natural.

First of all they will most certainly be more efficient.

On the MMA they won't have to worry about airport gate separation.

The MMA will have a more favourable lateral weight distribution. Only little payload in the fuselage, all the fuel the wing tanks can take, and various weapons and sensors on wing hardpoints. Therefore the 738 wing spar most likely doesn't need to be strengthened due to the extra lift from the raked wingtips.

A winglet mostly converts energy loss from the tip vortex into forward "thrust" - like a sail on a ship.

A raked wingtip minimizes the loss due to tip wortex AND generates lift - the latter at a very unfavorable position when talking about wing bending forces.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
aeroweanie
Posts: 1576
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:33 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Jun 28, 2005 7:44 am

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 23):
First of all they will most certainly be more efficient.

Wrong - read my earlier posts. For a given span extension, winglets will be more efficient and produce less bending moment.

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 23):
Therefore the 738 wing spar most likely doesn't need to be strengthened due to the extra lift from the raked wingtips.

Wrong - you have to consider the worst case when doing loads, which would be min fuel and max fuselage payload.

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 23):
A winglet mostly converts energy loss from the tip vortex into forward "thrust" - like a sail on a ship.

A raked wingtip minimizes the loss due to tip wortex AND generates lift - the latter at a very unfavorable position when talking about wing bending forces.

Wrong - "generating lift" is meaningless, as lift = weight in cruise flight. Both raked wing tips and winglets have the benefical effect of reducing induced drag. End of story.
 
sidishus
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:45 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Fri Aug 05, 2005 6:26 pm

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 19):
The blended winglets on the 737NG are certified for use without anti-icing. They have been flown with ice shapes and have no negative impact when flown as such.

Funny how both AvWeek and Flight International quoted Boeing and the Navy; both indicating the change was due to icing considerations...You better get them squared away 'Weanie!!!

http://www.flightinternational.com/A...New+MMA+wingtips+combat+icing.html

New MMA wingtips combat icing
Boeing has changed the wingtip design of the 737-based P-8A Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA) under development for the US Navy, following concerns about icing of the original 737-standard blended winglet at the MMA's lower, in-weather operating altitudes.

The MMA will fly routinely at 10,000-15,000ft (3,000-4,600m), where ice could build up on the winglets and degrade performance. The raked wing extension will be anti-iced to the tip, and the performance benefit of the raked wingtip will be the same as for the blended winglet, says Boeing, adding there is no cost or schedule impact.


And speaking of performance in icing conditions, components of the bleed system on next gen 737s are infamous for crapping out when you need them the most. The PRSOV and wing body overheat inop are two very common-too common-gripes.
The VP folks have some ORM issues looming.

[Edited 2005-08-05 11:27:20]
the truth: first it is ridiculed second it is violently opposed finally it is accepted as self-evident
 
ruger11
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 4:20 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:29 pm

I bet the payload will be impressive. Can't wait to see one myself. I recently went on a deployment and got to fly on a brand new C-40, and it was AWESOME... SO much better than a C-9, and even better than a C-130  Smile
 
aeroweanie
Posts: 1576
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:33 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Sat Aug 06, 2005 1:00 am

Quoting Sidishus (Reply 25):
Funny how both AvWeek and Flight International quoted Boeing and the Navy; both indicating the change was due to icing considerations...You better get them squared away 'Weanie!!!

And you believe press releases?

There is a letter in Av Week from a P-3 pilot pointing out that the only time he has seen 10,000-15,000 feet on his altimeter was while transiting to or from cruising conditions.
 
sidishus
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:45 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Sat Aug 06, 2005 12:53 pm

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 27):
And you believe press releases?

Fact is the change is being made ...and thats according to Boeing per the link in the origianl post. And yes I do belive the stated reason in AvWeek.
Now why would they be making this change to a less effecient wing-which is a cost and the selection of an "off the shelf" civil platform in the first place was all about saving costs-unless the navy found it imperative?

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 27):
There is a letter in Av Week from a P-3 pilot pointing out that the only time he has seen 10,000-15,000 feet on his altimeter was while transiting to or from cruising conditions

I did read that letter and while I won't dispute Capt Allender's experience, I do wonder how much time he spent engaged in overland ISR which is how currently deployed P-3s spend the majority of their time today. This is a huge change from the Blue Water ASW days against the Soviets...and which was the environment Capt. Allender spent most of his time. Today P-3s are spending a whole lot of their airborne time in the teens and low 20's.
the truth: first it is ridiculed second it is violently opposed finally it is accepted as self-evident
 
AFHokie
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 3:29 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Sat Aug 06, 2005 9:54 pm

Quoting Sidishus (Reply 28):
P-3s are spending a whole lot of their airborne time in the teens and low 20's.

Nope, think higher
 
sidishus
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:45 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Sun Aug 07, 2005 3:51 pm

Quoting Sidishus (Reply 28):
did read that letter and while I won't dispute Capt Allender's experience, I do wonder how much time he spent engaged in overland ISR which is how currently deployed P-3s spend the majority of their time today....



Quoting AFHokie (Reply 29):
Nope, think higher

And at what altitude is IED hunting taking place?
Also, in my experience, P-3s spent a whole lot of time lots lower than the '20s while perfomring other missions such as SSSC
the truth: first it is ridiculed second it is violently opposed finally it is accepted as self-evident
 
AFHokie
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 3:29 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Sun Aug 07, 2005 6:45 pm

Flying in the teens would put them in the middle of the MANPAD envelope
 
sidishus
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:45 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Sun Aug 07, 2005 7:00 pm

Quoting AFHokie (Reply 31):
Flying in the teens would put them in the middle of the MANPAD envelope

Middle??
the truth: first it is ridiculed second it is violently opposed finally it is accepted as self-evident
 
AFHokie
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 3:29 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:07 pm

Quoting Sidishus (Reply 32):
Middle??

Yep middle. According to globalsecurity.org the max altitude of an Sa-14 is 6000m which is roughly 19685ft. That is from MSL, not AGL. You also have to take into account terrain, how high up in the air can you throw a baseball from the ground vs. from standing on top of the Empire State building. It's the same principle. While Iraq is not the most mountainous country in the world, you still don't fly in the threat envelope if you don't have to.
 
Lt-AWACS
Posts: 2120
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2002 2:40 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Sun Aug 07, 2005 11:29 pm

Dave you remember stuff from Tyndall  Wink

Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,
Capt-AWACS, Shawarmas for all my friends
Io voglio fica ogni giorni da mia bella moglie!
 
aeroweanie
Posts: 1576
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:33 pm

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Win

Mon Aug 08, 2005 2:39 am

Quoting Sidishus (Reply 30):
And at what altitude is IED hunting taking place?
Also, in my experience, P-3s spent a whole lot of time lots lower than the '20s while perfomring other missions such as SSSC


The obvious reason for coming down low is to give the optical sensors a better chance to see things on the ground. Inflight icing occurs during flight through clouds (thats the only place you are going to find supercooled water droplets). The APB blended winglets are fully FAA certified for flight in icing conditions. The FAA FAR 25 Appendix C envelope calls for as much as 45 minutes of flight in icing conditions. Are you saying that the P-8s are going to fly more than 45 minutes in clouds at 10-15k' looking for things (that they can't see because of the clouds)?

Quoting Sidishus (Reply 28):
And yes I do belive the stated reason in AvWeek.

Phineas Taylor Barnum was right...


[Edited 2005-08-07 19:42:41]
 
sidishus
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:45 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Mon Aug 08, 2005 1:38 pm

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 35):
Phineas Taylor Barnum was right...

Ok "Weanie, share a modicum of your superior knowledge and tell us why the Navy is mandating a change to a less efficient wing. The whole premise behind a COTS platform for this military mission was to save money. Turns out those savings are being whittled away at a rapid pace. The wing tip change is but one-relatively minor-example. Turns out that the MK-54 will be undergoing wholesale changes as well to fit the P-8...But that's grist for another thread.
Back on topic. Why is it then that the Navy wants the change? And if there is no change in efficiencies, then why are the airlines buying the winglets instead of raked tips? Better chance of ground damage with the winglets. And why is it that two of the most respected information outlets in this business are so misguided?
Bless us with what you know 'Weanie.

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 35):
The FAA FAR 25 Appendix C envelope calls for as much as 45 minutes of flight in icing conditions.


It's obvious the Navy isn't considering FAA certification criteria.

Oh, and by the way 'Weanie, I was an ASAC in a previous life, and have some friends who were P-3 Bubbas until not too long ago. I might just know a thing or two about how P-3s go about their business.

Quoting AFHokie (Reply 33):
According to globalsecurity.org the max altitude of an Sa-14 is 6000m which is roughly 19685ft.

Go outside and do a little test hokie. See how soon you can eyeball a transport category aircraft coming towards you at 19000 ft. Do it from a road at least 15 miles from an airport. Ignore the aircraft at 30000 with a contrail. Ditto for the ones at 2000 feet on short final. And report back.
Aircraft in the mid to high teens are mighty hard to spot visually in time to get a shot off with a MANPADS. The DHL and other engagements were much lower and near an airport against aircraft flying fairly predictably. Ditto for Mombassa-but it failed.
A P-3 tooling about in direct support of the Marines is a different situation entirely.

Quoting AFHokie (Reply 33):
That is from MSL, not AGL. You also have to take into account terrain, how high up in the air can you throw a baseball from the ground vs. from standing on top of the Empire State building. It's the same principle

Certainly a consideration for ops in Afghanistan...but your stated max engagement altitude is optimistic when the targeting is by visual means.

Quoting AFHokie (Reply 33):
you still don't fly in the threat envelope if you don't have to.

And the point is sometimes you have to.
the truth: first it is ridiculed second it is violently opposed finally it is accepted as self-evident
 
AFHokie
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 3:29 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Mon Aug 08, 2005 9:53 pm

Quoting Sidishus (Reply 36):
See how soon you can eyeball a transport category aircraft coming towards you at 19000 ft. Do it from a road at least 15 miles from an airport

last time I checked, 3-7 miles, depending on how good your eyesight is and haze conditions

Quoting Sidishus (Reply 36):
Ditto for the ones at 2000 feet on short final. And report back.



Quoting Sidishus (Reply 36):
The DHL and other engagements were much lower and near an airport against aircraft flying fairly predictably.

you answered your own question with that one. I think they had a pretty good idea as to which way to look.

you also forgot to include spotters. A couple of cell phones will go a long way in a crude air defense cueing system. You don't even need a cell phone, or any other type of electronic means of communication, but that is another discussion.

One last thing:

Quoting Sidishus (Reply 36):
A P-3 tooling about in direct support

Tooling about is the word of choice there. Like the AC-130H that was shot down in Gulf I by an Iraqi SAM, they were "tooling" around orbiting over Al Khafji, (they also stuck around after sunrise, another no no for gunships) You hang out in one area long enough, people are gonna notice, therefore you are not going to go down into a threat envelope and hang out. That is asking someone to take a shot at you.
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 5212
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Aug 09, 2005 12:54 am

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 35):
The obvious reason for coming down low is to give the optical sensors a better chance to see things on the ground. Inflight icing occurs during flight through clouds (thats the only place you are going to find supercooled water droplets). The APB blended winglets are fully FAA certified for flight in icing conditions. The FAA FAR 25 Appendix C envelope calls for as much as 45 minutes of flight in icing conditions. Are you saying that the P-8s are going to fly more than 45 minutes in clouds at 10-15k' looking for things (that they can't see because of the clouds)?

You seem to be missing the entire point of the change from the APB winglets to the raked wingtips. It's not that they aren't certified for use in icing conditions, rather it is that they do not have any provision for active anti-icing (read: no bleed air ducts). The USN wants something that can be de-iced, not only can tolerate icing. These raked wingtips will have full anti-icing capability. Boeing decided that this design was preferable to re-designing the APB winglets.

Also I wounldn't doubt that Boeing learned a lesson from the Wedgetail project with the APB winglets sensor-masking problems. This may have as much or even more reason to switch.

In any case, we'll see soon enough when the prototype flies which wingtip dressing they settled on.
The last of the famous international playboys
 
sidishus
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:45 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Aug 09, 2005 12:38 pm

Quoting AFHokie (Reply 37):
Quoting Sidishus (Reply 36):
See how soon you can eyeball a transport category aircraft coming towards you at 19000 ft. Do it from a road at least 15 miles from an airport

last time I checked, 3-7 miles, depending on how good your eyesight is and haze conditions

Optimistic ranges in most sky conditions Eagle Eye...and most often after its already gone by and you can hear it. Aircraft under a high overcast a being a notable exception.

And getting off a sucessful MANPADS shot at an aircraft at 19,000 ft is Oswald-esque at best.

Quoting AFHokie (Reply 37):
Tooling about is the word of choice there. Like the AC-130H that was shot down in Gulf I by an Iraqi SAM, they were "tooling" around orbiting over Al Khafji, (they also stuck around after sunrise, another no no for gunships) You hang out in one area long enough, people are gonna notice, therefore you are not going to go down into a threat envelope and hang out. That is asking someone to take a shot at you.

Not denying that. And I strongly suspect the P-3s in the overland ISR job(which the Navy tried to get out of but the Marines wouldn't have it) are taking care to minimize risk. Unpredictability being a big part of that.
Still, I'll wager a bet they spend a whole lot of time in the teens.

Spirit03 was engaged at ~12000 ft IIRC on climb out and it was after it had been orbiting for an extended time engaging the enemy. Also, if memory serves, its egress was predictable as well which allowed the Iraqi missileer to guess a good spot to be in. Even then, there was more than a little luck involved in the engagement.
the truth: first it is ridiculed second it is violently opposed finally it is accepted as self-evident
 
sidishus
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:45 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Aug 09, 2005 1:57 pm

Quoting AFHokie (Reply 37):
A couple of cell phones will go a long way in a crude air defense cueing system. You don't even need a cell phone, or any other type of electronic means of communication, but that is another discussion.

Ingenuity wins wars.
the truth: first it is ridiculed second it is violently opposed finally it is accepted as self-evident
 
AFHokie
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 3:29 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Tue Aug 09, 2005 10:52 pm

Quoting Sidishus (Reply 39):
Optimistic ranges in most sky conditions Eagle Eye...and most often after its already gone by and you can hear it. Aircraft under a high overcast a being a notable exception.

Not really. If I'm such an eagle eye, then why can we sit on outside the squadron building and clearly watch hogs and vipers work the Poinsett Range which is approx five miles to the south of Shaw? With no overcast, and I don't recall hearing them either. Half the time they disappear below the treeline when they're doing low angle strafe runs.

Quoting Sidishus (Reply 39):
And getting off a sucessful MANPADS shot at an aircraft at 19,000 ft is Oswald-esque at best.

True, but if someone has a 5% chance of hurting you, yet if you fly 5,000ft higher, he has a 0% chance of hurting you and at either altitude you still accomplish your mission with the same results, what do you think you would do?

Quoting Sidishus (Reply 40):
Ingenuity wins wars.

Really? I wouldn't have guessed. So that's why Omar calls Ahmed, so he can pimp him out about the infidel aircraft approaching his position from the west and give him a few more moments to prepare his shot. Thanks for clearing that mystery up for me.

Anyways, now that we are no longer anywhere near the original topic of this thread, back to providing the blanket of freedom that keeps us all warm at night...
 
sidishus
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:45 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Aug 10, 2005 5:34 am

Quoting AFHokie (Reply 41):
True, but if someone has a 5% chance of hurting you, yet if you fly 5,000ft higher, he has a 0% chance of hurting you and at either altitude you still accomplish your mission with the same results, what do you think you would do?

I will just go with the open source quote from Aviation Week that the P-8 will be spending time in the teens. That also jibes with what I personally know about P-3s.
Pony up a reference that states otherwise...

Quoting AFHokie (Reply 41):
Not really. If I'm such an eagle eye, then why can we sit on outside the squadron building and clearly watch hogs and vipers work the Poinsett Range which is approx five miles to the south of Shaw? With no overcast, and I don't recall hearing them either. Half the time they disappear below the treeline when they're doing low angle strafe runs.

And I might add a patch of sky where you expect to see them too. Still doesn't mean you could get off a good MANPADs shot at FL190 with any degree of certainty 'Hokie

Quoting Sidishus (Reply 40):
Anyways, now that we are no longer anywhere near the original topic of this thread, back to providing the blanket of freedom that keeps us all warm at night...

We can snip this Irish Pennant then with your key points unsubstantiated..

  • That FL190 is the "middle" of a realistic MANPADs engagement envelope.

    and

  • That P-3s today can do their job and not operate in the teens

    And thank for your service 'Hokie
the truth: first it is ridiculed second it is violently opposed finally it is accepted as self-evident
 
Lt-AWACS
Posts: 2120
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2002 2:40 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:02 am

Without divulging HOkie's sources, I can say he is pretty much on the money, with the MANPAD info.


Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,
Capt-AWACS, Work Harder, Millions on Welfare count on you
Io voglio fica ogni giorni da mia bella moglie!
 
sidishus
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:45 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:12 am

Quoting Lt-AWACS (Reply 43):
Without divulging HOkie's sources, I can say he is pretty much on the money, with the MANPAD info.

You already did...

Quoting Lt-AWACS (Reply 34):
Dave you remember stuff from Tyndall

My beef is with the characterization of "middle" as opposed to "max theoretical"
the truth: first it is ridiculed second it is violently opposed finally it is accepted as self-evident
 
Lt-AWACS
Posts: 2120
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2002 2:40 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:21 am

No Hokie has plenty of unclass sources, most of which I know, because I went through some training with him-- it is just not always wise to link/reveal Multiple unclass sources, it is a FOUO thing.

It is not max theoretical BTW. There have been shots with MANPADS at higher altitudes than that. Not always the best choice, depending on the operator, but with terrain and some conditions as noted above, "Mid" is a decent characterization.

As for HVAA placement, this thread only hits the high points. You can go to courses for weeks just on HVAA and missions planning considerations. So vagaries is the best we will most likely get here.

Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,
Capt-AWACS, Seven Continents Down, None to Go
Io voglio fica ogni giorni da mia bella moglie!
 
sidishus
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:45 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:43 am

Quoting Lt-AWACS (Reply 45):
It is not max theoretical BTW. There have been shots with MANPADS at higher altitudes than that. Not always the best choice, depending on the operator, but with terrain and some conditions as noted above, "Mid" is a decent characterization.

In Afghanistan that is an issue when talking AGL. P-3s had/have to struggle to stay on station at the MSL altitudes they are forced to there. It also means they may not be in a position to make best use of what they have when looking into valleys.

I know there have been higher shots, but they have been Hail Marys at best. When it comes to the probabilities of a sucessful hit-especially against an alerted target-"mid" really isn't the right term to use.

Either way, MANPADs are a huge threat to you guys. Would it not be better to be in a platform that could tolerate a shrapnel hit-or maybe even a really close miss-instead of instantly turning into a nearly uncontrollable crash trying to happen such as the DHL after a hit from just a few fragments?

Thats what you will get without some really expensive Vulnerability Engineering backfitted into Faux Warbirds. And even then, after that money is spent, you could still end up with less than optimum protection.

[Edited 2005-08-09 23:52:05]
the truth: first it is ridiculed second it is violently opposed finally it is accepted as self-evident
 
Lt-AWACS
Posts: 2120
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2002 2:40 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:51 am

Quoting Sidishus (Reply 46):
Either way, MANPADs are a huge threat to you guys. Would it not be better to be in a platform that could tolerate a shrapnel hit-or maybe even a really close miss-instead of instantly turning into a nearly uncontrollable crash trying to happen such as the DHL after a hit from just a few fragments?

Thats what you will get without some really expensive Vulnerability Engineering backfitted into militarized airliners. And even then the benefits of that money spent you could still end up with less than optimum protection.

Your point there is well taken. I don't know if the process can ever be fixed. The R&D process and bidding process is broken, that is for sure.

Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,
Capt-AWACS, I'd like to supersize that with a diet coke
Io voglio fica ogni giorni da mia bella moglie!
 
sidishus
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:45 am

RE: Military 737-800ERX: No Winglet, Now Raked Wingtip

Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:24 pm

quote=Lt-AWACS,reply=47]Your point there is well taken. I don't know if the process can ever be fixed. The R&D process and bidding process is broken, that is for sure.[/quote]

A big problem is getting the program managers...and you operators... to understand that there is a real benefit to Survivability Engineering.
I was around long ago to see exactly the same sentiments you, Duce, and 'Hokie put forward, being said in the early Vietnam days. Some good people died too.
Difference between your world and theirs-and then and now-is that back then we could afford to lose 1000 F-4s and still carry on the fight. Lose an HVAA on a mission (or sitting on the apron) in "an AOR near you" in the not too distant future because it can't take even the most insignificant damage, and a commander may be looking at a potential defeat in a battle.
But I will rerun what the experts have to say on this thread to underscore the point that when it comes to survivability, its not the lack of money so much as a lack of understanding how important Survivability Engineering really is to winning the fight.

And BTW, Cdr. Cibula is a P-3 driver.

"One of the major barriers to designing the right amount of survivability into an aircraft is the perception that survivability might be too expensive, particularly those features that make the aircraft tougher or less vulnerable. Some believe that a hit is a downed aircraft, and nothing can be done about it.sound familiar Duce? There is also the perception that the benefits from survivability will never be realized if the aircraft is never used in combat; and if it is used in combat, a return on investment might not be achieved until late in the life cycle of the aircraft.
These beliefs and perceptions are not correct, and they must be eliminated using realistic cost-effectiveness analyses. These analyses will show that designing for survivability pays off, an aircraft that is both mission capable and survivable in combat will achieve its mission objectives and return home more often, it will be used more aggressively in high risk combat scenarios, and it will win battles."

Robert E. Ball

"In the last 40 or so years, aircraft survivability has shifted away from damage tolerance to hit avoidance. As technology advanced and threats became more lethal, it made a lot of sense to keep the aircraft from being hit in the first place. With advanced countermeasures and low observable technology, this was possible. As our technology increased and we were able to outfit our aircraft with a lot of high-tech gizmos, the focus shifted from developing vulnerability reduction features to developing advanced sensors for threat detection, engagement, and target destruction at greater distances. You see, if you can detect and identify a threat at 500 miles, engage it at 450 and destroy it at 400, there really isn’t a need to worry about getting hit. The only problem with that is—we aren’t there yet.
If you took a poll of operators in the fleet and asked them what they wanted most on their aircraft, they would say—
1)advanced sensors,
2)range and speed,
3)long range and very accurate weapons,
4)low observable technology, and
50)vulnerability reduction.
Yes that was number 50, not number 5. There are two reasons for this. First, vulnerability reduction technology is not very sexy. A cool new radar that can identify a target at 500 miles is always preferable to a fuel tank liner. And second, most operators just assume that basic vulnerability reduction features such as fire protection and redundancy are a given in aircraft design. If you asked an operator if he would prefer target ID at only 400 miles while guaranteeing he would not burn up in flight because of a fuel leak, you might get a different answer.
Keep in mind that vulnerability reduction is still a very important part of the overall survivability equation. Until we can truly develop technologies that can keep our aircraft from being hit in combat, this will be the case."

CDR Andrew (Andy) Cibula
the truth: first it is ridiculed second it is violently opposed finally it is accepted as self-evident

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos