Emu

I guess now that the INF is off, B-61s could be replaced by IRBMs again anyway.

Okay, here's a challenge.

That strikes me as part of a routine integration job. Whilst conventional bombs are less destructive, you still don't really want them landing in the wrong place. A little more software maybe.

Okay, but surely mounting them upside-down just makes the missile longer due to the shape of the nosecone? What's the benefit? And how does the final stage propel itself forward if the nosecone is one side and the warheads are on the other? Just trying to understand here.

Can't see why. It's a bomb. Just need weight and loading flight tests, plus release test and weapon integration. EMP proofing upgrade is probably the largest factor.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/germany-fighter-jet-order-airbus-boeing-sources-201627187--business.html Does it mean F-15?

Standard DASS is a pretty large step-up on legacy RWR systems though. It's good to within less than 0.5 degrees on bearing and azimuth and of course radar has an A2G mode for detecting targets (as used with Brimstone) to provide additional accuracy. And of course the missile has passive homing and active MWR for terminal guidance (just like Brimstone for terminal guidance).

Really? I though the warheads were mounted facing towards the tip.

I'm not convinced that standard DASS doesn't do enough of a job to cue the missile anyway. The UK Tornado was not an ECR variant and was still able to use ALARM. France left Eurofighter because it wanted a carrier version, not because of swing-role capability.

It would be possible to integrate AARGM onto Typhoon or proceed with the talked-about ARM version of Meteor. The problem with the F-35, as well as the political one, is that the Franco-German 5th gen jet will likely replace it post 2030, and it would seem silly to replace the F-35 so early. They will again want to maximise production volume of their 5th gen for jobs etc.

Yeah, EMP-proofed Typhoon with CFTs. Common spares, logistics and training plus German jobs benefit.

I think they're looking for a gap filler until their 5th gen project bears fruition. I think you mean 2030s, there's no way they'll have anything approaching IOC until after 2030. For Rafale and Typhoon it took 9 years from production prototype to IOC and right now they don't even have a pre-production prototype and it's 2019. If they could then they likely wouldn't be considering an F-15.

I had to ask. Are these images just wrong? https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/782078291515578942/ https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/569916527840892083/

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/446419381799357325/ https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/446419381799357325/

There were 6 carrier battle groups in Desert Storm and at least ten F-14 squadrons. Also two very large battleships.

Yes, the F-8 had the highest kill ratio in Vietnam.

There is no known countermeasure.

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/25993/suicide-bombing-kills-u-s-troops-in-syria-mysterious-s-92-helicopter-seen-evacuating-casualties

It does, but a missile does not gain a higher range advantage just from being fired OTS and some people are making a dodgy assumption that the pursuing pilot will just keep flying straight forward and won't have fired first. It's a useful capability to have in a multi-adversary fur-ball and a better alternative to thrust vectoring and Cobras (since it doesn't expend energy) but not one to be relied upon. The realistic advantage is more in HOBS and HMCS, which avoids having to put an adversary in a smack-bang 12 o'clock position on the HUD and can also give you an awareness of adversaries on a 360deg basis from 3rd party data comms and systems like EODAS. It would make Top Gun very boring though.

Yeah, my bad. I didn't see the things break up.

At 18:30. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMmaFzbCqZE&t=1110s

Some stuff from Desert Storm at 27:12.