Jump to content

BOL dispensers


Ironwulf

Recommended Posts

Apparently time to beat a dead horse. To quote WAGs from an EA post:

 

"Note that this is all very much subject to change for our mid-2000s F/A-18C USN Hornet."

 

Note in the statement that the aircraft we are flying is based on a mid 2000s USN hornet. Not a RAAF hornet with a system delivered in 2016.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently time to beat a dead horse. To quote WAGs from an EA post:

 

"Note that this is all very much subject to change for our mid-2000s F/A-18C USN Hornet."

 

Note in the statement that the aircraft we are flying is based on a mid 2000s USN hornet. Not a RAAF hornet with a system delivered in 2016.

 

Mid-200s USN Hornet's didn't use Litening pods:dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These are facts. Doesn't matter if someone doesn't like the facts.

 

I see.

 

Replace “Service” with “Department” and you’d be correct. The Marines are a part of the Dept of the Navy, and subordinate to it’s civilian leadership to be sure, but they are in no way subordinate to the Navy’s military leadership. The Navy and Marine Corps are co-equal branches of the US military.

 

It’s a fine distinction that many people confuse so don’t be hard on yourself. :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cheek mounted litening pod was however put in DCS for NON USN/USMC Hornets - RAAF, Spain, etc.

 

https://www.airforce-technology.com/uncategorised/newssaab-to-deliver-bol-pods-to-australias-fa-18ab-hornet-4697189/

 

"In 2008, Australia acquired BOL for the F/A-18A/B Hornets of the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF). The new order is aimed at increasing the RAAF’s operational capability."

 

These hornets had been upgraded to essentially C standard, starting in 1999

 

 

 

ED bends their rules frequently, and if you don't ask, you don't get.


Edited by Ironwulf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see.

 

Replace “Service” with “Department” and you’d be correct. The Marines are a part of the Dept of the Navy, and subordinate to it’s civilian leadership to be sure, but they are in no way subordinate to the Navy’s military leadership. The Navy and Marine Corps are co-equal branches of the US military.

 

It’s a fine distinction that many people confuse so don’t be hard on yourself. :thumbup:

 

 

Yeah at what point did I say they were subordinate to the Navy? I said they were a sub set of the Navy.

 

If you want to pick nits then sure department. That doesn't address the whole point that was being discussed in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cheek mounted litening pod was however put in DCS for NON USN/USMC Hornets - RAAF, Spain, etc.

 

https://www.airforce-technology.com/uncategorised/newssaab-to-deliver-bol-pods-to-australias-fa-18ab-hornet-4697189/

 

"In 2008, Australia acquired BOL for the F/A-18A/B Hornets of the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF). The new order is aimed at increasing the RAAF’s operational capability."

 

These hornets had been upgraded to essentially C standard, starting in 1999

 

 

 

ED bends their rules frequently, and if you don't ask, you don't get.

 

 

Well if you are going to ask to get then since the EF-2000 is incoming I'm not sure why we wouldn't ask for an E model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if you are going to ask to get then since the EF-2000 is incoming I'm not sure why we wouldn't ask for an E model.

 

 

I've seen it mounted on RAAF Hornets several times, always on the centreline. Anecdotal yes, but I've never seen a cheek mount used. And, I am not military so maybe I wouldn't know, just saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if you are going to ask to get then since the EF-2000 is incoming I'm not sure why we wouldn't ask for an E model.

 

Actually I asked for D (AW) model. Has a higher chance of success... plus people grovelling for an E or F model has been done to death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah at what point did I say they were subordinate to the Navy? I said they were a sub set of the Navy.

 

If you want to pick nits then sure department. That doesn't address the whole point that was being discussed in the first place.

 

As you conveniently edit the original statement, "Marines aren't a separate service but a sub set of the Navy." That can only be correctly interpreted one way regardless how you meant it, and that one way is factually wrong. I was merely making what I considered a cheeky observation.

 

You are a rude and obnoxious person but I don't wish to highjack this thread, so try to have a great day. Out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you conveniently edit the original statement, "Marines aren't a separate service but a sub set of the Navy." That can only be correctly interpreted one way regardless how you meant it, and that one way is factually wrong.

 

 

I didn't edit anything about this statement thanks. No different than when the USAF wasn't a separate service but was a sub set of the Army. You just choose to act like using the term "service" is completely wrong and "department" is correct. Fine I don't care about the semantics of it. We both understand what it meant. You chose to interpret it differently.

 

 

I was merely making what I considered a cheeky observation.

 

With a snide remark about how this difference of interpretation made you "right" and me "wrong" so yeah whatever.

 

 

You are a rude and obnoxious person but I don't wish to highjack this thread, so try to have a great day. Out.

 

 

Your opinion and you are entitled to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like many parts of the HUG mods to the F/A-18A, there's no public documentation on how those dispensers are integrated into the RAAF Hornet, any implementation would be pure assumption and they'd no longer be able to call it an F/A-18C on the store page. It would be the same as asking for the AIM-132 and no one is doing that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like many parts of the HUG mods to the F/A-18A, there's no public documentation on how those dispensers are integrated into the RAAF Hornet, any implementation would be pure assumption and they'd no longer be able to call it an F/A-18C on the store page. It would be the same as asking for the AIM-132 and no one is doing that.

 

 

Well one would think it'd simply use the 'other' options in the countermeasures programs.

 

https://saab.com/globalassets/publications-pdfs/eds/electronic-warfare-ew/bol_f-18_product_sheet.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...