737 - The next great air frame?

[410Cougar]

I don't know if Boeing planned it this way, but it certainly seems that the 737 series of airframes is being used as the airframe of choice for several new projects such as the Wedgetail as well as the P-8 MMA.

This is just a personal thought, but with the availability of the airframes (they are commonly used as Airliners in several countries - a very volatile industry to say the least) it looks like Air Forces are using or will use planes that have a large parts cache/availability when they choose their planes for the future.

Thoughts?

 

[aaaditya]

I don't know if Boeing planned it this way, but it certainly seems that the 737 series of airframes is being used as the airframe of choice for several new projects such as the Wedgetail as well as the P-8 MMA.

This is just a personal thought, but with the availability of the airframes (they are commonly used as Airliners in several countries - a very volatile industry to say the least) it looks like Air Forces are using or will use planes that have a large parts cache/availability when they choose their planes for the future.

Thoughts?

the p8 is no longer unique,airbus a319 has been offered by the eads as a rival to the p8 for the indian navy deal ,this concept was developed for a european country ,but found no takers.

of course they offer a very good solution as you have suggested,since the costs can be kept low,but the actual success will be determined by the capability of the sensors and the weapons package.

 

[XEROX]

I think they use 738/739 platforms becouse of 3 important factors,

1. Its more fuel efficient when compared with larger models such as 777, 747
2. Newer engines on the 737NG have lower noise emmisions
3. Maintenance costs are cheaper for this series of a/c then compared with other Boeing models.

having said that i can see military platforms being based upon Boeings upcoming 787 a/c

 

[aaaditya]

I think they use 738/739 platforms becouse of 3 important factors,

1. Its more fuel efficient when compared with larger models such as 777, 747
2. Newer engines on the 737NG have lower noise emmisions
3. Maintenance costs are cheaper for this series of a/c then compared with other Boeing models.

having said that i can see military platforms being based upon Boeings upcoming 787 a/c

there is no version called the 738/739 but the 737-800 and the 737-900 which are called as the ng(new generation),i believe the 737-800 platform with the the 737-900 ng's engines and wingtips are being utilized.

 

[XEROX]

738/739 is shorthand for 737-800, 737-900

 

[cypress]

Yes I think they will. The U.S. is also going to put ABM lasers on 747s. Seems like in a total war situation the military would convert a portion of the civilian fleet into fuelers/bombers.

 

[Big-E]

Yes I think they will. The U.S. is also going to put ABM lasers on 747s.

Since the laser is going to destroy the fuel section of ICBMs shortly after launch would the falling warhead detonate on impact if it survives the explosion?

 

[cypress]

No, at least not if it is a nuke. A nuke requires a trigger. It might be an altitude/location trigger: ie: when the nuke is above the target it detonates. If the nuke does not detect that it is above the target it will not detonate. There is very little risk of accidental nuke detonation. Mabey some super old weapon like the "fat man" or "tall boy" with dinosaur triggers would.

 

[Wild Weasel]

The warhead falls back into the territory of the offending nation, and that is typically not a good thing if the warhead does not fall into the sea. Plutonium and such is rather toxic to people.

 

[cypress]

The warhead falls back into the territory of the offending nation, and that is typically not a good thing if the warhead does not fall into the sea. Plutonium and such is rather toxic to people.

I do not think a warhead case would crack on impact. It could, and spread plutonium, but thats nothing compared to all the DU used in Iraq. Overall not a major risk compared with the destructive power of an 50+ megaton H-bomb.

 

[Wild Weasel]

Well yes, of course. But what difference does that make? The point is that the warhead falls back on the country that launches it- and that it doesn't detonate over it's intended target.

 

[cypress]

A 737 would make a great platform to deliver cruise missiles and bombs. Why not create a fleet of them? They don't last forever like a b52 because of the stresses on the airframe, but they are cheap. As soon as there is airsuperiority bring in the 737 to drop bombs all over the place. As long as they are above 20,000 ft they should not have problems with MANPADS. 20 or 30 of them would be an excellent addition to any airforce. Hey you could even attach mini-guns and rocket pods to Lear jets or Gulf Streams. Or attach one of those High Energy Tatical Lasers to the bottom of a 737 for a modern version of the c130 spectre.

 

[Wild Weasel]

A 737 would make a great platform to deliver cruise missiles and bombs. Why not create a fleet of them? They don't last forever like a b52 because of the stresses on the airframe, but they are cheap. As soon as there is airsuperiority bring in the 737 to drop bombs all over the place. As long as they are above 20,000 ft they should not have problems with MANPADS. 20 or 30 of them would be an excellent addition to any airforce. Hey you could even attach mini-guns and rocket pods to Lear jets or Gulf Streams. Or attach one of those High Energy Tatical Lasers to the bottom of a 737 for a modern version of the c130 spectre.

I think it makes more sense from an economic ( and psychlogical ) point of view- to use unmanned platforms, and multitudes of inexpensive strike weapons with standoff-range.
LOCAAS, SDB, Titan Affordable Weapon, G-MLRS, NLOS-LS, etc etc.
It might be embarrasing to be killed by a B-737, but I think an X-47B spewing LOCAAS miniature cruise missiles would be much more frightening to an enemy hiding behind a Russian-style air defense grid.
After air supremcy is achieved, then manned platforms such as the B-52, and B-1B can carpet bomb with SFW, and other cluster munitions.

But I am aware that there are concepts to mount DEWs on V-22's and the like.

 

[cypress]

If we are talking about an opponent behind a russian defense grid there is no chance of using 737's. A 737 could be loaded with SDB's just like anything else. My only point was, if you have the air in control, why not use the cheapest planes you can to deliver the load. If you are beyond MANPAD range, who cares? They cant see that high anyway so who cares what scares them the most. They wont even know what hit them most of the time anyway. So use the cheapest plane capable of dropping the bombs with the lowest fuel and matinence costs. That is the 7*7 series. Or mabey airbus or that russian company that makes passenger planes.

 

[Big-E]

A 737 would make a great platform to deliver cruise missiles and bombs. Why not create a fleet of them? They don't last forever like a b52 because of the stresses on the airframe, but they are cheap. As soon as there is airsuperiority bring in the 737 to drop bombs all over the place. As long as they are above 20,000 ft they should not have problems with MANPADS. 20 or 30 of them would be an excellent addition to any airforce. Hey you could even attach mini-guns and rocket pods to Lear jets or Gulf Streams. Or attach one of those High Energy Tatical Lasers to the bottom of a 737 for a modern version of the c130 spectre.

B-52H costs $53.4 million with 303,000 load out including fuel.
737 cost $77 million with 70,000 load out including fuel.

737 as a bomb truck = bad idea!

Oops, you were joking... I was duped again.:tomato

 

[410Cougar]

I hate bringing up this point...

But if alot of airlines are falling apart and need to sell off their assets, would the USAF be able to purchase and then convert them over to bombers?

That'd be a huge force as there are a large number of 737's in the world right now...

 

[Big-E]

I hate bringing up this point...

But if alot of airlines are falling apart and need to sell off their assets, would the USAF be able to purchase and then convert them over to bombers?

That'd be a huge force as there are a large number of 737's in the world right now...

Why would the USAF want to convert airliners that are at the end of their service lives? If she wanted more bombing capabilty she would do better just to reinstate as many aircraft at the boneyard that are still servicable. 737s would make horrible bombers.

 

[410Cougar]

I agree, they make horrible bombers. I think I was looking more at the availability of airframes...with new skin and systems they'd make great P8's, no??

Not that I want to replace our Aurora's....they rock.

 

[Wild Weasel]

I think it would make much more sense to convert a large number for tanker/transports and other strategic roles, like AEW/C4ISTAR, surveillance/recon, maritime patrol, and possibly airborne control centers for UAVs and UCAVs.
In addition, I could see a couple dozen acting as dedicated high-speed transports for special operations forces, and working in other covert/SOCOM-related roles. Perhaps several 737s could even be converted into an inexpensive gun platform like the AC-130 gunships.
There seems to be an ever-increasing demand for SPECOPS gunships these days, and an insufficient number of Spookys and Spectres to do the job.

 

[Big-E]

Perhaps several 737s could even be converted into an inexpensive gun platform like the AC-130 gunships.
There seems to be an ever-increasing demand for SPECOPS gunships these days, and an insufficient number of Spookys and Spectres to do the job.

Can they keep the guns targeted at those speeds? Is the turn radius of the aircraft enough to keep guns constantly on target like the AC-130s? Can she operate effectively that close to the ground?