Thread

1. walrus01 · 1790727565 · focus · HN ↗

   I'd be more astonished if there isn't something superior to the SR71 (likely unmanned) that has been flying around at night from facilities like Groom Lake for years. Look at how long the RQ180 was flying around in semi-public and known about before it became seen in daylight by plane spotters in Greece. And a long time before that there were public relations approved photos of the Lockheed Martin Polecat.

   There were a series of extremely public quotations from senior DoD officially recently about how they plan to aggressively retire the Global Hawk program (which is a mostly non stealth aircraft), reading between the lines it's because they have something much better.

   edit: for those who haven&#x27;t seen the RQ180: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;search?client=firefox-b-d&amp;q=RQ180+greece" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;search?client=firefox-b-d&amp;q=RQ180+gre...

   edit 2 (apologies for the X link): <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;x.com&#x2F;MechDesignxyz&#x2F;status&#x2F;2041281689838584193" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;x.com&#x2F;MechDesignxyz&#x2F;status&#x2F;2041281689838584193

   1. ricksunny · 1790748086 · focus · HN ↗

      I wonder if people are 1. proud, 2. in awe, 3. regretful, 4. spiteful of the people (engineers, technicians, administrators, executives, and back office people) who make secretive kinetic hardware like this under USG contract &#x2F; prospective contract.

      1. walrus01 · 1790749416 · focus · HN ↗

         In strictly military technology terms, an ISR platform isn&#x27;t a kinetic anything, though it would enable the targeting of something kinetic.

         1. ricksunny · 1790750457 · focus · HN ↗

            Yes. Though some ISR platforms are more adaptable than others. (i.e. you’re not the only one here with lived DIB experience..)

            But an easy illustrative reference is the Predator drone loosing Hellfire missiles during the War on Terror.

            1. walrus01 · 1790755651 · focus · HN ↗

               Very possible. Once you&#x27;ve gone to the massive engineering effort&#x2F;budget to produce something like an RQ180, I&#x27;m sure someone will come up with an idea boiled down to essentially &quot;hey what if we took the radar-resistant bay door design and internal munitions bay mounting from the F22 and shrunk it a bit, we could fit at least four 500 lb JDAMs in this bad boy&quot;...

               Things get re-used in weird ways with other stuff grafted onto them, I&#x27;m pretty sure the people who originally designed the F-A&#x2F;18 never imagined it would be turned into the EA18 growler.

               1. m4rtink · 1790769177 · focus · HN ↗

                  I&#x27;m not sure how an unmodified JDAM would handle highly supersonic slipstream. Best case is the guidance section just falls apart. Worst case - the bomb smashes into the aircraft on release, killing the crew.

                  Would not be the first for the related A-12 program - the D-21 drone program managed top get 3 people killed due to crashes on release.

                  1. ricksunny · 1790787842 · focus · HN ↗

                     “Yes we know, Mrs Lincoln, but how did you like the show?”

                     Classic HNer fixating to something technical because it’s safer than engaging on moralistic lines with broader topic at hand. And this is how unaccountable military technical monstrosities get built.

                     1. m4rtink · 1790819306 · focus · HN ↗

                        &quot;Never liked participatory theater &amp; this one finally ruined it to me for life.&quot;
                  2. walrus01 · 1790801843 · focus · HN ↗

                     I was referring to the rq180 or similar design which is very much not a supersonic aircraft.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.