Engaging in a bit of Monday morning quarterbacking


Message posted by C. Reed on December 14, 2010 at 11:49:07 PST:

If it would three months to break down, move by road or C-17/C-5, and then reassemble a UAV derived from a type that first flew years ago, something's off. In '52, Grumman moved the prototype XF10F Jaguar to Edwards aboard a C-124, and had it flying in little more than a month. It took less than three weeks for Lockheed to fly the first Have Blue after it was moved in pieces to Groom on a C-5, and the prototype F-15 flew in a similar timeframe after being airlifted.

I recognize that there's an apples and oranges aspect to the analogies I gave (Phantom Ray wouldn't have as many personnel and resources), but IIRC the predecessor X-45 was designed to be airlifted and then rapidly assembled at forward locations - it was even supposed to be able to be stored containerized for long periods. Assuming such capability is intended for Phantom Ray as well, why not demonstrate it right off?


In Reply to: Phantm Ray & NASA 747 posted by Bill on December 13, 2010 at 18:26:32 PST:

Replies:



[ Discussion Forum Index ] [ FAQ ]