Lockheed "Classified Aero Program"

[dark sidius]

This has to be one of the worst examples you could have given. It totally proves my point. Despite the CIA ordering the A-12 and the USAF ordering the YF-12 they both share the same parts and technology.

Two different customers shared the same technology at the Skunk Works.



Lockheeds NGAD demonstrator, any SR-72 designs and this secret aircraft is all made at the Skunk Works. So just like the A-12, YF-12 and SR-71 all made at the Skunk Works. It doesn't matter if the funding sources or customers were different.

This is not like two private companies trying to keep their trade secrets. I even doubt the stories where USAF funded research wouldn't be shared with the US Navy and vice versa. Like a greedy kid not wanting to share the lollies they paid for. It is ridiculous suggestion. There is no evidence of data not being shared.

I agree but at a time there is a need of some proof instead it is just speculation. At this time we still don't know what is this classified plane in the work, just my opinion is something for the Strike family. Or some sort of very advanced CCA.

 

[DWG]

The P prefix is for a maritime patrol aircraft with anti-submarine warfare capability.

You're confusing designation systems and role descriptions - P-ISR = Penetrating ISR.

I suspect any future ISR platforms would have an R prefix if they use passive sensors for sigint or an E prefix if they use active radars. Also, the E-7 and P-8 should have been the EC-40 and PC-40.

EA-37B Compass Call and E-130J TACAMO point to anything goes for future designations

(My favourite designation remains the Hall XPTBH)

 

[Scott Kenny]

The RC-135 is another platform that needs to be replaced, in addition to JSTARS.

Both of those are highly likely to be drones/CCAs.

Plus I think that the JSTARS replacement is going to end up as two different drone airframes. A small one operated by the Army at low to medium altitudes like TACIT BLUE was intended to be as an artillery and attack helicopter target finder, and a big one operated by USAF at high altitudes.

It's possible that the RC-135s may be replaced by 737s/C-40s, if the sensors needed must be physically large and there's no real reason for a stealthy airframe.

I suspect any future ISR platforms would have an R prefix if they use passive sensors for sigint or an E prefix if they use active radars.

Maybe? I think that there were a few RC-135s with active radars. *wikidive* yeah, the single RC-135E RIVET AMBER had a 7MW radar for tracking Russian ballistic missile tests.

Also, the E-7 and P-8 should have been the EC-40 and PC-40.

No.

E-3 AWACS was not the EC-135 or -137. Nor was E-8 JSTARS an EC/RC-135/137. E-1 Tracer vs C-1 Trader vs S-2 Tracker, despite all having very similar airframes. C-2 vs E-2.

The P-8 has significant changes from a C-40. Like that whole bomb bay.

 

[baseball801802]

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA604249.pdf
This article features an overly optimistic timeline but i definitely still think this belongs here lol.

 

[quellish]

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA604249.pdf
This article features an overly optimistic timeline but i definitely still think this belongs here lol.

Optical stealth only becomes relevant when you have already lowered every other method your adversary has to build a kill chain or detect you as low as it can go.

For UAVs flying in uncontested airspace optical and acoustic stealth are very important..

For fighters in contested airspace… not so much.