MQ-25 Stealth Tanker

Winston · Apr 11, 2018

Why? Because the self-guided (fire and forget) anti-ship missiles of China and Russia have exceeded the operational range of our carrier based aircraft and it doesn't make much sense to refuel stealth fighters to extend their range with huge tankers that are the antithesis of stealthy.

[video=youtube;T1F8GoVnonU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1F8GoVnonU[/video]

burkefj · Apr 11, 2018

Now they need a stealth hose....not sure how stealthy a hose with basket is.....

ksaves2 · Apr 11, 2018

burkefj said:
Now they need a stealth hose....not sure how stealthy a hose with basket is.....

Heck, they'll figure out a way to "micro facet" the things to scatter the Rf so it won't be a problem! Yeah that's the ticket. I suspect if that was a problem, they wouldn't be talking about Stealth tankers then. Kurt

Winston · Apr 12, 2018

I've obviously given them too much credit for smarts. The MQ-25 has a stealth shape, but not stealth coatings. That's optional for possible future attack versions. Still better than a huge tanker, but not fully stealth.:

Lockheed Is Already Pushing A Stealthy Version Of Its MQ-25 Stingray Tanker Drone
The sad thing is, the whole idea originally was for the Navy to get a stealth drone, but it ended up getting a flying gas can.
APRIL 11, 2018

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...hy-version-of-its-mq-25-stingray-tanker-drone

Excerpt:

Then again, if a stealthy carrier-based UCAV wasn't 'strangled in its crib' by the fighter-pilot dominated decision-making cadre in the Navy and the idiots in Congress, it would lead a lot of people to ask why an F-35C is needed if a drone that cost half to a quarter the price can do many of the same things but three times to four times farther away and without risking a pilot in the process.

But instead of just embracing the future and fielding the best UCAV it could, the Navy is blowing its money on a tanker drone that it no longer needs that badly and that can maybe adapt to do some limited work in the semi-contested airspace. That is if the Navy will shell out to develop and field those upgraded variants.

In the end, the decision deep six UCLASS and neuter the Navy's unmanned carrier-based aircraft potential into the form of a flying gas can was laughably near-sighted and arguably disingenuous. Above all else, the decision to give the drone a job no fighter pilot wanted, one that was only needed in part because of the cancellation of UCLASS itself, protected the service's manned fighter programs with ruthless abandon.

And sadly, none of this is surprising.

snrkl · Apr 12, 2018

Didnt Russia just go back to WWII era radar tech to defeat stealth?

From: https://youtu.be/mxDSiwqM2nw

Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum

markkoelsch · Apr 13, 2018

Pierre Sprey thinks far too much of himself.

Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum

Winston · Apr 14, 2018

Boeing's MQ-25 version:

[video=youtube;x3jMQVM_c0U]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3jMQVM_c0U[/video]

MQ-25 Stealth Tanker

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn

burkefj

Well-Known Member

ksaves2

Well-Known Member

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn

snrkl

Well-Known Member

markkoelsch

Well-Known Member

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn

Similar threads

Latest posts

MQ-25 Stealth Tanker

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

Lorenzo von Matterhorn

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Lorenzo von Matterhorn

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Lorenzo von Matterhorn

Similar threads

Join the conversation!

Join today and get all the highlights of this community direct to your inbox. It's FREE!