shep854 Posted December 5, 2018 Share Posted December 5, 2018 https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurph/articles/20181205.aspx"Ten heavy bombers (B-52, B-1B and B-2) flew in while the GPS was off and tested their skills at navigating without GPS...""It was found that without GPS the younger troops, sailors and pilots could still do it old school and seemed to relish the challenge." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted December 5, 2018 Share Posted December 5, 2018 Wonder if there is room to retrofit one of these in a B1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted December 5, 2018 Share Posted December 5, 2018 For an aircraft, couldn't you use radar mapping to get a very good fix if you were overflying a know area? This is how TERCOM worked. In that case the waypoints would be very specific, but I would have thought strategic bombers now adays could carry the radar imagery of an entire theater for reference purposes. This would mean illuminating your radar, but depending on the threat or stand off range, that would be acceptable in most situations. If nothing else, it might allow precise terminal weapon delivery and presumably the gig is up once you start releasing weapons anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GARGEAN Posted December 5, 2018 Share Posted December 5, 2018 For an aircraft, couldn't you use radar mapping to get a very good fix if you were overflying a know area? This is how TERCOM worked. In that case the waypoints would be very specific, but I would have thought strategic bombers now adays could carry the radar imagery of an entire theater for reference purposes. This would mean illuminating your radar, but depending on the threat or stand off range, that would be acceptable in most situations. If nothing else, it might allow precise terminal weapon delivery and presumably the gig is up once you start releasing weapons anyway.Pretty hard to perform while flying over Pole or ocean... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted December 5, 2018 Share Posted December 5, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shep854 Posted December 5, 2018 Author Share Posted December 5, 2018 Arctic nav is a real headache, even with GPS. Radio get really screwy towards the poles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted December 5, 2018 Share Posted December 5, 2018 (edited) deleted Edited December 5, 2018 by Josh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted December 5, 2018 Share Posted December 5, 2018 For an aircraft, couldn't you use radar mapping to get a very good fix if you were overflying a know area? This is how TERCOM worked. In that case the waypoints would be very specific, but I would have thought strategic bombers now adays could carry the radar imagery of an entire theater for reference purposes. This would mean illuminating your radar, but depending on the threat or stand off range, that would be acceptable in most situations. If nothing else, it might allow precise terminal weapon delivery and presumably the gig is up once you start releasing weapons anyway.Pretty hard to perform while flying over Pole or ocean... I wasn't implying it should be a singular source of navigation, but it would allow PGM delivery where as most other nav methods short of GPS would not. Presumably you could refine your position when you made landfall. Arctic nav is a real headache, even with GPS. Radio get really screwy towards the poles. Besides the bad radio conditions, I was under the impression GPS orbits were sub optimal for good coverage over the poles as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Werb Posted December 5, 2018 Share Posted December 5, 2018 First of all, how accurate is a modern, high end INS over say an hour? If you then have something like a sniper pod it could update your INS in clear weather by locking onto an object of known location and tracking and ranging it. Alternately, with two such pods you could do it passively by triangulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Werb Posted December 5, 2018 Share Posted December 5, 2018 I found one source claiming that "modern" INS used by aircraft drift by c. 0.6 nautical miles per hour. That's lousy for even a strategic weapon used over the poles, but it would get a human crew within sight and certainly within radar range of known objects to get a fix on even after a transpolar flight. RC135s use celestial to update their INS. I wonder how accurate that is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted December 6, 2018 Share Posted December 6, 2018 I found one source claiming that "modern" INS used by aircraft drift by c. 0.6 nautical miles per hour. That's lousy for even a strategic weapon used over the poles, but it would get a human crew within sight and certainly within radar range of known objects to get a fix on even after a transpolar flight. RC135s use celestial to update their INS. I wonder how accurate that is? It was certainly adequate for civilian airliners flying the Atlantic or the Pacific until the not too distant past. Or at least was, assuming it wasn't flown by a South Korean. Its worth remembering that RAF Black Buck operations would also have been flown near exclusively by INS. I seem to recall the Black Buck Vulcans were fitted with an INS system that had been removed from VC10's awaiting conversion into RAF Tankers. Thats 3300 nautical miles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DB Posted December 6, 2018 Share Posted December 6, 2018 For an aircraft, couldn't you use radar mapping to get a very good fix if you were overflying a know area? This is how TERCOM worked. In that case the waypoints would be very specific, but I would have thought strategic bombers now adays could carry the radar imagery of an entire theater for reference purposes. This would mean illuminating your radar, but depending on the threat or stand off range, that would be acceptable in most situations. If nothing else, it might allow precise terminal weapon delivery and presumably the gig is up once you start releasing weapons anyway.Pretty hard to perform while flying over Pole or ocean...You can't rely on GPS at high latitudes, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shep854 Posted December 6, 2018 Author Share Posted December 6, 2018 KC-135s no longer carry dedicated navigators, though the mount for celestial nav is still in the roof. As far as I know, celestial navigation is no longer used aboard US aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Werb Posted December 7, 2018 Share Posted December 7, 2018 KC-135s no longer carry dedicated navigators, though the mount for celestial nav is still in the roof. As far as I know, celestial navigation is no longer used aboard US aircraft. RC-135s have this, Pete. http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/LN120GStellarInertialNavigationSystem/Documents/ln120g.pdf http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/61074/northrop-to-upgrade-rc_135-navigation-(aug-4).html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shep854 Posted December 7, 2018 Author Share Posted December 7, 2018 Thanks,Chris! I was harking back to a FAMFLIGHT I took on a KC-135 back around '05 or so. The fitting for the navigator's sextant was still in the flight deck overhead, but the actual flying/navigating was done by the pilot/copilot.I'm sure the automated systems are much faster and more accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETAC21 Posted April 2, 2020 Share Posted April 2, 2020 Doesn't really fit here but rather than open a new thread, 2 contenders: patrol ship 1500 tons Cruise ship: 8300 tons One winner: https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/venezuelan-navy-patrol-boat-sinks-after-collision-with-cruise-ship Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted April 2, 2020 Share Posted April 2, 2020 This is going to make such an awesome Osprey book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BansheeOne Posted April 3, 2020 Share Posted April 3, 2020 Naval Patrol Boat Takes on Cruise Ship. Loses Real Bad.Turns out you shouldn't ram a cruise ship built to withstand sea ice. By Kyle Mizokami Apr 2, 2020 The Venezuelan Navy offshore patrol vessel Naiguata, sent to intercept a lowly cruise ship, accidentally owned itself on Monday. After ramming the cruise ship RCGS Resolute's steel-reinforced hull, the patrol boat sank. (The good news: There were no injuries.) The Resolute suffered only minor damage because it was reinforced to withstand iceberg-infested waters. According to Maritime Executive, the incident took place 13 nautical miles off the coast of Isla de Tortuga, an uninhabited Venezuelan island. The Naiguata ordered the Resolute to follow it to Venezuela and port, on the pretext of “violation of Venezuelan territorial waters.” While the cruise ship crew was consulting with the home office, the navy vessel fired several warning shots and began ramming the cruise ship. What the crew of the Naiguata apparently did not realize was that the Resolute’s hull is stronger than average because of its iceberg-resistant hull. The ship’s website describes the hull as having “high density steel plating” to allow it to sail in “ice laden large waters.” Columbia Cruise Services, operators of the Resolute, tell the ship’s side of the story: While the RCGS RESOLUTE sustained minor damages, not affecting vessel’s seaworthiness, it occurs that the navy vessel suffered severe damages while making contact with the ice-strengthened bulbous bow of the ice-class expedition cruise vessel RCGS RESOLUTE and started to take water. While the Master was in contact with the head office, gun shots were fired and, shortly thereafter, the navy vessel approached the starboard side at speed with an angle of 135° and purposely collided with the RCGS RESOLUTE. The navy vessel continued to ram the starboard bow in an apparent attempt to turn the ship’s head towards Venezuelan territorial waters. The Naiguata ended up sinking. According to Columbia Cruise Services, Resolute stayed in the vicinity until the Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre (MRCC) Curaçao, the authority responsible for local incidents at sea, told it to continue on its voyage. Resolute also claims that offers to lend aid to the stricken ship were “left unanswered.” The Venezuelan military disputed that, stating “the action of the ship Resolute is considered cowardly and criminal, since it did not attend to the rescue of the crew, in breach of the international regulations that regulate the rescue of life at sea.” A statement attributed to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro alleged that the cruise ship was actually to blame in an "act of aggression and piracy."After being released by the MRCC, the Resolute sailed on to safety, docking at the island of Curaçao. [...] https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a32021287/venezuela-cruiser-cruise-ship-collide/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted April 3, 2020 Share Posted April 3, 2020 They should really paint a kill marking on the bridge...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJ Posted April 3, 2020 Share Posted April 3, 2020 A Japanese destroyer collided with a Chinese fishing boat, getting a meter long gash, on Monday evening in the East China Sea. Reported to be 650km west of Yukashima island, making it about 150km east of Shanghai. Both sides seem eerily calm about it, even though the whole virus thing might be a distraction. The Japanese destroyer was one of the older ones.https://www.defenseworld.net/news/26644/Hole_in_Japanese_Destroyer_after_Collision_with_Chinese_Fishing_Boat#.XodK1eozbcshttps://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20200331_04/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivanhoe Posted April 4, 2020 Share Posted April 4, 2020 They should really paint a kill marking on the bridge...... +1000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivanhoe Posted April 4, 2020 Share Posted April 4, 2020 patrol ship 1500 tons Thanks much for tracking down good photos, Google was not helpful last night. That is, er was, a beautiful patrol ship. However, beauty does little good when one tries to play sumo with an opponent 3 weight classes up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobu Posted April 5, 2020 Share Posted April 5, 2020 Whether it left more than a paint stain on the cruise ship will be interesting once the damage photos appear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burncycle360 Posted April 5, 2020 Share Posted April 5, 2020 (edited) *delete Edited April 5, 2020 by Burncycle360 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BansheeOne Posted April 5, 2020 Share Posted April 5, 2020 They should really paint a kill marking on the bridge...... I can only imagine the supressed smugness with which the cruise ship crew offered assistance to the sinking OPV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now