Palletized munitions delivery vs traditional bombers

R

Ronny

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
19 July 2019
Messages
1,127
Reaction score
1,147
Rapid dragon concept allow you to load cruise missile inside pallets and put on common cargo aircraft, then these cargo aircraft can launch all short of cruise missiles and bombs just like a bomber.
A45E06A5-8E99-49EF-ADF7-D640FE64197D.png
DD203B13-F7A3-4209-978F-F52B1D0FFF3A.png
For example: a C-17 can carry and launch 32 JASSM/LRASM missile
For comparison, a dedicated bomber such as B-1B can carry 24 JASSM/LRASM internally and another 12 JASSM/LRASM externally for a total of 36 missiles. A B-52 can carry 8 JASSM/LRASM internally and 12 JASSM/LRASM externally for a total of 20 missiles. So we can see that Cargo aircraft can carry just as much if not more missile and bombs than conventional bombers . So, with palletized munitions delivery concept, will cargo aircraft now able to do bombers job even better than dedicated bombers?. Do we even need dedicated bomber anymore?
 
Palletized works great as long as you enjoy air superiority within range of the target.
As soon as a defender fields significant numbers of AAA or AA missiles, you will lose transport planes by the dozens.
 
Here is where prevailing winds play a part.

The munitions don’t need to come home, right?

Deploy during very strong winds blowing to target just outside of enemy range.

Cargo craft fly back…by the time enemy fire is encountered, all it hits are empty pallets because your munitions have been sent streaking towards targets a moment beforehand.

Just keep the racks aloft just long enough to deploy…a whole new twist to JPL’s “seven minutes of terror!”

Arsenal balsa gliders anyone?
 
Last edited:
publiusr said:
Here is where prevailing winds play a part.

The munitions don’t need to come home, right?

Deploy during very strong winds blowing to target just outside of enemy range.

Cargo craft fly back…by the time enemy fire is encountered, all it hits are empty pallets because your munitions have been sent streaking towards targets a moment beforehand.

Just keep the racks aloft just long enough to deploy…a whole new twist to JPL’s “seven minutes of terror!”

Arsenal balsa gliders anyone?
Click to expand...
It'll be hard to build CONOPS where everything hinges upon winds blowing in precisely the right direction at the right time.
 
You can tack into the wind with kite sails. I am thinking of combining the very highest tech with the very lowest—to defeat common 20th Century tech. The pallets have big chutes and maybe an ultralight engine pushing them just close enough…that sort of thing….just long enough for the cargo planes to escape.
 
riggerrob said:
Palletized works great as long as you enjoy air superiority within range of the target.
As soon as a defender fields significant numbers of AAA or AA missiles, you will lose transport planes by the dozens.
Click to expand...
Palletized delivery can allow cargo aircraft to drop cruise missile from extended range just like bombers can. And i also don't think a B-52 is particularly more survivable than C-17
 
donnage99 said:
our transport fleet is usually in high demand during a conflict. Idk about burdening them with bomb truck role as well.
Click to expand...
I mean will palletize munition delivery eliminate the need to design/produce a dedicated bombers?, may be you just need to manufacturing cargo aircraft and they can do both jobs
 
Clearly this method of delivery is specific to very long ranged weapons that can be easily palletized. There is a huge multitude of ordnance and missions that the B-52 can undertake that a C-17 would not. But as a cheap way of kicking more of one specific type of cruise missile in the air, it seems viable. Though as someone noted above, it seems likely the C-17 fleet is quite occupied in the event of a conflict. But it uses a missile and a plane in inventory, so the development of the delivery method seems pretty cost effective. Presumably a C-17 can carry a fairly large load of AGM-158s on pallets. A quick google search indicates that a C-17 can carry 18 pallets, though depending on how many missiles there are per pallet it would probably mass out before you could load that many. There would probably be center of gravity issues as well with a full capacity load. Still, seems likely you could carry many more missiles than a bomber.
 
Josh_TN said:
Clearly this method of delivery is specific to very long ranged weapons that can be easily palletized. There is a huge multitude of ordnance and missions that the B-52 can undertake that a C-17 would not. But as a cheap way of kicking more of one specific type of cruise missile in the air, it seems viable. Though as someone noted above, it seems likely the C-17 fleet is quite occupied in the event of a conflict. But it uses a missile and a plane in inventory, so the development of the delivery method seems pretty cost effective. Presumably a C-17 can carry a fairly large load of AGM-158s on pallets. A quick google search indicates that a C-17 can carry 18 pallets, though depending on how many missiles there are per pallet it would probably mass out before you could load that many. There would probably be center of gravity issues as well with a full capacity load. Still, seems likely you could carry many more missiles than a bomber.
Click to expand...

According to this, C-17 can launch 32 JASSM-ERs. Which weight around 32 tons, maximum weight capacity of C-17 is 77 tons, so I guess the limit could be due to missile length
The data is uploaded to the missiles, then cleared for release. The pallet rolls out the back, dropping by parachute at a safe distance from the C-17, stabilizes and then automatically fires up to 32 JASSM-ERs or other munitions at a target hundreds of miles away
Click to expand...

Air Force to Launch Munitions from C-17s

Air Force to Launch Munitions from C-17s
www.nationaldefensemagazine.org www.nationaldefensemagazine.org
 
Thanks...rather less than I expected, but certainly a non trivial amount. There's no shortage of volume in the C-17 for this weapon type; I suspect they are limited by how many pallets they can safely eject from the aircraft without causing flight control issues. IE, were they just delivering the missiles to a forward base and landing normally I suspect they can carry much more.
 
donnage99 said:
our transport fleet is usually in high demand during a conflict. Idk about burdening them with bomb truck role as well.
Click to expand...
It so much cheaper to buy new transport plane though. For example: a C-130J cost about 55-70 millions USD, and each C-130 can carry up to two ‘six-pack’ pallets (for a total of 12 cruise missiles). That basically more than twice as many as an F-15EX or F-35 can carry.
Whereas a single B-1B cost 317 millions USD when it was built.
 
I could see the MC-130 community contributing to air strikes. Also C-17s might be used as a surge capability. Just a pair could mount a a hundred missile strike. And while C-17s are a limited resource with no production line, B-52s are an even scarcer resource. It is important to note that a major war in the Pacific would probably see the the IS expend most of its cruise missiles in the first month, so increasing the launch capacity might not be desirable outside perhaps a Day1 strike.
 
Simon Whistler at Megaprojects recently uploaded an interesting video about the Rapid Dragon programme:


Discover the evolution of long-range weaponry from ancient stones to the advanced USAF Rapid Dragon missile system. Explore its origins, functionality, and groundbreaking efficiency in modern warfare. Watch now!
Click to expand...
 
publiusr said:
You can tack into the wind with kite sails. I am thinking of combining the very highest tech with the very lowest—to defeat common 20th Century tech. The pallets have big chutes and maybe an ultralight engine pushing them just close enough…that sort of thing….just long enough for the cargo planes to escape.
Click to expand...
"Tack into the wind with kite sails ... " ??????????
Tacking only works when you have two different media in close proximity, like water and air.

Dropping cargo with steerable para-foils (square parachutes invented by Domina Jalbert) has been done since the 1980s. Para-Flite were one of the first companies to manufacture para-foils and they were also one of the first to equip them with guidance systems.
In October 2023, Hamas proved that powered para-foils are any easy way to hop across border fences.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom