New Iraqi Airborne Strike Capability Spotted

On Oct 22, 11:55*am, frank wrote:
On Oct 22, 1:22*am, Mark Borgerson wrote:



In article ab5f457c-92f8-4016-9d19-ef56508e44f0@
79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com, says...

On Oct 21, 5:42*pm, BlackBeard wrote:
On Oct 21, 12:52*pm, Jack Linthicum
wrote:

On Oct 21, 3:10*pm, BlackBeard wrote:

On Oct 21, 7:00*am, Mark Borgerson wrote:

In article 9870b6e3-029a-4701-9405-6919ed5d2cd0
@s1g2000prg.googlegroups.com, says...

On Oct 20, 9:59*pm, Mark Borgerson wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:59:09 -0700 (PDT), Jack Linthicum
wrote:

On Oct 20, 4:50*pm, Peter Skelton wrote:
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:42:34 -0700 (PDT), BlackBeard

wrote:

Thanks Jack and Dumpst. *That link worked. *I don't believe it can
carry 12 passengers with all that equipment onboard.. *I worked on
several projects where we loaded EO/IR sensors, trackers, and
targeting equipment onboard similar platforms we were using as test
beds. *Not much room left after all that gets shoehorned in.
re. OV-10. *I have a friend that was a USN test jumper who jumped
several times from the Bronco. *He claims they'd sit on the deck, nuts-
to-butts facing aft. *The Bronco would go into a steep climb and
they'd all slide out the back. *Crazy...

If the maximum payload load is 3500 lb as Cessna says, 12 kitted
soldiers are not going to fit.

Peter Skelton

specs for the Grand Caravan Super Cargomaster, listed at 14 passengers
plus two crew. Something like 3700-3800 pounds of cargo/people

Weights:
Empty Weight
1,746kg
Maximum Take-Off Weight
3,629kg
Maximum Load
1,900kg
Fuel Capacity
1,267l
Ramp Weight (Grand Caravan, Super Cargomaster)
3,985kg

http://www.aerospace-technology.com/...van/specs.html
http://www.aerospace-technology.com/...van/specs.html

Interesting. The Cessna website gives the maximum useful load
number I gave above. The Brochure downloadable from the site
gives 1862 kg. It also shows that, for a range of 100 nm, the
maximum payload, exclusive of 170 lb pilot and 45 min fuel
reserve is 1588 kg. to get 300 nm it's down to 1361 kg.

http://www.cessna.com/MungoBlobs/746...n_Brochure.pdf

12 kitted soldiers is too much weight.

The MC-5 and MP-360 canopies used by the Marine Corps
Force Recon troops can easily handle 400 pounds. *They
have been tested at weights up to 700 pounds. *I don't
think they regularly jump anywhere near that weight, but
400 pounds divided between the Marine and his separately-
suspended duffel is probably not uncommon.

http://atairaerospace.com/onyx/ul/

(been there, wrote the software, but DIDN'T jump out
of the airplane----I'm a 62-year old ex-squid, after
all!)

Mark Borgerson

Test jump site looks like Marana...

The test site with visible cactus, *known as "Area 52", *is about 15
miles East of Eloy, Arizona. * The dry lake bed is Red Lake, about
30 miles North of Kingman, Arizona.

Mark Borgerson

Thanks, I knew it had to be Az. but it didn't look like Yuma which was
my first thought. *I didn't know about Area 52. *Who runs it?

BB

I guess everybody has some mountain to climb in their life.
It's just fate whether you live in Kansas or Tibet.

http://www.lasvegasnow.com/Global/story.asp?S=7340352

Thanks Jack, I've been to Tonopah more than once. *I was referring to
the site Mark mentioned in Az.

BB

I guess everybody has some mountain to climb in their life.
It's just fate whether you live in Kansas or Tibet.

I used to have a cite for the location of all of the "areas". As I
understand it Area 51 is now partially in Tooele Proving Ground.

I remember---but can't find---a reference to some black aircraft
programs moving to a site in Utah. *In any case, the area 52 to
which I was referring is very much a local nickname. *On the
Skydive Arizona web site they call it their own Area 51.

http://skydiveaz.com/filmoffice.html

Mark Borgerson

I'd heard Area 12 as the new place to be.

Part of the problem is its not just getting the airframe there (and if
you're lucky its something you can load into a C-5 under a tarp) but
all the support. You want telemetry, maintenance, security, it adds up
fast. Janitors, toilet attendants.

Though with the way technology advances, it makes as much sense to
just start from scratch every decade. We were using an Atari to put
flight test data up on the monitor. Started as a 'proof of concept'.
Of course it worked, so nobody wanted to change it.

Utah had test and training range (UTTR). I think Edwards had better TM
and other data support. At least at the time, they were a step child.
Though they did have better camera setups. Tonopah had best stuff for
nuclear drops. Better operators. Probably better angles around drop
site.

Huge ****ing contest late 80s, Edwards wanted to get part of the
action. Just couldn't follow release and keep cameras trained on the
items.

Eglin had their own specialties, mainly weapons as opposed to
releases, all the aircraft specific tests.

Uncle Sam sure does have the real estate tied up to move though....

My personal encounter with the U-2 was on the back road to the beach
at Cubi Point, aircraft being unloaded from a 124, IIRC.