Are these not EGBUs on the upper CFT station?
I think they might be DMLGB’s (GPS/ INS Paveway produced by Lockheed-Martin, e.g. GBU-12F/B), Technically and legally, not EGBUs (GPS/ INS Paveway produced by Raytheon). But are nearly functionally identical outside a weaponeering perspective, and the probable use of different seekers.
Do you have a date that the Brochure was produced, or otherwise a link to it.
3 Likes
It’s from this actually. Just happened to look at it for something else recently and realized they weren’t regular GBU-12s in the picture.
1 Like
It is F-15SA. They bought EGBU
I don’t see the MAWS sensor things on the nose area
Huh… Internet lied me…
It’s not. It’s very clearly a 391st Bold Tigers patch on the CFT.
Yeah, I found already.
I know there is an F15E-1 manual from 2008 that may have been leaked, but I do not have it.
There is also evidence in other rejected manuals that the JDAM can be delivered at at least Mach 1.3 instead of the current Mach 1.
1 Like
The current number provided in the game is wrong, and its error is large enough to be fatal.
It’s certainly above Mach 1.
1 Like
For F-22A and F-35 different restriction.
It’s proof that the JDAM has the structural integrity for supersonic ejections at that speed. It’s not like the F-22 / F-35 use some special subvariant of the kit(s), that is designed for high speed release (e.g. long / short chord Paveway / GBU-15).
And obviously doesn’t suffer from adverse lift, which is the underlying cause of the Supersonic release limits for unguided bombs, which could be explained by the presence of the Strakes that are added on the forebody of the warhead as part of the kit.
4 Likes
Is there anything regarding GBU-53 drop limits?
I think same as GBU-39.
I’m not too sure, it could be supersonic but it would probably use any excess energy it was imparted with at release to loft until it reaches optimal (subsonic) speeds before deploying the pop-out Glide surfaces (Nothing I’ve seen indicates that they are actuated, so are likely spring loaded).
Then do it’s best to maintain the optimal AoA during the glide / mid-course phase to extend range and conserve energy as best it can.
The SDB’s are basically too new to really have much concrete to go off.
I’d certainly be similar, but the use of a Ram Air Turbine, and different aspect ratio of the glide surfaces on the GBU-53 would almost certainly impose different limits.
My point is that only the F-22 can use the GBU-39 from supersonic. But I haven’t heard about the F-15 or F-16. Just like I haven’t heard this about GBU-53.
Reminder though that the F-22 uses the exact same GBU-39s and GBU-39 racks as every other aircraft, the only difference would be the airframe, and if it is somehow the internal carriage then the likes of the B-1B should also have the ability to use GBU-39s supersonic since it too has internal carriage but such has not been shown to be true.
1 Like
Well F-22 out of all of them is most likely to be going supersonic due to supercruise and all. But since it’s the same launchers, F-15 and 16 should be able to use SDB 1 supersonic.