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.
Well I don’t think the US has entered a conflict where there was any reason for a B-1 to go supersonic since the SDB entered service so there’s that too
Largely irrelevant though, its still capable of such as far as I am aware. As already highlighted by you, myself and a lot of other folks so far, there is nothing really different between all the aircraft mounting the GBU-39 in these situations as well, bar the B-1B, F-35 and F-22 having an actual bomb bay, every other component is a standardized item that is identical across all airframes that can carry the GBU-39.
Edited as I was really repeating myself.
1 Like
I think these ammo drop restrictions are mainly for safety reasons, not ammo and pylon restrictions, and the aircraft does not prohibit you from releasing bombs when you are speeding. The manual gives the absolute safe value, and you may endanger your own safety when you exceed the limit. It is also possible that values outside the limits have not been tested enough.
1 Like
No. I won’t prove anything, you’ll have to take my word for it.
Yes. Internal carriage is very important in this way.
It’s not going to fix anything if it can’t avoid becoming unstable due to lift generated by bow shock that occurs when it gets exposed to the supersonic freestream air.
Then why was only the raptor able to supersonic drop the GBU-39?
Can you at least point to a source; that might back up this claim.
I’m not saying it can’t, outright. But if the F-22 could, it would follow that all supersonic platforms could. As the F-22 uses the same BRU-61 or BRU-55 / -57 adapter that they all do.
1 Like
If I do this, I won’t write here anymore.
But…
WE have this
It was in 2008, but GBU-39 reached IOC on F-15E in 2006. You think they never dropped GBU-39 from supersonic aircraft if they can?
Yes, If it’s literally not a written requirement of the contract the money and time isn’t going to be put into the testing to prove a capability, and “extend” the release envelope.
The F-22 is one of the few US Fighter aircraft capable of Super cruise with a relevant A2G payload, it makes sense why they would wait, the same way as the previously referenced JDAM is capable of up to at least Mach 1.5. (~850Kts), why wait 9 years to do high speed / altitude tests.
It’s hard for me to discuss what I know and there is documentary evidence that I cannot provide.
I know about JDAM
I don’t rule out the possibility of a supersonic jettison of the GBU-39, but there may be safety issues or something similar.
You can be punished for association just fyi
4 Likes
Just realized I have had these as wallpapers for ages and they are definitely EGBUs (or whatever the legal name is) as well on the upper CFT stations.
6 Likes
Anyone know if T.O. 1F-15E-1 (1993) is still export restricted?