WT Forums

Home | WT Forums | Hogpedia | Warthog blog | Hosted sites
It is currently 07 May 2026, 18:19

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Mar 2006, 13:31 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 07 Mar 2006, 13:31
Posts: 172
Location: Wyoming, MI
looooooong time lurker, first time poster.

i have a question that i think has never been answered before. in Desert Storm photos, the hogs carried 2 - 3 Mavrick Launcher Rails. since then, hogs only carry 2 mavericks. why is that? not enough targets or not enough missles?

thanks

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Mar 2006, 16:10 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2002, 13:12
Posts: 5068
Location: Hill AFB UT
During Desert Storm the A-10 did use the LAU-88 but on a limited basics. There were two issues keeping them from using this configuration to a great extent, reliability and the inboard Mav exhaust burning the gear pod when fired. Today the reliability of the LAU-88 is a lot better, and better rocket motors on the mavs has solved the pod burning issue. The big problem with carrying 6 mavs is the drag on the aircraft and the reduction of maneuverability, lost of range, and shorter loiter time when in this configuration, these factors together make it “not worth” carrying 6 mavs.

The LAU-88 is available and can be used at any time and there are plenty of missiles to go around so these are not issues. In fact a good use of the LAU-88 during OIF was to ferry missiles from the main operating bases to the FOLs. They would fly 6 up, download 4 and carry 2 into battle, leaving 4 for quick rearm.

Ugly But Well Hung


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 07 Mar 2006, 17:07 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 07 Mar 2006, 13:31
Posts: 172
Location: Wyoming, MI
makes sence, thanks dice

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 08 Mar 2006, 08:39 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 07 Dec 2004, 16:08
Posts: 1050
Location: Aurora CO
Thanks Dice.
That's all news to me as well. When I loaded at DM back in the late '70s, all we ever saw was the LAU-88's and these days you rarely see them. Now I know why.

"Slow is Fast - Fast is Slow"

_________________
Slow is Fast, Fast is Slow
Violence may not be the best option, but it IS an option
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 08 Mar 2006, 16:18 
Offline
Warthog VFW
User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2002, 14:02
Posts: 6162
Location: IL
Dice is right,
plus carrying 4 MAV's and a load of CBU'S or MK-82'S was alot of weight by itself.

Goose

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin,
(1706 - 1790)

_________________
\"Live Free Or Die\"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 08 Mar 2006, 18:18 
Offline
\"Some Pup\"
User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 17:17
Posts: 1022
Location: Missouri
All I ever saw of the -88s at Spang were to test them, and put htem back in thier static bags and crates. It'd have to be a pretty target rich environment for them to pull them out I'd think. And even then I'm sure they'd use up the cluster bombs first.

Ignorance may be bliss, but it sure ain't fun!

_________________
Evil is evil, no matter how small.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 08 Mar 2006, 18:55 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2003, 18:48
Posts: 2449
Location: Still fighting the indians in Western Massachusetts
We opted to use them with all three Mavs in OIF. I believe yjey were the G models because the K's would have weighed to much. We also only used them on station 3 because 9 was reserved for the pod.

"By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a peerage or Westminster Abbey !" Nelson the Immortal Memory

_________________
YGBSM !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2006, 01:49 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2002, 13:12
Posts: 5068
Location: Hill AFB UT
Like this Hawg166....
<img src="http://www.warthogpen.com/picture_files/pic101.jpg" border=0>

Ugly But Well Hung


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2006, 05:43 
Offline

Joined: 15 Jan 2004, 13:53
Posts: 10
Hawg166: If they want to carry Mavericks on 9 also, maybe the pod can be moved to station 10. (or 2)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2006, 05:50 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2002, 21:15
Posts: 2000
When did they come out with a "K" model Maverick? During DS1 it was the "G" models that were not allowed on the LAU-88. We could only load the "G" models on LAU-117's. Dice those look like A's or B's on that LAU-88 to me, EO seeker vs the IR for "D's" and higher models.

Fender

"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it."
George Bernard Shaw


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2006, 10:25 
Offline

Joined: 06 Oct 2005, 20:35
Posts: 129
During DS we had a hard time reloading the 88s after the rail had fired three or four missiles. the upper rails were really a pain. We used bath soap on the rail to help slide the missile on. On a few 117s we removed it from the AC and used another MJ1 to push the launcher onto the missile


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2006, 16:55 
Offline
Warthog VFW
User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2002, 14:02
Posts: 6162
Location: IL
Carl, boy I remember those loads, the problems you guys had loading those rails.

Goose

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin,
(1706 - 1790)

_________________
\"Live Free Or Die\"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2006, 18:31 
Offline

Joined: 09 Jul 2004, 16:29
Posts: 77
Location: MA
The current modification only allows the pod on 9. The "pod" can only go out to 2 & 10 in the PE (A-10C) configuration. The H and K models are Electro-optical (clear dome). G models are IR (non-transparent dome). Dice's and HAWG166's LAU-88 picture are H's or K's(EO). A models have been phased out and B's have been converted into H's.

Checkout this site for a good AGM-65 model explanation
http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=72

Not sure how to paste a link!

Kungfu


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2006, 19:01 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2002, 21:15
Posts: 2000
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Maverick K models are currently in development. They were developed by taking a G model and replacing the IR guidance system with an electro-optical television guidance system.

Maverick K and H models are currently in production. The Maverick K model was developed by taking a G model and replacing the IR guidance system with an electro-optical television guidance system. The Maverick H model was developed by taking a B model and upgrading it to increase its capability.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Looks to me like the H and K models are bastardized variants of the G. Take the EO off of the A's and B's, put them on a G model warhead/motor and viola you have a EO with the 300 pound penatrator warhead.

The fact sheet didn't mention the fact that the G's have a PAS compared to the HAS on the earlier models or vise versa, it has been a long time since I loaded a live AGM-65.

Fender

"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it."
George Bernard Shaw


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2006, 20:10 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2003, 18:48
Posts: 2449
Location: Still fighting the indians in Western Massachusetts
Well they must be H's (Mud would know) because the K's cant be carried on all three rails. The K's are the anti-shipping version of the mavs with a switch on the ass end for sea or shore use. They also have a 300 lb warhead as opposed to a smaller one on the other variants. They are a converted G model with a hardened nose for hull penetration.

AGM-65K
The U.S. Air Force and Raytheon have worked out an intricate arrangement to upgrade electro-optically-guided AGM-65 air-to-ground Maverick missiles through reuse of hardware on older Mavericks. The upgrade is intended to extend the service life of the AGM-65 through the use of a charge coupled device (CCD) seeker. Operational benefits of the CCD include greater reliability and the ability to operate in lower light levels.


The AF put together a plan to buy about 2,500 missiles but was unable to fund the program. As a result, it scaled back its procurement plans to about 1,200. Also, Raytheon proposed an exchange program in which it reuses parts of older Mavericks to reduce the cost of the improved Mavericks. The two-part agreement calls for Raytheon to buy old missiles and guidance and control sections from the AF.
The main portion of the program calls for Raytheon to buy back guidance and control sections of some of the 5,300 IR-guided AGM-65Gs the AF bought after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. The IR seekers have six cards that are common with the CCD and are reused. The CCDs then are mated with the center aft section of the missiles that were earlier stripped of their IR seeker. The new missile will be known as the AGM-65K.

The AF first considered a CCD upgrade using AGM-65Bs to make AGM-65Hs. Those missiles have a 125-pound warhead. But the conversion program taking AGM-65Gs - which have a more powerful 300-pound warhead - and making them into AGM-65Ks will be lower cost. Raytheon will use IR seeker parts not needed by the CCD for foreign military sales customers. Although some of the IR seeker would have to be newly built, the reuse of some hardware will make the total seeker less expensive than it would have been otherwise.


The second part of the AGM-65K program involves Raytheon's procurement of up to 1,000 of about 7,000 AGM-65As that have been in cold storage. This became necessary because Raytheon's Maverick airframe supplier was getting out of the business, even though Raytheon still receives foreign orders for new missiles.

After detailed analysis and disassembly of six missiles, the cold storage AGM-65As were deemed to be as good as the day they were built. The missiles are corrosion coated inside and out, and not just on the outside like newer Mavericks. The arrangement calls for the US Government to receive about $2,150 per missile. Raytheon takes the missile apart and returns those items that need to be demilitarized, such as the warhead, to the government. The government pays disposal costs which would have been incurred anyway. Because Raytheon disassembles the missile, the government saves about $500 to $1,000 per unit. The approximately $2.1 million the government will receive will go towards the AGM-65 upgrade.

One of the advantages for foreign military sales customers is stable pricing for the airframe. In the past a small Maverick order could result in high airframe costs. That will no longer be the case. Only pristine missiles are being accepted. Raytheon is refusing any missiles that have been out of cold storage, such as captive-carry missiles. Some consideration is even being given to reuse some parts of the AGM-65A. In addition to its combat missiles the AF will also receive upgraded training missiles. Although the Raytheon/AF agreement allows the AF to move forward with the CCD upgrade, the scope of the program is much smaller than first planned. The AF was hoping to upgrade about 2,500 missiles, about 50% of the requirement Air Combat Command has articulated. <i></i>

"By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a peerage or Westminster Abbey !" Nelson the Immortal Memory

_________________
YGBSM !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2006, 20:13 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2003, 18:48
Posts: 2449
Location: Still fighting the indians in Western Massachusetts
Goose wouldnt you say that that is about the best looking airplane you have ever seen ?

"By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a peerage or Westminster Abbey !" Nelson the Immortal Memory

_________________
YGBSM !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2006, 20:45 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2002, 21:15
Posts: 2000
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>The K's are the anti-shipping version of the mavs with a switch on the ass end for sea or shore use. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

The ship/land switch on the G's was underneath a quick access panel on the side of the missile not on the rear, maybe they moved it to the rear for the K's?

Fender

"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it."
George Bernard Shaw


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2006, 20:49 
Offline

Joined: 23 Oct 2002, 20:45
Posts: 2802
H/k Models are TV New CCD upgraded b's Went into production in 02 and 1250 H's and 1240 K's Are ordered between 02-08, then a sustainment program. But that has been increased becasu of Demand and the Conflict.

H is a 125-lb Shaped Charge Warhead
K is a 300-lb Blast Frag Penetrator Warhead

There is a GPS LOAL Data link system that has been in testing for a couple yers. But I havnt worked for raytheon in over a year.

Those Cases look Like Reworked B's (H) But I am not sure as I have not used or seen them in the Production Version. Your current load Toad and Shooter could tell ya more.


<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Well they must be H's (Mud would know) because the K's cant be carried on all three rails. The K's are the anti-shipping version of the mavs with a switch on the ass end for sea or shore use. They also have a 300 lb warhead as opposed to a smaller one on the other variants. They are a converted G model with a hardened nose for hull penetration.

AGM-65K
The U.S. Air Force and Raytheon have worked out an intricate arrangement to upgrade electro-optically-guided AGM-65 air-to-ground Maverick missiles through reuse of hardware on older Mavericks. The upgrade is intended to extend the service life of the AGM-65 through the use of a charge coupled device (CCD) seeker. Operational benefits of the CCD include greater reliability and the ability to operate in lower light levels.


The AF put together a plan to buy about 2,500 missiles but was unable to fund the program. As a result, it scaled back its procurement plans to about 1,200. Also, Raytheon proposed an exchange program in which it reuses parts of older Mavericks to reduce the cost of the improved Mavericks. The two-part agreement calls for Raytheon to buy old missiles and guidance and control sections from the AF.
The main portion of the program calls for Raytheon to buy back guidance and control sections of some of the 5,300 IR-guided AGM-65Gs the AF bought after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. The IR seekers have six cards that are common with the CCD and are reused. The CCDs then are mated with the center aft section of the missiles that were earlier stripped of their IR seeker. The new missile will be known as the AGM-65K.

The AF first considered a CCD upgrade using AGM-65Bs to make AGM-65Hs. Those missiles have a 125-pound warhead. But the conversion program taking AGM-65Gs - which have a more powerful 300-pound warhead - and making them into AGM-65Ks will be lower cost. Raytheon will use IR seeker parts not needed by the CCD for foreign military sales customers. Although some of the IR seeker would have to be newly built, the reuse of some hardware will make the total seeker less expensive than it would have been otherwise.


The second part of the AGM-65K program involves Raytheon's procurement of up to 1,000 of about 7,000 AGM-65As that have been in cold storage. This became necessary because Raytheon's Maverick airframe supplier was getting out of the business, even though Raytheon still receives foreign orders for new missiles.

After detailed analysis and disassembly of six missiles, the cold storage AGM-65As were deemed to be as good as the day they were built. The missiles are corrosion coated inside and out, and not just on the outside like newer Mavericks. The arrangement calls for the US Government to receive about $2,150 per missile. Raytheon takes the missile apart and returns those items that need to be demilitarized, such as the warhead, to the government. The government pays disposal costs which would have been incurred anyway. Because Raytheon disassembles the missile, the government saves about $500 to $1,000 per unit. The approximately $2.1 million the government will receive will go towards the AGM-65 upgrade.

One of the advantages for foreign military sales customers is stable pricing for the airframe. In the past a small Maverick order could result in high airframe costs. That will no longer be the case. Only pristine missiles are being accepted. Raytheon is refusing any missiles that have been out of cold storage, such as captive-carry missiles. Some consideration is even being given to reuse some parts of the AGM-65A. In addition to its combat missiles the AF will also receive upgraded training missiles. Although the Raytheon/AF agreement allows the AF to move forward with the CCD upgrade, the scope of the program is much smaller than first planned. The AF was hoping to upgrade about 2,500 missiles, about 50% of the requirement Air Combat Command has articulated. <i></i>

"By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a peerage or Westminster Abbey !" Nelson the Immortal Memory
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

It was a woman who drove me to drink, and I never had the courtesy to thank her for it.
The cost of living has gone up another dollar a quart.Somebody left the cork out of my lunch.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2006, 22:12 
Offline

Joined: 24 Jan 2003, 22:23
Posts: 584
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Maverick K models are currently in development. They were developed by taking a G model and replacing the IR guidance system with an electro-optical television guidance system.

Maverick K and H models are currently in production. The Maverick K model was developed by taking a G model and replacing the IR guidance system with an electro-optical television guidance system. The Maverick H model was developed by taking a B model and upgrading it to increase its capability.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Looks to me like the H and K models are bastardized variants of the G. Take the EO off of the A's and B's, put them on a G model warhead/motor and viola you have a EO with the 300 pound penatrator warhead.

The fact sheet didn't mention the fact that the G's have a PAS compared to the HAS on the earlier models or vise versa, it has been a long time since I loaded a live AGM-65.

Fender

"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it."
George Bernard Shaw

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

The K-Model video is way, way better than a G...

ATTACK!!!!!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 10 Mar 2006, 02:28 
Offline

Joined: 05 Dec 2002, 11:38
Posts: 385
You guys are getting way to deep in the details.
Bottomline, seeing six Mav's hanging off the Hawg is way cool.
Next to my wife nothing gives me wood like seeing a Hawg loaded up!!!!!

Cheers
db

Being responsible means sometimes pissing people off.
Gen Colin Powell ret


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 10 Mar 2006, 08:43 
Offline
Warthog VFW
User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2002, 14:02
Posts: 6162
Location: IL
My Nephew got to load the AGM-65K's on their P-3's,cheaper than a Harpoon buy they also for $$$$$$ been using some older AGM-65B models so the Crews can get some live fire time.

Goose

PS Billy your right that their is a Pretty Site !
They could paint that jet "Blue" and it would still look GREAT!



They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin,
(1706 - 1790)





Edited by - sgtgoose1 on Mar 10 2006 07:46 AM

_________________
\"Live Free Or Die\"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 10 Mar 2006, 09:43 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2003, 18:48
Posts: 2449
Location: Still fighting the indians in Western Massachusetts
I thik a harpoon on an A10 would rock. But they are freain' big. I dont think it would fit.

"By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a peerage or Westminster Abbey !" Nelson the Immortal Memory

_________________
YGBSM !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 11 Mar 2006, 09:12 
Offline
Warthog VFW
User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2002, 14:02
Posts: 6162
Location: IL
Who needs the Harpoon, just think what "Party-mix" would do to a ship?
<img src=newicons/anim_shock.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=newicons/anim_shock.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>


Goose

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin,
(1706 - 1790)





Edited by - sgtgoose1 on Mar 11 2006 08:25 AM

_________________
\"Live Free Or Die\"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 11 Mar 2006, 16:49 
Offline

Joined: 23 Oct 2002, 20:45
Posts: 2802
Harpoon has a range of 150NM, the tomahwk or Slamm -er has a range of over 800nm.

When approaching a flotilla, getting within 60NM is lucky enoughas they can engage you well inside 100nm. The Missile has navigational methods of NOE, Popup Attack and other Cruise altitude profiles to get to where it needs to begin its Final attack profile. The reason for the self destruct is, that you dont want to inadvertantly kill the wrong ship, For Example Mom and pops on their 60th Wedding anniversary on cruiseline somewhere in the Med.

"I was a Hero once. Now i just fuck with people on the Internet"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 11 Mar 2006, 16:50 
Offline

Joined: 23 Oct 2002, 20:45
Posts: 2802
some may recall the AGM 62 Walleye, this is a Camara Guided Anti Ship Missile.

"I was a Hero once. Now i just fuck with people on the Internet"


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group