This edition of the Aircraft Survivability Journal focuses on reclaiming the low-altitude battlespace. By saying that we need to reclaim the low-altitude battlespace, I imply that we have already lost that area of combat operations. I think many will argue that point, but I also think that we can safely say that if we have not given it up entirely, we have definitely retreated from using it as we would like. In general, helicopter operations will always need to take place under 15,000 feet. Fighter aircraft can mostly avoid low altitudes if necessary, but will often perform missions at lower altitudes. And transport and reconnaissance aircraft may operate in these altitudes, but they most certainly spend quite a bit of time transitioning through. So if all our aircraft use this airspace, why did we ever give it up at all.
Aircraft Survivability: Reclaiming the Low Altitude Battlespace. Fall 2003
2003
49 pages
Report
Keine Angabe
Englisch
Aeronautics , Aircraft , Air Transportation , Electromagnetic & Acoustic Countermeasures , Survivability , Military aircraft , Fighter aircraft , Infrared signatures , Validation , Models , Threats , Security , Commercial aviation , Air space , Missions , Fires , Fire protection , Military modernization , Transport aircraft , Countermeasures , Low altitude , Gas generating systems , Test and evaluation , Flight testing , Aircraft modernization , Aircraft survivability , Aircraft systems , Ballistic penetration , C-5 aircraft , Commercial aviation security , Deflagrations , F-35 aircraft , F/a-22 aircraft , Fire prediction , Flammable fluids , Inert gas generating systems , Infrared engine suppression , Jlf(Joint live fire) , On board systems , Passive protection , Threat models , Vulnerability reduction