Hi /k/ I'm writing a short story that involves various old obsolete military aircraft being hurriedly reactivated in an attempt to make them suitable for modern conflict. My question is, what upgrades could be made to old jet aircraft relatively quickly in a span of months, what might take a few years and what would take decades/be basically impossible? In the setting, the country doing this (the USA) has plenty of money to throw at this.One of the aircraft in the story is the F-111, which has been taken from a museum. I got inspired to try writing this plot point when I read about jets in Ukraine being fitted with ipads to control missiles they weren't designed for. I find jury rigged stuff like that really cool. I don't know much about how fighter jets are made so appreciate any advice thanks.
This really isn't a reasonable prospect. These machines are way too complex to be thrown into service after decades of neglect. There's really no upgrades that would make them less obsolete, their only possible task would be hunting drones but that's much better done in prop powered aircraft
>>65373134>My question is, what upgrades could be made to old jet aircraft relatively quickly in a span of months,Fitting an ECM/ESM and countermeasures pod, then rig some kind of improvised control panel in the cockpit. Perhaps also add a pod with a towed decoy. Other than that, its joever. >>65373147>their only possible task would be hunting drones but that's much better done in prop powered aircraftYou cant catch jet or turboprop powered drones in prop aircraft.
>>65373238>prop aircraft.What about in a turboprop plane?
>>65373134The only stuff I could see as plausible would be mothballed legacy F-16s and F-18s, maybe the odd QF-4 if we still had those. Museum aircraft are drained of fluids and everything else that makes them hazardous on the ground, so I'd imagine there would be a ton of seals and hoses that are dried out and pumps, and bearings that are seized up. I lament the fact that my fantasy of becoming a Phantom pilot is just that.
>>65373258this. there are so few f-111 around that any reactivation would make any sense. just check what is available at the boneyard. some f-4 are still available i think as a interesting choice. of course any f-15, f-16, or legacy f-18 would make more sense.when it comes to upgrades look at ukraine conversions for preprogrammable munitions that just fly towards coordinates and to their thing (like HARM and any gps-guided bomb) seems to be doable in a short time.
>>65373248>What about in a turboprop plane?Maybe but the faster you are the easier it is to be able to generate an intercept vector before the missile reaches its target. A tomahawk will outrun this thing.
>>65373134Commercial GPS cand be bolted in as Russia has done.A TGP could be linked to a screen / controls via external cable taped to the plane to avoid a full rewire of the hardpoints.AN/ALQ-99 EW pods are powered by their own RAT and don't need major changes to the plane, can also be controlled with an external cable.Depending where the fuel tanks are something like the F-16s conformal tanks could be a farely easy install.Missiles could also plug into external wiring to avoid a hardpoint rewire.The main downside of all these external wires will be bird strikes possibly wiping out systems.
>>65373134>I'm writingCould you fucking not?
>>65373134The stick control needs to be updated to the latest wiggling vibrating dildo with many buttonsbsticking out to increase pilot awareness. On extra stick will be placed in the middle of the seat for incoming warning. Advanced female pilot will prefer to have one more stick there.
I think it's realistic, in fact there's a strong precedent whereA. The obsolete air frame was either sold to civilian industry, a training aircraft, for training ground crews, for museum air shows.B. It was rearmed for ground attack, so would never have to fly air to air combat missions, bombing fishing boats, trucks, infantry columns, artillery positions, livestock, defenceless stationary targets. C. It was rearmed with modular rocket pods, as they are far more realistic to fit and train a pilot to use. They would be true dumb fire rockets.D. The plane is carrying a kind of hellfire missile with has its own signals and guidanceE. There's a realistic prospect an obsolete fighter could gun down a modern helicopter. This is partially because of the odd engine signature. Counter measures being retrofitted, and the helicopter possibly not having any air to air missiles fitted if it wasn't expecting to be targeted by some local museum piece. Google says Australia flew f-111 15 years ago, but never saw combat. So it's not inconceivable that one is air worthy, or retired staff could service one.
>>65373134When the F-111A came out it was such a secret plane there were only rumors about it. It was flying missions over Vietnam towards the end. People knew about it and wondered if that was it on mission sheets when they saw only one single jet because they know no missions only used one single jet. The aircraft also featured some kind of land navigation system that was so advanced it could fly the plane entirely on its own at super low altitude. My father worked in the planes. He was top 5 of his class. Top 5 got to go ack home and my old man was so homesick he went insane and got within the top 5. He told me they would force the pilots to use the land ground navigation at night inside the grand canyon. He said the pilots hated doing it. The purpose of the system was to fly under the radar and bomb Moscow. You will sometimes still hear it said as under the radar
>One of the aircraft in the story is the F-111, which has been taken from a museum.That may take months simply to get into the air at all.
Pretty much your only option if you have a short timeframe is to pull out mothballed examples of in-service aircraft that probably have some upgrade path already documented. Think early block F-16s, F-15As and Bs, and legacy Hornets. Pressing already retired aircraft back into service would take way to long unless they were retired in the last five or so years.
>>65373496Any more stories from your dad?
>>65373355A tomahawk is expensive enough to warrant use of an actual surface-to-air missile, if your drone can outrun a turboprop it's no longer cheap.
>>65373134If you're doing a Vark, you could do something where you replaced the internal weapons bay with a targeting pod or datalink, and have it be used to sling glide bombs or cruise missiles. It's what the bird would want to do, anyway.
>>65373134I think the only half reasonable idea is to convert all f 16s into AI drones. Everything else would take so long and cost so much that it would be cheaper to just build something new
>>65374510>doing something brand new is more reasonable than giving them upgrades they are currently receivinghang ALL dronefags
>>65373134>what upgrades could be made to old jet aircraft relatively quickly in a span of months,Exactly the same as has been done for Ukraine. New missiles, limited ECM, GPS>what might take a few yearsStealth, fully integrated weapons and ECM systems> and what would take decades/be basically impossible?Build a new plane at this point, retard
>>65373134if you look at vietnam-era aircraft a lot of them are old school. These were designed by 100 men in a room with drafting tables. The LTV A7E Corsair II is another aircraft like this, yeah it can be made capable by modern standards but anything newer is just going to outclass it. Any modern aircraft is going to knock it out of the sky, it won't even be a contest.
>>65373355Yeah thats true. Funnily enough a piston engines plane like the P-51 or F-8 will actually outrun the PC-9/T-6 that I posted. They can travel about 100kts faster.
>>65373134Uhhhh...your story won't have 8 foot tall aliens with dreads and John Travolta in it, right?
