Trends in Air to Air Combat

[Clark Griswold]

5 minutes ago, di1630 said:

Technology has advanced so far that if an airframe can be multi role, the pilot can handle it much easier now than 20 yrs ago.

Some airframes like the A-10 really can’t be multi role, but you also don’t want an F-35 wheeling over the battlefield so niche single missions are still viable.

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Agree on the tech (platform and weps) as to multi-role, they (single role) are still viable mission relevance wise but I would caveat that I can see that with lower cost aircraft to procure/operate/sustain like Light Attack (shameless plug) just from a sequester influenced budget environment.

[Clark Griswold]

Related to Air to Air Combat trends:

https://alert5.com/2019/12/10/plaaf-j-11-beat-rtaf-gripen-16-0-on-first-day-of-falcon-strike-2015/

Gripens had a really bad first day then J-11s got the favor returned to them.  Taken with 2 milligrams of salt but interesting.

[Clark Griswold]

Interesting article on Congressional interest in planning for a growth in Aggressors:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/31697/congress-wants-an-aggressor-modernization-plan-before-adversary-f-35s-head-to-nellis

Linked article also makes an interesting suggestion that we should consider it not just in Aggressor Fighters but Aggressor Capability and author (Rogoway) suggests Aggressor AWACS to supplement GCI. 

If you're in for a dime, you're in for a dollar (millions of them) so expanding the idea: dedicated Aggressor AWACS, Growlers/Prowlers, RPAs, mobile SAMs, etc...? 

We would still have RF at Nellis but build an entire Aggressor Wing(s) at an existing or reactivated base(s) for bigger LFEs

Value or a product of the office of redundancy?

[12xu2a3x3]

1 hour ago, Clark Griswold said:

Aggressor AWACS

not with this fleet

[jazzdude]

Just do it all in the sim :)

[brwwg&b]

https://www.flightglobal.com/military-uavs/us-navy-flies-two-ea-18g-growlers-autonomously-third-growler-used-as-controller/136532.article

Navy turns Growler into drone, flies 2 unmanned controlled from a third manned

[Clark Griswold]

2 hours ago, brwwg&b said:

https://www.flightglobal.com/military-uavs/us-navy-flies-two-ea-18g-growlers-autonomously-third-growler-used-as-controller/136532.article

Navy turns Growler into drone, flies 2 unmanned controlled from a third manned

Nice

From the article:

Some defence researchers have proposed turning the USAF’s fleet of retired F-16s into a group of limited-use combat UAVs.

Plenty of 16s at DM to be converted.

For the USAF, has there been any talk of using a Strike Eagle, modified bomber or AWACS as a C2 platform for this?

LOS at 30,000 is about 180 NM, combined with BLOS you have a first wave of strikers to trip & hit the IADS or distract them as the LO package ingresses, all while under control for dynamic tasking.  Just a few billion or more for this cape but whatever...

 

 

[brwwg&b]

3 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

For the USAF, has there been any talk of using a Strike Eagle, modified bomber or AWACS as a C2 platform for this?

Beats me. Certainly lots of smart ways to utilize them as you pointed out. QF-16 already exists so at least a portion of the mechanics are figured out. Airborne control, via whatever means I think is being somewhat explored in the "loyal wingman" realm. I always just worry that these good ideas get so distorted in practice and don't end up matching original intent.

Plus alot of fighter pilot egos get crushed if they don't have the sensibility to realize risking $'s is always better than risking American (or other) lives

[Majestik Møøse]

What does that buy over a MALD?

[SurelySerious]

2 hours ago, Majestik Møøse said:

What does that buy over a MALD?

MALD can’t employ weapons (which I assume is the natural progression of this concept). 

[Sprkt69]

1 hour ago, SurelySerious said:

MALD can’t employ weapons (which I assume is the natural progression of this concept). 

MALD or something similar is just a few nerds away from employing weapons

[SurelySerious]

8 minutes ago, Sprkt69 said:

MALD or something similar is just a few nerds away from employing weapons

The general idea of a drone, maybe, but MALD itself is smaller than an AMRAAM. 

[Clark Griswold]

The general idea of a drone, maybe, but MALD itself is smaller than an AMRAAM. 

Yup, MALD is very capable but brining a converted 4th gen with new capes to block or tackle is another animal entirely

Now since we have our next AR platform completely fixed /s - how do we AR this theoretical UCAV?

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lawman]

Yup, MALD is very capable but brining a converted 4th gen with new capes to block or tackle is another animal entirelyNow since we have our next AR platform completely fixed /s - how do we AR this theoretical UCAV?
 
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

I’m curious how you would strategically position a fleet of unmanned F-16s in both a timely and useful manner.

The reason these UAS platforms are built the way they are is it’s easier to crate them up and fly them in the belly of a big grey tailed aircraft than it is to try and figure out how to fly a Reaper/Pred/etc across all the airspace between us and the S-head country we need it to go too.

Somebody with more F-16 experience please chime in on the level of difficulty if you were asked “get from Hill, and go to Thailand/Japan/Phil.... you can’t air refuel and also we aren’t allowed in the following countries airspace.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brwwg&b]

5 hours ago, Lawman said:

Somebody with more F-16 experience please chime in on the level of difficulty if you were asked “get from Hill, and go to Thailand/Japan/Phil.... you can’t air refuel and also we aren’t allowed in the following countries airspace.

Fly them over manned. QF-16 is optionally manned currently.

[Clark Griswold]

Fly them over manned. QF-16 is optionally manned currently.

Like it, optionally manned.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brwwg&b]

Also:

https://www.darpa.mil/about-us/timeline/autonomous-highaltitude-refueling

https://defensesystems.com/articles/2015/04/27/navair-x47b-uas-midair-refueling.aspx

2007 and 2015...turns out, refueling just ain't that hard

[SurelySerious]

1 hour ago, brwwg&b said:

Also:

https://www.darpa.mil/about-us/timeline/autonomous-highaltitude-refueling

https://defensesystems.com/articles/2015/04/27/navair-x47b-uas-midair-refueling.aspx

2007 and 2015...turns out, *probe and drogue* refueling just ain't that hard

Fify

[Majestik Møøse]

Just...no. Make more rounds and put a lot of them in a big bomber. Many big bombers. I hope we’re not wasting a damn dollar on making QF-16s into actual lawn darts.

[JimNtexas]

I'm a former EF-111A EWO, I can easily envision a digital jamming system being carried by an unmanned air vehicle.  

In the Raven, which used something like an intel 8080 processor for most of its life, we could program the jammers to work automatically.  If nothing broke all I had to do is turn on the master radiate switch, hold a banana in front of my chauffeur with one hand, while keeping an eye on the ALQ-99, an eye on the generators, an eye on the nav system, an eye on our paper chart, and an eye out the window.      😁

A jamming drone large enough to accommodate VHF/UHF jamming antennas would seem a logical idea in the modern age.

[Clark Griswold]

On 2/14/2020 at 11:05 AM, Majestik Møøse said:

Just...no. Make more rounds and put a lot of them in a big bomber. Many big bombers. I hope we’re not wasting a damn dollar on making QF-16s into actual lawn darts.

This may just be a way to less expensively field a UCAV with the additional benefit of being optionally manned.  

Our friends are pushing ahead in development of UCAVs (Hunter in Russia, Sharp Sword in China), this should be one of several COAs pursued IMHO.

Many big bombers methinks would be a bridge too far but an arsenal / C2 platform to accompany at standoff distances the LO package and control / update the UCAVs might be affordable, if you forgo LO and keep the platform focused on supporting the LO fighters/bombers/attack platforms rather than trying to make it one of them.

Missile/Sensor/Comm platform for on and off-board cueing, high endurance to provide gap coverage during yo-yo ops, secure node in the network for additional coverage and enough capability/performance to self-defend / egress if a leaker gets thru.

Not perfect, but using the F6D Missilier as an example:

Not a fighter but an archer and a lookout with endurance to support as the package moves forward / threats detected and suppressed.

[Clark Griswold]

Air Force to Test Fighter Drone Against Human Pilot

 

[Clark Griswold]

Thread restart:

RB-8 proposal:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/40859/the-case-for-stripping-the-p-8-poseidon-down-into-an-rb-8-multi-role-arsenal-ship

New Russian jet:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41618/russias-checkmate-light-tactical-fighter-is-officially-unveiled

[Clark Griswold]

Relight thread

Reading this 

https://www.twz.com/air/b-21-taking-on-some-of-ngad-fighters-missions-on-the-table-air-force-says

Reminded me of Stillion’s article 

https://csbaonline.org/uploads/documents/Air-to-Air-Report-.pdf

Now it’s not an official announcement but it sounds like alluding to adding / developing a CCA controlling capability / mission for the Raider, I’d like to see that same concept applied to a light fighter but that’s another thread…

[uhhello]

14 minutes ago, Clark Griswold said:

Relight thread

Reading this 

https://www.twz.com/air/b-21-taking-on-some-of-ngad-fighters-missions-on-the-table-air-force-says

Reminded me of Stillion’s article 

https://csbaonline.org/uploads/documents/Air-to-Air-Report-.pdf

Now it’s not an official announcement but it sounds like alluding to adding / developing a CCA controlling capability / mission for the Raider, I’d like to see that same concept applied to a light fighter but that’s another thread…

FAB-21 sounds glorious....