Devilleader501 Posted March 15, 2014 Share Posted March 15, 2014 Lmao TT. Never is a dull moment with you around. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
habu2 Posted March 15, 2014 Share Posted March 15, 2014 When I first saw this pic of an F-22 escorting a Russian TU-95 Bear I laughed in irony because the distance that those drop tanks provide for said F-22, the YF-23 could hold internally thus maintaining it's stealth capability. Given the mission I think it is more a matter of time on station rather than simpy distance/range from base. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Aaronw Posted March 15, 2014 Share Posted March 15, 2014 So thanks for feeding a straight man line. I'm not at all dissing it as an A2A asset. If anything, I think loading it up like that says you don't trust it in A2A. Just as a two seater variant of this jet would be monumentally dumb considering the amount of time, money and effort to develop the world's most advanced simulator training, so that we in essence have an airline pilot level of confidence and ability before a pilot ever gets in the real jet, loading a JSF up with missiles like that would be a tremendous waste of money. First, you have to pay to even certify the load out. How many tens of millions of $$ is that worth? Second, if I want an unstealthy missile truck, I'll have a couple Superhornets tagging along with the JSF four ship. My point is the JSF not going to go old west style like a gunslinger into battle, alone and unafraid. With a four ship of F-35s in stealthy A2A mode you would have 16 AMRAAMs. If the big balloon goes up, we'll do what we always do, clear the skies. But we won't do it in a way that gets everybody shot down on our side on day one. A regular, internal carriage F-35 flight should be plenty damn lethal all by itself, thank you very much. And when you launch one F-35 in a "real" war, you are indeed launching four as it was designed around 4 ship operations. Let's say you have a 2 ship doing no fly zone or escorting an UAV. That two ship should be able to handle whatever comes their way. So again, why would you need any JSF loaded out like that? That's why I say it is ignorant. Thinking you'd have to put a silly load like 12 AMRAAMs on a F-35 to make it effective is what was ignorant. And before you get your panties further bunched up, there is a difference between ignorance and dumb. Everybody is so sensitive these days. This might sound kind of silly, but at least in theory you could have a literal missile truck on the ground. Just park a trailer load of AMRAMMs in the area, and any F-35 around could link up and launch a missile at an intruding aircraft. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Diamondback Six Posted March 15, 2014 Share Posted March 15, 2014 (edited) Missile truck? Heck, why not mod a B-52 or a B-1 to pack a metric buttload of AMRAAMs around waiting for an outward-deployed F-35 to call up a launch? Might mean developing a 2-stage variant akin to Sea Sparrow from AIM-7 and new high-density racks (whoever scrapped the Big Belly racks from Nam should be smacked til their head pops out their arse IMO), but it could work... Oh, BTW, guys, some are gonna find this offensive but some recent courses of events across multiple modeling boards, from multiple sides of various issues, are reminding me of one of my favorite lines from a favorite TV show... "You know spies, bunch of b----y little girls."--Sam Axe (Bruce Campbell), Burn Notice Edited March 15, 2014 by Diamondback Six Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tony Stark Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Missile truck? Heck, why not mod a B-52 or a B-1 to pack a metric buttload of AMRAAMs around waiting for an outward-deployed F-35 to call up a launch? Like the B-1R concept? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Diamondback Six Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Or a more passive "Old Dog"... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Devilleader501 Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Like the B-1R concept? Interesting concept. First I have never even seen this and I am a huge fan of said shows but 2 I never would have though about this in the first place. It make a whole hell of a lot of sense though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Aaronw Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Missile truck? Heck, why not mod a B-52 or a B-1 to pack a metric buttload of AMRAAMs around waiting for an outward-deployed F-35 to call up a launch? Might mean developing a 2-stage variant akin to Sea Sparrow from AIM-7 and new high-density racks (whoever scrapped the Big Belly racks from Nam should be smacked til their head pops out their arse IMO), but it could work... Oh, BTW, guys, some are gonna find this offensive but some recent courses of events across multiple modeling boards, from multiple sides of various issues, are reminding me of one of my favorite lines from a favorite TV show... "You know spies, bunch of b----y little girls."--Sam Axe (Bruce Campbell), Burn Notice Thought about that too, but if the missiles in the B-52 are in range then wouldn't the big fat radar profile of a B-52 be in range? Kind of hard to shoot down a "dumb" trailer on the ground, I'm assuming missiles have much longer range than a bomb. I was thinking more like AA defenses. Park a trailer of missiles at your strategic location and as long as you have some F-35s around you have a pretty nifty way of killing aircraft. Would assume the F-35 wouldn't even have to be in missile range (radar longer range than the AMRAMM?). F-35 picks up an intruding aircraft 150 miles away, pilot selects a trailer of missiles 40 miles from the aircraft and launches a missile. Makes being a modern fighter pilot almost as dull as flying drones. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Diamondback Six Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Aaron, hence my note of a two-stage "AMRAAM-ER" with a booster to extend its reach. B-52 acts as bait to lure 'em in, F-35 calls in the missile strikes unseen. And there are things that could be done to mitigate the StratoPig's RCS... Problem with a trailer is you have to GET it out there undetected... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Aaronw Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 I was thinking defensive, located at existing forward bases and such to react to intruding aircraft. Offensive air superiority stuff presumably going to the F-22. It was just an odd thought that was going through my head in response to the can guide missiles launched elsewhere ability and criticism of the F-35s internal missile storage. It would basically make any F-35 an interceptor even if passing through loaded only with air to ground weapons on a strike mission. B-52, B-1, why not even a C-130 would be a similar idea just not as low maintenance. Like I said kind of a silly idea, but if the F-35 can really use a missile launched from another source, then it does open up some interesting possibilities. Could be the end of the fighter as we know it, just get an AWACS and send a bunch of dudes out in missile armed dune buggies to clear the skies of enemy fighters. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Check Six Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Like the B-1R concept? I remember watching the whole documentary. And since I'm getting to understand the 'stand-off' concept in general, the B-1R makes perfect sense. Especially with the recent debate regarding 'To gun or not to gun; that is the question.'; It further makes sense. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AussieTim Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 (edited) Got to page 3 - realised F-35 is a waste of tax payers money, X-32 is a museum dust collector, facepalmed the Australian Govt and moved on to cleaning my car. All that in less than 15 minutes. Edited March 16, 2014 by AussieTim Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Like the B-1R concept? Just like you Mr Stark to go whipping out your Bone-R Got to page 3 - realised F-35 is a waste of tax payers money, X-32 is a museum dust collector, facepalmed the Australian Govt and moved on to cleaning my car. All that in less than 15 minutes. Great, thanks for the input Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spejic Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 It's sensors alert the pilot to a potential threat, the decision is made to fight or flight. But it's not going to go out hunting for fighters to kill. Why? The day you have to point your airplane at the guy you want to kill is going away, and the F-35 is a giant step in that direction. If the sensors can tell you a plane to your left rear, you can target at the left rear with you helmet, and your missile flies off to the left rear. The F-35 isn't a knife fighter because you don't need a knife fighter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Diamondback Six Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 "Always cheat, always win. The ONLY 'unfair' fight is the one YOU LOSE." --Clint Smith, retired USMC drill instructor; Director of Thunder Ranch Academy Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MarkW Posted March 16, 2014 Author Share Posted March 16, 2014 The Bone-R video was hilarious, thanks! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Aaron, hence my note of a two-stage "AMRAAM-ER" with a booster to extend its reach. There already is such a thing, the Standard SM-6 (if you are launching from the ground) and the AIM-120D (from airborne platforms). They are still working out the bugs on the -120D. The 120D was developed in response to advances made by other nations AAM's. The older C-models forced you to get within range of the bad guys before you could launch. Even with the stealth, the closer in you get, the higher the probability you will be detected. Only issue is that China (and undoubtedly other adversaries) are spend huge sums of money working on ways to jam the AMRAAMs radar seeker. One reason for the USN's renewed focus on radar silent, IR attacks. Just because the AMRAAM was something of a "silver bullet" during GW1 does not mean that it's still an unbeatable death dealer today. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tony Stark Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 A truck.....with missiles that shoot up into the air to shoot down planes. And the missiles are guided by radar. What a novel idea.... Just like you Mr Stark to go whipping out your Bone-R It makes an impact. Why? The day you have to point your airplane at the guy you want to kill is going away, and the F-35 is a giant step in that direction. If the sensors can tell you a plane to your left rear, you can target at the left rear with you helmet, and your missile flies off to the left rear. The F-35 isn't a knife fighter because you don't need a knife fighter. A. We've heard that before. B. How're those piggish handling characteristics going to work out against an IADS once the aircraft is detected and some S-300s are sent up to say "hello?" Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Check Six Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 There already is such a thing, the Standard SM-6 (if you are launching from the ground) and the AIM-120D (from airborne platforms). They are still working out the bugs on the -120D. The 120D was developed in response to advances made by other nations AAM's. The older C-models forced you to get within range of the bad guys before you could launch. Even with the stealth, the closer in you get, the higher the probability you will be detected. Only issue is that China (and undoubtedly other adversaries) are spend huge sums of money working on ways to jam the AMRAAMs radar seeker. One reason for the USN's renewed focus on radar silent, IR attacks. Just because the AMRAAM was something of a "silver bullet" during GW1 does not mean that it's still an unbeatable death dealer today. Dumb question: How about a system that works similar to the way a JDAM or other smart bombs are guided to their target? Some AWACS-type a/c fly's high up and back out of harm's way, locks on and paints targets via laser etc while another a/c (F-22 or B-1R) launches intercept missiles that are guided by said laser etc. Said missiles are not heat-seeking so flares are useless. Said missiles are also not RADAR-guided so chaff is useless. Am I missing anything that would otherwise make it plausible? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tony Stark Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Dumb question: How about a system that works similar to the way a JDAM or other smart bombs are guided to their target? Some AWACS-type a/c fly's high up and back out of harm's way, locks on and paints targets via laser etc while another a/c (F-22 or B-1R) launches intercept missiles that are guided by said laser etc. Said missiles are not heat-seeking so flares are useless. Said missiles are also not RADAR-guided so chaff is useless. Am I missing anything that would otherwise make it plausible? Seeker head's got to be able to see what the laser's painting. Besides, you're still using radar to locate and lock the laser onto the target. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Check Six Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Yeah; Good points. I figured clouds would be an issue. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 (edited) Just because the AMRAAM was something of a "silver bullet" during GW1 does not mean that it's still an unbeatable death dealer today. AMRAAM Wasn't in service in GW1. The majority of kills were BVR by the much maligned Sparrow. And the concept of jamming enemy missiles is not a new one either. AMRAAM has improved as well, new versions are showing up, same with Sidewinder. You will also note that LM test pilot Paul Giggilotti in that panel made sure to "put his oar in the water" and say the US needs a new AAM... but he is evil and works for LM so its just the unending quest for more money. Edited March 16, 2014 by TaiidanTomcat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 AMRAAM Wasn't in service in GW1. The majority of kills were BVR by the much maligned Sparrow. And the concept of jamming enemy missiles is not a new one either. AMRAAM has improved as well, new versions are showing up, same with Sidewinder. You will also note that LM test pilot Paul Giggilotti in that panel made sure to "put his oar in the water" and say the US needs a new AAM... but he is evil and works for LM so its just the unending quest for more money. My bad, I know it did get a kill or two at the very end (or maybe during the subsequent policing activities). Of course the concept of jamming enemy missiles is not new but from what one gleans in the open press, our adversaries seem to be making some worrisome strides in this area. That (again per open source press) is the reason for the USN's new emphasis on non-radar tactics. There was a pretty interesting article that came out a while back about new radar-silent tactics being developed by the Navy. The main driver for this was supposedly a real concern that US radars, comm systems and radar-guided AAM's may be denied in a future conflict against a high-end adversary. It wasn't a worry that this could happen in a decade or so, there was concern that the bad guy(s) have this capability today. I'll try to dig it up and post a link. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Diamondback Six Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Which comes back to the argument some make that "all you can count on is what's on-board, hence the importance of the un-jammable Visual Gun Pass". Chalk me up as somewhere in the middle... all that support and force-multiplier effect is great when you DO have it, but you also need to design, build, plan and train to account for the fact that the Other Team may have a wild-card to counter it and the warfighter in cockpit may HAVE to go it just himself and his wingmen with no outside help. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ken Cartwright Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Maybe it should be equipped with a ram too, just in case :) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.