Military Tech Thread

[TaiidanTomcat]

A question to all the experts here.

Is this actually real? I mean does China poses a technological edge over the western military in terms of missiles and rockets?

Only one way to find out

[ElectroSoldier]

For America or the world?

Would a shift in the balance of power in the region make any difference?

[11bee]

A question to all the experts here.

Is this actually real? I mean does China poses a technological edge over the western military in terms of missiles and rockets?

Depends on who you talk to. China had an epiphany after Desert Storm and vowed to revamp their military to focus on quality instead of quantity. They also made a concerted effort to poach western technology by whatever means possible.

No idea if they are ahead of the west (my own guess is that they are close but still a bit behind) but you have to admit that they have made some significant gains over the last decade or so and show no sign that they are stopping their push to overtake the west. They went from flying revamped MiG-21's to being close to fielding two stealth fighters in a short period of time. Couple that with a pretty impressive electronic attack capability and you have to give them points for trying.

Hopefully we'll never find out.

[ElectroSoldier]

So as far as you know the article isnt true?

[TaiidanTomcat]

I don't believe that's necessarily the case. From all I have read, the USN is looking to drastically increase the -9X range because they feel that the AMRAAM's effectiveness will be significantly reduced by the new EW equipment starting to be fielded.

It's a bit of a desperation move (IMO) but they appear to have some real concerns about the AMRAAM.

Another reason too, Rhinos can't put AMRAAMs on Wingtips ala F-16

[GreyGhost]

I believe Rhinos are cleared to carry 8 AIM-120s in a combat load so I don't think tthat's a big deal to the Navy.

I thought there was talk of developing an IR seeker head for the AIM-120?

-Gregg

[Waco]

TaiidanTomcat, on 04 December 2014 - 09:08 PM, said:

I take at the USN not so much losing faith in AMRAAM but looking to enhance the Aim-9X. Its almost like this WVR stuff is getting dangerous...

I don't believe that's necessarily the case. From all I have read, the USN is looking to drastically increase the -9X range because they feel that the AMRAAM's effectiveness will be significantly reduced by the new EW equipment starting to be fielded. It's a bit of a desperation move (IMO) but they appear to have some real concerns about the AMRAAM.

I'd argue, for whatever my opinion is worth, that it's a healthy bit of both. And it's not just the Navy with these concerns. WVR stuff has been extremely dangerous for a few years now, and it's only getting worse. AMRAAM is a rather long-in-the-tooth missile, and we've given potentially adversaries 25+ years to see how it fairs, how we employ the thing, and to develop countermeasures. AIM-120D is designed to solve some of those issues, but it's still just a repackaging/update of the same technology.

Having a mix of mid- and long range missiles with multiple guidance techniques seems prudent, given the expected heavy EA of a modern air combat environment against 4th Gen and beyond assets.

[TaiidanTomcat]

I believe Rhinos are cleared to carry 8 AIM-120s in a combat load so I don't think tthat's a big deal to the Navy.

I thought there was talk of developing an IR seeker head for the AIM-120?

-Gregg

The difference between wingtip carry and pylon carry is big one with the Super Bug plus the future beckons:

https://d262ilb51hltx0.cloudfront.net/max/800/0*EHMRa8PPl9y0MS3a.png

[11bee]

I'd argue, for whatever my opinion is worth, that it's a healthy bit of both. And it's not just the Navy with these concerns. WVR stuff has been extremely dangerous for a few years now, and it's only getting worse. AMRAAM is a rather long-in-the-tooth missile, and we've given potentially adversaries 25+ years to see how it fairs, how we employ the thing, and to develop countermeasures. AIM-120D is designed to solve some of those issues, but it's still just a repackaging/update of the same technology.

Having a mix of mid- and long range missiles with multiple guidance techniques seems prudent, given the expected heavy EA of a modern air combat environment against 4th Gen and beyond assets.

Back in the old days, the Russians used to launch a single radar guided AAM plus a similar IR guided weapon to maximize the probability of a kill.

Along those lines, the ever pragmatic Israelis have decided to include both seekers on a single missile (the Stunner). Coupled with a dual pulse rocket motor which gives a significant increase in range and new sensor technology which is resistant to jamming and you may have the way of the future. The Stunner is a SAM but there seems to be work underway to adapt it to the long range A2A role.

The technology to replace the AMRAAM is out there, the trick is to get it all to fit in the weapons bays of the F-22/35. I wonder if these bays were sized to only take something with the dimensions of an AMRAMM or if Lockheed built in a bit of extra space to provide some flexibility for any future missiles?

[TaiidanTomcat]

Back in the old days, the Russians used to launch a single radar guided AAM plus a similar IR guided weapon to maximize the probability of a kill.

Along those lines, the ever pragmatic Israelis have decided to include both seekers on a single missile (the Stunner). Coupled with a dual pulse rocket motor which gives a significant increase in range and new sensor technology which is resistant to jamming and you may have the way of the future. The Stunner is a SAM but there seems to be work underway to adapt it to the long range A2A role.

The technology to replace the AMRAAM is out there, the trick is to get it all to fit in the weapons bays of the F-22/35. I wonder if these bays were sized to only take something with the dimensions of an AMRAMM or if Lockheed built in a bit of extra space to provide some flexibility for any future missiles?

The limiting factor is not the size of the internal bays seeing as they can carry bombs and small cruise missiles. You could probably get away with making bigger AAMs (to a point of course) because you don't have to worry about drag, and clearences with other stations/ flight envelopes etc.

[fulcrum1]

Just read this...might be of interest:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/04/pentagon-worries-that-russia-can-now-outshoot-u-s-stealth-jets.html

[TaiidanTomcat]

Just read this...might be of interest:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/04/pentagon-worries-that-russia-can-now-outshoot-u-s-stealth-jets.html

MISSILE GAP!

[ElectroSoldier]

But can you believe that article?

[fulcrum1]

But can you believe that article?

It's an article based on speculation without much if any meat, kind of like some threads.....

[ElectroSoldier]

It's an article based on speculation without much if any meat, kind of like some threads.....

So there is still no believable news that the Chinese possess any kind of technological edge over anybody? And even if they did no one can say why they would be building up that kind of technology, in the face that their only real "enemy" is the United States and they wouldnt dare use it against them.

[11bee]

It's an article based on speculation without much if any meat, kind of like some threads.....

They quoted a couple of senior AF officers who are involved with the F-22/F-35 programs. That's not saying much but unless you are suggesting they fabricated the quotes, the article seems to concur with some of the points Waco posted above and it also is similar to many other articles that have come out in the last year or two.

All of which suggest the same thing - some of our adversaries have developed countermeasures which MAY limit the effectiveness of the AMRAAM.

[fulcrum1]

They quoted a couple of senior AF officers who are involved with the F-22/F-35 programs. That's not saying much but unless you are suggesting they fabricated the quotes, the article seems to concur with some of the points Waco posted above and it also is similar to many other articles that have come out in the last year or two.

All of which suggest the same thing - some of our adversaries have developed countermeasures which MAY limit the effectiveness of the AMRAAM.

Oh, I agree with the notion that our pilots need new missiles and other systems to stay ahead of the game. However, don't for a second think that the timing of these articles and "Senior" whoever are not tied into funding. Now that the recent defense bill was passed and most major programs were given the cash you're going to start seeing the DoD maneuver for other needed items. If you recall, the new missile program was canned two years ago and all of a sudden its the most needed thing. Wasn't it Growlers several months ago?

[ElectroSoldier]

But they didnt actually name the officials though did they.

Without a name of the person they are quoting or some actual proof it all looks rather dubious

[11bee]

Oh, I agree with the notion that our pilots need new missiles and other systems to stay ahead of the game. However, don't for a second think that the timing of these articles and "Senior" whoever are not tied into funding. Now that the recent defense bill was passed and most major programs were given the cash you're going to start seeing the DoD maneuver for other needed items. If you recall, the new missile program was canned two years ago and all of a sudden its the most needed thing. Wasn't it Growlers several months ago?

Good point.

It does seem that the military tends to have a "program du jour" mentality. Yesterday it was the F-35, today the AF is starting to beat the drums for the Long Range Bomber (amongst others) as being paramount to meet the "new threat". Is the US military hyping the China threat to open the funding floodgates? I'd like to say no but the last 50 years is chock full of examples that would contradict me.

[11bee]

US tests long range, stealthy anti-ship missile.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-us-just-tested-stealthy-long-range-anti-ship-missile-12227

Sounds pretty interesting, especially that last sentence.

The LRASM, which is manufactured by Lockheed Martin, has a reported range of 500 nautical miles and carries a 1,000-lb. penetrator and blast-fragmentation warhead. It is primarily designed to provide the U.S. Navy and Air Force with a precision-guided long-range stand-off capability that can survive in aggressive electronic warfare environments. To achieve this, it uses on-board sensors and a semi-autonomous guidance system to reduce its dependence on intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) platforms, network links and GPS navigation. It also employs “innovative terminal survivability approaches and precision lethality” to avoid advanced enemy countermeasures while still reaching its intended target.

US is way overdue for something like this, those Harpoons are positively ancient. Seems that the US is opting for stealth to allow the missile to hit it's target, while Russian (and by default China) are going with speed to allow their ship killers to get through US defenses.

[Vaildog]

It's strange that while the US has been the leader in airframe technology and has had at least a half generation advantage in technology against potential adversaries, US air to Air missiles have remained inferior for decades. Russian missiles in particular seem vastly ahead of the US. Any ideas why?

[11bee]

It's strange that while the US has been the leader in airframe technology and has had at least a half generation advantage in technology against potential adversaries, US air to Air missiles have remained inferior for decades. Russian missiles in particular seem vastly ahead of the US. Any ideas why?

That's not really the case.

The AIM-9L was top dog for IR missiles for quite a while until the Archer appeared. That thing ruled the short range arena for a decade or two, the West had nothing to compete with it (especially when it was coupled with a helmet mounted sight). The AIM-9X has brought the US back to equality.

From the time it was fielded until just recently, the AMRAAM was also top dog for BVR combat. It's now showing it's age a bit when compared to some European and Russian designs but it's still competitive due to recent upgrades.

So I think to say that the Russians are "vastly" ahead of the US is not accurate.

[11bee]

Silly article on the upgraded Harpoon. Granted, it's got more range but to call it "twice as dangerous" is a bit silly. It's still a nearly 50 year old design, subsonic and non-stealthy. I'm guessing that most ship's close-in defense systems would be able to handle it. Compare that to some of the newer anti-ship missiles that can hit Mach-2 during their terminal phase.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/05/23/boeings-most-dangerous-missile-just-got-twice-as-d.aspx

[82Whitey51]

Anyone catch the CNN video of the P-8 that was "challenged" by the Chinese Navy while reconn'ing their man made island build up?

Chinese military building up what amounts to basically forward bases in the South China Sea and nobody is going to tell them they can't (well...we'll tell them they can't but...)

Anyway, I'm not sure who cleared the piece for broadcast but a few of us watching it were pretty surprised. I know "PR" is the name of the game (for some stupid reason) when it comes to our military but in the piece you not only see our latest maritime patrol aircraft but also it's capabilities, operating altitudes (for conducting ISR), on station time....just dumb. Stop telling everyone.

Edited May 26, 2015 by 82Whitey51

[Exhausted]

I saw that and I too was surprised. They gave some pretty close views up the monitors, which I found fascinating. I don't understand why the P-8 was selected for this PR segment, but it was fascinating. I wonder, but don't really care, if anything made it to broadcast that wasn't allowed. Not trying to sound unconcerned, but how well the Navy controls what gets recorded has nothing to do with civilians like me.