Conceptual types of CCAs that should be built - Forum opinions welcome!

[Scott Kenny]

Had an idea pop up in the "Designing a new Interceptor" thread: what happens when your long-range manned interceptors are shot down or otherwise not available, and the cruise missiles keep coming?

And I came up with an absolutely ridiculous "kamikaze CCA" that was really more of a beast of a SAM. 21" diameter like the SM6blk1b, but a solid-fuel ramjet like Meteor with 4 intakes. Enormous booster to cover the first 10,000ft in elevation and Mach 1 speed. Meteor has a booster to get it up to ramjet start speed inside the length of the regular missile, so this would as well. And now you have a 21" GaN AESA radar at ~100,000ft or so and M5ish searching for the incoming cruise missiles. Being able to recover the thing is entirely optional. Likely cost is going to be about the same as the SM6blk1b as well for the airframe, plus development of the search and attack autonomy.

For the USN CCAs.

• several think tanks are proposing a pretty big multirole UCAS. More or less the size of the NG ATA/A-12 proposal, in fact. This big beast would do strike, SUW, ASW, EW, and some tanking missions. (If someone has the actual USN roadmap, please post it here for updating my own thoughts)
• EW ended up a separate version of that big airframe, like the Growler.
• I think that the ASW version may also end up a separate airframe, just because the ASW bird spends a lot of time down low using the MAD and maybe sonobuoys. This could change if the P-8 works well.
• Most of the tankers are MQ-25s, there's only a couple of the stealthy airframes tanking.
• There's also a suggestion for a couple of those unmanned H-60s (MU-X) in the air wing.
• Not technically CCAs, but I expect that the next generation of ships is going to have space for VTOL AEW and VTOL ASW drones. No bigger than the MQ-8C and ideally with a bespoke fuselage instead of the manned LongRanger.
• Plus USVs and UUVs, but that doesn't count for this discussion.

Then there's the USAF CCAs. We know Increment 1 basically only exists to get some experience working with CCAs and developing operations for them.

• One of the easiest CCAs to derive for the USAF is their EW CCA. If you don't have giant non-stealthy aircraft to demand standoff jamming, you can get away with much smaller airframes only putting out a couple of watts of RF for stand-in Jammers instead of Standoff. Basically potentially-recoverable MALD-Js. Unfortunately, ADM-160Bs are about the size of a 2000lb bomb: 14.5" tall and 16.5" wide with the wings folded.
• Another easy UCAV to call out is the cheap "spear carrier" that can carry 2-4x AMRAAMs and or 4-8x SDBs. Arguably, Increment 1 can do this right now.
• I'm kinda anticipating an ISR drone. TACIT BLUE II. No longer sight sensitive so we can build 600+ of the things and calmly fly in someone's IADS with an LPI ground-search radar to give targets to the F-35s. If it's a big enough airframe, we can add the Reaper EOTS to it as well. If it's a JASSM-sized drone, the Reaper EOTS will have to be in a separate drone.
• I don't remember if the USAF owns the BACN radio-translation aircraft or if those are USArmy. But someone is going to own those. They can likely be the same airframe as the TACIT BLUE IIs.
• SANDY drone, to escort the PJs to rescue shot-down pilots. Controlled from somewhere close to the action. Potentially out of the back of an Osprey or AC-130!

And finally we get Army CCAs.

• Another TACIT BLUE II, but this time maybe only JASSM sized. Same job as the USAF version, but tied into Army command and control instead of USAF.
• UCAR/MQ-8C and/or V247, both armed to do the CAS role. Two different types because the helicopter version is still viable in Europe and will be viable on mainland Asia, but not viable over the water.
• Also a dedicated scout VTOL, mix MQ8C and OH-58D (and likely RAH-66 as well), also in both rotorcraft and tiltrotor models.
• smaller drones for each ground vehicle to have their own aerial scout.

 

[Scott Kenny]

My inital mental image for the kamikaze interceptor CCA was a modified SM6 Block 1b, the 21" diameter missile, just with a Meteor-style solid fuel ramjet. Assuming a simple rocket engine, there's 2.4x more fuel inside a 21" tube than inside a 13.5" tube so you should have about 2.4x the range(!). Nevermind the increase in range you get from a ramjet over solid fuel.

But if we're trying to recover the fighter-sized radar on the thing, should probably go to a liquid-fueled ramjet instead to have more stuff to recover. And that suggests an airframe looking more like a Regulus 2 than SM6.

(image from wiki)

Or maybe more like a CIM-10 Bomarc, since we're talking ramjet powered instead of turbojet.

 

[shin_getter]

Well, Drones should just about cover all existing roles of existing aircraft, plus some that didn't exist due to size and loss rates issues.

I see powerplant - Airframe platforms as long term basis since engine development is slower while payloads change quickly.

There are a few dimensions of characteristics to fill:
1. Range
2. Survivability
3. Payload Transport per unit of time/Payload, sustained (sensors, EW, DEW, etc)
5. Payload: scale
6. Mobility requirements (interceptor/counter interception)
7. Basing requirements

You can probably throw darts at this and figure out a use case of many hits. This needs to be whittled down by thinking about tactical-operational-strategic-political levels of warfighting and figuring out what is the theory of victory in various conflicts and how to implement it with airpower.

And a working theory of victory is for now, missing quite a bit in many conflicts and all the hardware isn't going to fix it (and is thus irrelevant).

And I came up with an absolutely ridiculous "kamikaze CCA" that was really more of a beast of a SAM. 21" diameter like the SM6blk1b, but a solid-fuel ramjet like Meteor with 4 intakes. Enormous booster to cover the first 10,000ft in elevation and Mach 1 speed. Meteor has a booster to get it up to ramjet start speed inside the length of the regular missile, so this would as well. And now you have a 21" GaN AESA radar at ~100,000ft or so and M5ish searching for the incoming cruise missiles. Being able to recover the thing is entirely optional.

This does sound rather expensive for it to be disposable. I do like rocket-ramjet interceptors that can be recovered. Not sure if it can do ABM or maybe something pure rocket like falcon-9 would be better.

 

[Scott Kenny]

This does sound rather expensive for it to be disposable.

The 21" AESA radar is not going to be cheap, no. It may be viable to pack the warhead volume/mass with a bunch of HalfRAAMs instead of a single explosive charge, and recover the main missile/drone.

I do like rocket-ramjet interceptors that can be recovered.

That's why the idea morphed in my mind from "SM6-sized Meteor" to "ramjet-Regulus II or BOMARC".

Though an "SM6-sized Meteor" would have a pretty ludicrous range, about on par with what we've been talking about for the "North American Continental Interceptor".

Not sure if it can do ABM or maybe something pure rocket like falcon-9 would be better.

I think something pure exo-atmospheric would be preferred for ABM work, though sticking the THAAD KV or whatever Glide Breaker uses onto the top of a Minuteman so it does still have some endo-atmo capabilities would likely be preferable.