• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Musings on the "F-117 Companion"

Ravinoff

Hoodoo Operator
Joined
Oct 6, 2017
Messages
44
Reaction score
68
Okay, noticed the TR-3 thread was bumped again, and I was gonna make this a post there, but as it concerns a bit of a broader spectrum than just the (probably fictional) TR-3, I may as well make a thread out of it. I've been doing some thinking on the whole concept of the F-117 Companion and its supposed role of lasing targets for Paveways, and something sort of occurred to me.

What's a role that a stealth aircraft is inherently suited for, where a noticeable capability gap has existed since the early stealth era, but has never been even considered in open literature (that I know of, at least)? Suppression of enemy air defenses. Yeah, the F-4G was around until '96, and the AGM-69 SRAM and AGM-86 ALCM cover similar territory, but think for a moment about the advantages a "Sneaky Weasel" would bring to the table, from the perspective of a Cold War Air Force planner. Sure, those new Rockwell B-1Bs are neat and have a slightly reduced RCS, and the rumor going around is that somebody is working on a real stealth bomber, but the SAC workhorse is still the good old B-52. But the Soviets are getting damn good at building SAMs, and it's starting to look like they could even shoot down the new ALCM standoff missiles (though by pure weight of numbers the cruise missile bus still should work).

And then the eureka moment hits. This new stealth thing...what if we built a low-flying stealth penetrator that's nearly invisible to radar and loaded to the gills with Shrikes/Standard ARMs/HARMs and even SRAMs? Send them in ahead of the B-52 fleet who'll be launching hordes of decoys, and as soon as the Soviet radars start lighting up the Sneaky Weasels blast them off the map. So a few of these get built, budgets being what they are and the political turbulence of the time. Fast forward ten years or so, and they're sitting around mothballed since the war everyone planned for never happened, but it's starting to look like this Saddam Hussein guy is going to be trouble. The Iraqis are impressive on paper and we don't know how this is going to play out, so hell, dust off those Sneaky Weasel prototypes and we'll rig them with PAVE SPIKE pods to lase priority targets for the heavy hitters.

Thoughts/ideas/reasons I'm an idiot and this wouldn't work, anyone?
 

Ravinoff

Hoodoo Operator
Joined
Oct 6, 2017
Messages
44
Reaction score
68
Just a quick note, the F-117A had a laser designator in the nose of the aircraft.

If a "Companion" did exist, it would have more than likely fulfilled an EA role as it's an integral part of SEAD missions.

Lasing targets was the rumor I've always heard, don't know enough about those systems to say whether a secondary low-flying spotter bird would be useful.

And I'm mildly clueless on the acronyms, what's EA? I know EW (which, come to think of it, is also a good possibility for a Companion), but EA doesn't sound familiar.
 

Arjen

It's turtles all the way down
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,697
Reaction score
464
On the other hand, you could simply explain what EA stands for. AYBIU.
 

TsrJoe

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
444
Reaction score
246
im assuming EA is a not widely used acronym in this context for Electronic Attack
 
Last edited:

Arjen

It's turtles all the way down
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,697
Reaction score
464
There I was, mistaking it for Environmental Awareness.
 

_Del_

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
526
Reaction score
183
It's a newish acronym for all the things that used to be covered by EW. Not sure why it has gained traction other than marketing and an institutional need for staff officers to keep rewriting "the book" to show evolutionary progression. I suppose some aspects of current EW capability are indeed closer to an "attack" than simple " counter-measures". But "warfare" seemed to cover this just as well.
 

_Del_

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
526
Reaction score
183
Even SEAD/DEAD and such is now broadly covered by EW. The new breakdown is Attack, Protection, and Support (sometimes "Support Measures"). It all falls broadly under EW. The buzzword is "dominance" now. So you "Attack"-ing the enemies Electronic systems and suppressing his defenses, you "Protect" your own ability to make war electronically, and "Support" is everything covered in earlier acronyms like ESM, ELINT, etc to provide information. If you do this, you "dominate" EW, or acheive "EM spectral dominance" , or "multi-spectrum dominance" or whatever buzzword is in vogue.
"Attack" to deny the enemy access to the EM spectrum. "Protect" our own ability to use it. "Support" conventional decision-makers with information gathered via the EM spectrum.
You see them in staff work, RFI/RFP, occasional industry comments (and even ads). The only one that is relatively common in the wild is EA, and like EW, it is usually used in the broadest, least precise manner possible.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,968
Reaction score
356
Even SEAD/DEAD and such is now broadly covered by EW.

Not really since SEAD/DEAD has to cover non-emitters and/or sensors that don't operate in the electromagnetic spectrum.
No one regards an ATACMS attack on a AAA site as EW or EA.

The new breakdown is Attack, Protection, and Support (sometimes "Support Measures").

If by new do you mean at least 25 years old?
 

_Del_

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
526
Reaction score
183
If by new do you mean at least 25 years old?
If you say so. I just know that despite working in the defense industry, I've only seen it in the past 10 years perhaps, and I haven't seen EA in trade mags and the like until the past five or so. And even now, it is infrequent. I'm not directly involved in EW efforts, but I've also been around. I've never seen EP or ES or ESM in a trade mag or other media that I can recall. I've only seen them in think tank "white papers" and the occasional staff paper or RFI. Conversationally, I don't know anyone who uses those acronyms even when discussing EW.
I'm not an encyclopedia; I can only relate my experience. If you've been using those terms for 25 years, you're ahead of the Del Curve. ;)
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,968
Reaction score
356
FM 34-1 from 1994. There were earlier doctrinal publications on "electronic attack" but it was more along the lines of non-lethal jamming.
 

Attachments

  • fm34-1-1994.png
    fm34-1-1994.png
    327.9 KB · Views: 51

RetiredAFGuy

20 years of Phantom Phun
Joined
Jan 10, 2019
Messages
10
Reaction score
8
Would the "F-117 companion aircraft" be the "star shaped aircraft" reported over Iraq by US pilots and also be related to the "pointy things" referred to in the "boom operator's" stories about flying with classified aircraft during OIF?
 

sublight is back

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
776
Reaction score
54
Would the "F-117 companion aircraft" be the "star shaped aircraft" reported over Iraq by US pilots and also be related to the "pointy things" referred to in the "boom operator's" stories about flying with classified aircraft during OIF?
That sounds like "the artichoke", which has been seen quite a few times flying with F-117.
 

RavenOne

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
293
Reaction score
318
Would the "F-117 companion aircraft" be the "star shaped aircraft" reported over Iraq by US pilots and also be related to the "pointy things" referred to in the "boom operator's" stories about flying with classified aircraft during OIF?

Are you on about this article?


And the paragraph about OIF

Refueling The F-117's & "The Others" At Night, With No Lights On & Radio Silent...”

Then further down he’s on about he is on about rotational duty at Edwards

Where it says ‘Secret Aircraft Needs Gas Too

‘I was actually part of a lucky crew that flew into "a test facility in the center of the Nellis Range Complex" for a SCI briefing on a particular jet I would be refueling. It was a first actual offload to said jet ever. So it was pretty cool to be able to do the honors.‘

cheers


1573F8AB-F9D0-4A1B-A108-7B5D5E9B4BA6.jpeg
 

RetiredAFGuy

20 years of Phantom Phun
Joined
Jan 10, 2019
Messages
10
Reaction score
8
Yes. That's the article about the boomer and his reference to "pointy things" and "unique aircraft". My reference to "a star shaped aircraft" seen over Iraq was from an article in Aviation Week & Space Technology over a decade ago.

Since then I've noticed some Boeing "swag" jewelry featuring a stylized star that caught my eye due to its resemblance to an aircraft silhouette (main body, nose, wings, horizontal tail surfaces). I think the star shaped aircraft is/was a Boeing product or a McDonnell Douglas product now claimed by Boeing.

Only time will tell. That is if there is ever any move to bring classified projects into the open.
 

royabulgaf

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
478
Reaction score
49
Yes. That's the article about the boomer and his reference to "pointy things" and "unique aircraft". My reference to "a star shaped aircraft" seen over Iraq was from an article in Aviation Week & Space Technology over a decade ago.

Since then I've noticed some Boeing "swag" jewelry featuring a stylized star that caught my eye due to its resemblance to an aircraft silhouette (main body, nose, wings, horizontal tail surfaces). I think the star shaped aircraft is/was a Boeing product or a McDonnell Douglas product now claimed by Boeing.

Only time will tell. That is if there is ever any move to bring classified projects into the open.
Star shape? Now bear with me. Take an F-18 pointing up. You have the nose, two sort of straight wings, and two largish horizontal stabilizers pointing outward and down. Sort of star shaped. putter around with the aircraft's attitude a bit. That might be the source of the reports.
 

RetiredAFGuy

20 years of Phantom Phun
Joined
Jan 10, 2019
Messages
10
Reaction score
8
Star shape? Now bear with me. Take an F-18 pointing up. You have the nose, two sort of straight wings, and two largish horizontal stabilizers pointing outward and down. Sort of star shaped. putter around with the aircraft's attitude a bit. That might be the source of the reports.


My take on the star shape aircraft silhouette was of a long-nose F-15 (think current U-2 nose) with very long wings, at least 3x normal F-15 wingspan. And the sightings were said to be of the aircraft flying over Iraq at very high altitudes, well above the US aircraft that reported them.

I think someone saw a need for a new high-altitude aircraft and did what Kelly Johnson did with the F-104 to create the U-2. And foreign F-15 operators should be included in a list of who might be operating such an aircraft.
 

Similar threads

Top