USAF/US NAVY 6th Generation Fighter Programs - F/A-XX, F-X, NGAD, PCA

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,401
Reaction score
20
jsport said:
Russian systems work very close to the protected site to defeat the PGM almost like APS. Covered in previous discussion.

Battlefield IADS reduced by msles, UAS followed by tedious time consuming "tank plinking" from a gun toter stifles a ground advance. There are a alot of tanks in Asia.
This may come as a surprise to you but many of those systems are designed to fire on the move and support the advance. Good luck in your A-10.
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,196
Reaction score
0
sferrin said:
jsport said:
Russian systems work very close to the protected site to defeat the PGM almost like APS. Covered in previous discussion.

Battlefield IADS reduced by msles, UAS followed by tedious time consuming "tank plinking" from a gun toter stifles a ground advance. There are a alot of tanks in Asia.
This may come as a surprise to you but many of those systems are designed to fire on the move and support the advance. Good luck in your A-10.
This discussion was about updating F-16s for BAI/CAS. Modern high speed Fire Control as a component to an AFTI like upgrade would easily allow slow moving tanks to be engaged.
 

SpudmanWP

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
999
Reaction score
3
Why bother updating F-16s for BAI/CAS... It will never have the weapons load & range of the F-35 and can only have the same sensors if they spend ADDITIONAL BILLIONS (above the already planed SLEPs) updating them while they only have a few thousand hrs of life left in them.

Question: Why are we spend so much time talking about the F-35 in this thread?
Answer: We need a general F-35 "not news" thread.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,401
Reaction score
20
SpudmanWP said:
Why bother updating F-16s for BAI/CAS... It will never have the weapons load & range of the F-35 and can only have the same sensors if they spend ADDITIONAL BILLIONS (above the already planed SLEPs) updating them while they only have a few thousand hrs of life left in them.

Question: Why are we spend so much time talking about the F-35 in this thread?
Answer: We need a general F-35 "not news" thread.
'cuz da F-35 is just a fat pig that's why. ;)
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,196
Reaction score
0
SpudmanWP said:
Why bother updating F-16s for BAI/CAS... It will never have the weapons load & range of the F-35 and can only have the same sensors if they spend ADDITIONAL BILLIONS (above the already planed SLEPs) updating them while they only have a few thousand hrs of life left in them.

Question: Why are we spend so much time talking about the F-35 in this thread?
Answer: We need a general F-35 "not news" thread.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/lockheed-martins-new-f-16-block-70-fighting-falcon-has-f-22-26419

add AFTI capability including against small ground moving targets w/ autocannon bursts. BAI/CAS realistic vs what appears to be the plan. Oh dogfight survivor on top of that vs....
 

quellish

I am not actually here.
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
2,047
Reaction score
0
jsport said:
There are a alot of tanks in Asia.
A pair of B-1s with WCMD and Skeets would fix that.
Get the external hardpoints back and just one would do.
 

LowObservable

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,155
Reaction score
0
CAS requirement:

Numero Uno - Be there when required (persistence, response time)

Numero Two-O - C2 between the team on the ground and the airplane. "I want to see your TDP video so you're not targeting us". That is, ROVER and follow-ons.

Numero Three-O - Precision low-yield weapons

PS - if you're penetrating the IADS, you're not CAS. And if you're doing CAS, LO means silent.
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,196
Reaction score
0
LowObservable said:
CAS requirement:

Numero Uno - Be there when required (persistence, response time)

Numero Two-O - C2 between the team on the ground and the airplane. "I want to see your TDP video so you're not targeting us". That is, ROVER and follow-ons.

Numero Three-O - Precision low-yield weapons

PS - if you're penetrating the IADS, you're not CAS. And if you're doing CAS, LO means silent.
Bombers have other jobs like winning the strategic battle.

What really is needed is a F/A-XX like the F-111.

https://fighterjetsworld.com/2018/09/20/the-a-10-is-not-a-real-tank-killer-its-forgotten-f-111-aardvark/

Given the number of threats 2030+ CAS "plinking" and CAS supporting SEAD will need to be near simultaneous and accomplished by the generally the same the craft

If there are dedicated pure SEAD supporting Deep, Medium range (BAI) and Close battle (CAS) they would need to carry as many UAS/msles as possible internally and/or stealth conformal ..but these craft would be required to attack vehicles as far from troops as possible as well (Assaultbreaker/Warbreaker like).. so not pure SEAD either. The end of pure SEAD as a mission the new emphasis defeating APS and Counter-PGM at standoff takes ex/internal space and volume for these munitions.

The F-111 was the first turbofan so if these ADVENT Turbofans w/ advanced bypass are all that then winning design will move F-111-like size/weight around and at range. Modern wing and material science could allow an F-111 size plane to even possess decent maneuver and at speed. Yeah F-111 tried to do too much for too many but it taught alot.
 

Colonial-Marine

Fighting the UAV mafia.
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
608
Reaction score
1
jsport said:
What really is needed is a F/A-XX like the F-111. Bombers have other jobs like winning the strategic battle.

https://fighterjetsworld.com/2018/09/20/the-a-10-is-not-a-real-tank-killer-its-forgotten-f-111-aardvark/

The F-111 was the first turbofan so if these ADVENT Turbofans w/ advanced bypass are all that then winning design will move F-111-like size/weight around and at range. Modern wing and material science could allow an F-111 size plane to even possess decent maneuver and at speed. Yeah F-111 tried to do too much for too many but it taught alot.
I do think a strike aircraft with a lot of the same characteristics the F-111 had (size, weight, speed) is needed. I don't know if such an aircraft would be ideal for F/A-XX but it definitely would work as an eventual F-15E replacement and could even supplement the B-21 in some roles. The FB-23 comes to mind for a lot of this although it may have been a bit on the large side.

jsport said:
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/lockheed-martins-new-f-16-block-70-fighting-falcon-has-f-22-26419

add AFTI capability including against small ground moving targets w/ autocannon bursts. BAI/CAS realistic vs what appears to be the plan. Oh dogfight survivor on top of that vs....
I know the 30mm GAU-13 wasn't fully integrated with the F-16 as the software wasn't finalized but supposedly it just shook around the aircraft and the gun pod too much. At those ranges you also expose yourself to every form of short range air defenses the enemy has down to trash fire from every MG they have on the roof of a vehicle.

Seems to me that more weapon choices for the F-35 might be a better answer. SDB-II should be very useful but I imagine something like Brimstone II would be harder to intercept. Originally JAGM was supposed to be integrated on the F-35 and be significantly more capable. Now it is just a Hellfire-R with dual-mode MMW/SALH seeker.

The move away from cluster munitions also seems premature, especially when you consider the limited window any defenses would have to intercept whatever is carrying the submunitions. If I were leading a tank platoon down a road one of the last things I'd want is for a JSOW-A to detonate above my column.
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,196
Reaction score
0
Colonial-Marine said:
jsport said:
What really is needed is a F/A-XX like the F-111. Bombers have other jobs like winning the strategic battle.

https://fighterjetsworld.com/2018/09/20/the-a-10-is-not-a-real-tank-killer-its-forgotten-f-111-aardvark/

The F-111 was the first turbofan so if these ADVENT Turbofans w/ advanced bypass are all that then winning design will move F-111-like size/weight around and at range. Modern wing and material science could allow an F-111 size plane to even possess decent maneuver and at speed. Yeah F-111 tried to do too much for too many but it taught alot.
I do think a strike aircraft with a lot of the same characteristics the F-111 had (size, weight, speed) is needed. I don't know if such an aircraft would be ideal for F/A-XX but it definitely would work as an eventual F-15E replacement and could even supplement the B-21 in some roles. The FB-23 comes to mind for a lot of this although it may have been a bit on the large side.

jsport said:
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/lockheed-martins-new-f-16-block-70-fighting-falcon-has-f-22-26419

add AFTI capability including against small ground moving targets w/ autocannon bursts. BAI/CAS realistic vs what appears to be the plan. Oh dogfight survivor on top of that vs....
I know the 30mm GAU-13 wasn't fully integrated with the F-16 as the software wasn't finalized but supposedly it just shook around the aircraft and the gun pod too much. At those ranges you also expose yourself to every form of short range air defenses the enemy has down to trash fire from every MG they have on the roof of a vehicle.

Seems to me that more weapon choices for the F-35 might be a better answer. SDB-II should be very useful but I imagine something like Brimstone II would be harder to intercept. Originally JAGM was supposed to be integrated on the F-35 and be significantly more capable. Now it is just a Hellfire-R with dual-mode MMW/SALH seeker.

The move away from cluster munitions also seems premature, especially when you consider the limited window any defenses would have to intercept whatever is carrying the submunitions. If I were leading a tank platoon down a road one of the last things I'd want is for a JSOW-A to detonate above my column.
Would only say that according to text on this forum AFTI flying in a acending or decending circle w/ completely off -axis nose guided by a computer might be much for the pilot but impossible for ADA gun to follow. Recoil is not a contemporary issues if you dont want it to be. The software/
actuators would allow a light non-gatling gun(s).

Hellfire based msles are the issue as likely defeatable by developing APS and counter PGM systems. Thus the need for UAS/msle development as ideally it defeats this counter tech more than once before being expended.

Understand some clusters are prohibited. Damocles submunition in JSOWs of number again require a large craft and vehicles highly dispersed in antiscipation so JSOW...

PS: am a F-23 but something bigger but not bomber requires consideration.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,401
Reaction score
20
LowObservable said:
PS - if you're penetrating the IADS, you're not CAS. And if you're doing CAS, LO means silent.
Pretty sure there is such a thing as CAS within range of air-defenses. (Unless you're an A-10 anyway. ;) )
 

LowObservable

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,155
Reaction score
0
I said "the IADS". You can expect guns and MANPADS. And use third-party targeting and standoff to take out any Pantsyr-type threats.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,401
Reaction score
20
LowObservable said:
I said "the IADS". You can expect guns and MANPADS. And use third-party targeting and standoff to take out any Pantsyr-type threats.
There are things between strategic IADS and MANPADs. Things like TOR, Pantsir, Buk, S-350, etc. will make using A-10s impossible. If your thinking is clear away ALL threats then there is no need for the A-10 and you could just use a lightweight, cheap, COIN aircraft.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
0
SpudmanWP said:
Why bother updating F-16s for BAI/CAS... It will never have the weapons load & range of the F-35 and can only have the same sensors if they spend ADDITIONAL BILLIONS (above the already planed SLEPs) updating them while they only have a few thousand hrs of life left in them.

Question: Why are we spend so much time talking about the F-35 in this thread?
Answer: We need a general F-35 "not news" thread.
250 new build F-15's would make a nice mach 2 CAS platform. With todays sensors. . . Why not!? Speed, legs, payload. The ability to turn around on the same sortie and do A2A. No LO, but hell neither does the 16 nor the 10 that people are trying to save.
 

SpudmanWP

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
999
Reaction score
3
F-15s cost more to buy and maintain than the F-35 while offering no advantage except for max speed & range. In A2A the F-35 is better so that is no real advantage for the F-15 and it's gun is even weaker than the F-35's.

Modern CAS is about information and PGMs.

Now, can we please have a F-35 discussion thread?
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
717
Reaction score
4
quellish said:
A pair of B-1s with WCMD and Skeets would fix that.
Get the external hardpoints back and just one would do.
Don't forget the Battle Herk: you can CAS in low intensity fight or project your CAS capability with a minimal (and stealthy) logistical burden.

Moreover it makes even more senses once you fight peer adversaries where your logistics suddenly comes at the fore front of your capabilities. Turn the Hercules back in its cargo mode and bingo, you managed to ready your forces for two different type of crisis with a sane and efficient budgeting policy. What the USMC did with this concept is amazing. Hope we will see more of the HarvestHawk V2.0 sporting Eu markings.

(Sorry for the OT b/w...)
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
0
SpudmanWP said:
F-15s cost more to buy and maintain than the F-35 while offering no advantage except for max speed & range. In A2A the F-35 is better so that is no real advantage for the F-15 and it's gun is even weaker than the F-35's.

Modern CAS is about information and PGMs.

Now, can we please have a F-35 discussion thread?
Don't "poo poo" range. Remember, we don't have bases everywhere and not everyone is willing to base US fighters. I would dare say that range can out-trump LO as long as we're not fighting a peer state, and range definitely out-trumps LO when the battlefield is dominated by decoys and SEAD aircraft.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,401
Reaction score
20
Airplane said:
SpudmanWP said:
F-15s cost more to buy and maintain than the F-35 while offering no advantage except for max speed & range. In A2A the F-35 is better so that is no real advantage for the F-15 and it's gun is even weaker than the F-35's.

Modern CAS is about information and PGMs.

Now, can we please have a F-35 discussion thread?
Don't "poo poo" range. Remember, we don't have bases everywhere and not everyone is willing to base US fighters. I would dare say that range can out-trump LO as long as we're not fighting a peer state, and range definitely out-trumps LO when the battlefield is dominated by decoys and SEAD aircraft.
Might I suggest that if that sort of range is going to enter the equation the need for CAS will have long since passed by the time you get there.
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,196
Reaction score
0
SpudmanWP said:
F-15s cost more to buy and maintain than the F-35 while offering no advantage except for max speed & range. In A2A the F-35 is better so that is no real advantage for the F-15 and it's gun is even weaker than the F-35's.

Modern CAS is about information and PGMs.

Now, can we please have a F-35 discussion thread?
STOVL F-35s have an external gun only.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
0
sferrin said:
Airplane said:
SpudmanWP said:
F-15s cost more to buy and maintain than the F-35 while offering no advantage except for max speed & range. In A2A the F-35 is better so that is no real advantage for the F-15 and it's gun is even weaker than the F-35's.

Modern CAS is about information and PGMs.

Now, can we please have a F-35 discussion thread?
Don't "poo poo" range. Remember, we don't have bases everywhere and not everyone is willing to base US fighters. I would dare say that range can out-trump LO as long as we're not fighting a peer state, and range definitely out-trumps LO when the battlefield is dominated by decoys and SEAD aircraft.
Might I suggest that if that sort of range is going to enter the equation the need for CAS will have long since passed by the time you get there.
Not true. Loiter time. The 15 can loiter all day with fast packs and drop tanks and add in tanker support and it will fly till the pilot fatigues out. If you're saying CAS depends on being within a few minutes of a battle, they you're stuck with Apache gunships as they can be prepositioned near hot spots. Also Warthogs were providing CAS during Desert Shield Storm hundreds and hundreds of miles from their bases. An advanced Eagle could do it better and faster. If you study ground combat and history, most battles last a LONG time. It's not over in 5 minutes like a movie. Plenty of time for a Eagle to travel a hundred or 2 hundred miles and make a difference. For example from recent history, Benghazi was 13 hours. and if you know there will be a battle because you are the initiator, then 15s can be pre-positioned loitering.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,401
Reaction score
20
Airplane said:
sferrin said:
Airplane said:
SpudmanWP said:
F-15s cost more to buy and maintain than the F-35 while offering no advantage except for max speed & range. In A2A the F-35 is better so that is no real advantage for the F-15 and it's gun is even weaker than the F-35's.

Modern CAS is about information and PGMs.

Now, can we please have a F-35 discussion thread?
Don't "poo poo" range. Remember, we don't have bases everywhere and not everyone is willing to base US fighters. I would dare say that range can out-trump LO as long as we're not fighting a peer state, and range definitely out-trumps LO when the battlefield is dominated by decoys and SEAD aircraft.
Might I suggest that if that sort of range is going to enter the equation the need for CAS will have long since passed by the time you get there.
Not true. Loiter time. The 15 can loiter all day with fast packs and drop tanks and add in tanker support and it will fly till the pilot fatigues out. If you're saying CAS depends on being within a few minutes of a battle, they you're stuck with Apache gunships as they can be prepositioned near hot spots. Also Warthogs were providing CAS during Desert Shield Storm hundreds and hundreds of miles from their bases. An advanced Eagle could do it better and faster. If you study ground combat and history, most battles last a LONG time. It's not over in 5 minutes like a movie. Plenty of time for a Eagle to travel a hundred or 2 hundred miles and make a difference. For example from recent history, Benghazi was 13 hours. and if you know there will be a battle because you are the initiator, then 15s can be pre-positioned loitering.
So an F-15 would be good for CAS but an F-35 would not because. . . .

Also, re. range, you might want to take a look through this thread here with real F-15 pilots discussing range as it relates to the F-15 & F35:

http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=53048&start=120
 

LowObservable

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,155
Reaction score
0
Neither an F-15 nor an F-35 is the most cost-effective solution for CAS against insurgents.

And NGAD/PCA certainly won't be either.

CAS in a land battle against a peer force in a contested environment will be different, and would be an interesting separate discussion. However, in that situation I don't think that CAS would stand alone but as part of a blend of C4ISR and direct and indirect fire.
 

litzj

BLOG : http://jaesan-aero.blogspot.com/
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
205
Reaction score
0
Website
jaesan-aero.blogspot.com
I thought CAS mission will be conducted by UCAV in near future

Manned vehicle now is too expensive and risky to be used for that missions.

MQ series with dumb-bomb, smart bombs, hellfire class missile is already matured technology
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,196
Reaction score
0
Darpa Warbreaker/Assaultbreaker encompassed Critical Mobile Target (CMT) targeting (everything from TBM TELs to tanks and all the IADS in between) Deep to BAI to CAS.
 

Attachments

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,196
Reaction score
0
from Quellish Oct 12 2015.

In 1985 DARPA started the Smart Weapons Program which focused on using loitering autonomous weapons to hit fleeting mobile targets. Some of this concept became TACIT RAINBOW. SWP Phase 2 was THIRSTY SABRE, which aimed to put sensors and smarts on a conventional ACM as a hunter-killer system dispensing "dumb" submunitions on mobile targets. Sensors and software were tested on a surrogate aircraft.

During DESERT STORM the "theater mobile missile threat" was a higher priority. This lead to THIRSTY WARRIOR, which was a continuation of THIRSTY SABRE focused on mobile TBM. After DESERT STORM interest in the concept dried up. Later WARBREAKER attacked the mobile TBM problem with a very different, fully integrated approach.
 

Attachments

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,401
Reaction score
20
Now remove PAVE MOVER from your graphic and see how well it works.
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,196
Reaction score
0
a Ground /Air Forces network from unmanned to larger manned for CMTs across the entire battlespace. IADs is nothing particular. They all have to be dealt w/ from close to far.

Vehicle APS makes tanks part of the IADS

Fixed sites (Fixed Critical target) w/ Counter PGM part of the IADS.
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,196
Reaction score
0
ok the F-35 is to be the Digital Quarterback so for the F/A-XX to be worth it than if would need to be a Offensive Coach w/ a significant under fuselage multi purpose (EW (offensive jamming), ECM, ECCM, Early Warn radar, MTI/SAR) AESA (potential DEW antenna even) 'canoe' ie a reason for F-111 size craft potentially even w/ 4x hacker/EW operators/Wpns off/pilots.

Material Science and advanced turbofans could still allow fighter like high performance at load and range.
 

Ogami musashi

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2006
Messages
301
Reaction score
1
It just the lockheed martin baseline ESAV model that has been used since at least 2014 for a number of studies. You have several pictures and links to documents of it in this very post. This design was chosen to be modular, that is each study can modify details of the configuration without affecting too much the rest of the plane.
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,700
Reaction score
28
This configuration was studied on contract with AFRL since 2012 or even earlier.
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3536.msg187398.html#msg187398
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
885
Reaction score
0
Ogami musashi said:
It just the lockheed martin baseline ESAV model that has been used since at least 2014 for a number of studies. You have several pictures and links to documents of it in this very post. This design was chosen to be modular, that is each study can modify details of the configuration without affecting too much the rest of the plane.

The bulbous head, nacelles, and optical illusion of angled wing tips reminds me of a Klingon Bird of Prey. Appropriate for a Raptor.

The high cockpit, big engine nacelles and exhaust troughs remind me more of the YF-23 than the F-22.

Since this is an older baseline model would they intend to scale it up? Seems small for what folks have been discussing as the necessary range and weapons load.
 

NUSNA_Moebius

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
115
Reaction score
0
The bullbous head and long body reminds me of the new UK Tempest design.
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,196
Reaction score
0

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,401
Reaction score
20
jsport said:
litzj said:
It would seem a simple jink maneuver would allow even a large BWB B-21 to avoid a hypersonic intercept as the at that speed the missile could not adjust to a last second jink out of the missiles intercept vector.

I wouldn't want to have to test that theory. More likely the thing would be on you before you had a chance to think, "I should probably turn".
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,196
Reaction score
0
sferrin said:
jsport said:
litzj said:
It would seem a simple jink maneuver would allow even a large BWB B-21 to avoid a hypersonic intercept as the at that speed the missile could not adjust to a last second jink out of the missiles intercept vector.

I wouldn't want to have to test that theory. More likely the thing would be on you before you had a chance to think, "I should probably turn".
If your IRST and AESA aren't good enough to see a signature of a HV msle you might deserve to get shot down. DAS looks in every direction for instance. Once read that AH-1zs were to be programed to accomplish automated jinks away from man-portable SAMs.
 
Top