SDB II Scores Hits in Flight Tests

[weasel1962]

Which would have to be the case for SDB I since you can't "Golden Horde" network without a datalink.

I suspect they can since Genatempo was talking about it.
http://airforcemag.com/Features/Pages/2 ... tacks.aspx

Rather than seek out another cruise missile, Golden Horde would enable assets like the Small Diameter Bombs I and II, Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile, and Miniature Air-Launched Decoy to plan their next steps together once fired.

The only way I can think of is using the GPS receiver to receive mid-course updates.

[marauder2048]

The only way they can now compete is to keep SDB I going. The laser seeker addition was imho a smart move.

Missed this gem.

The manner in which they integrated the seeker changed the aero properties sufficiently to necessitate
a new stores separation campaign on every platform. Which is why you only really see it on turboprops.

And this kept it from being the go-to for the F-35's high-speed moving target weapon.

[marauder2048]

I suspect they can since Genatempo was talking about it.
http://airforcemag.com/Features/Pages/2 ... tacks.aspx

Rather than seek out another cruise missile, Golden Horde would enable assets like the Small Diameter Bombs I and II, Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile, and Miniature Air-Launched Decoy to plan their next steps together once fired.

Did he actually say that?

The only way I can think of is using the GPS receiver to receive mid-course updates.

Which leaves the host aircraft completely in the dark about your munitions plans; the power required to transmit
back is well beyond what SDB can do onboard.

One-way is clearly not what they want or even what they have:

But what if the weapons could think through those steps on their own and send feedback to other munitions and airmen?

“The first two of us that got here four minutes earlier, we actually took out this target,” Genatempo said, describing how weapons could chart out attacks. “So the two of you that were coming in behind us just to make sure, you can go to Target B. Within that four-minute flight time, there would be time to adjust to go to Target B.”

AFRL, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and weapons manufacturers are collaborating to create such a network, but Genatempo said he hasn’t taken the step of offering a company a contract to install it.

[popcorn]

I recall rrading an article last year on swarm logic and mention was made.of SDB-2 as possibly having such capability down the road.

[weasel1962]

Yet the USAF picked the dual shot LSDB for the MQ-9 before the SDB II...

Don't think the LSDB is perfect, it can't do zero-visibility but its certainly a scale up from the GBU-39A. My understanding is the USAF has been using the LSDB with the sniper pod and that's been positive feedback thus far.

[weasel1962]

Which leaves the host aircraft completely in the dark about your munitions plans; the power required to transmit
back is well beyond what SDB can do onboard.

One-way is clearly not what they want or even what they have:

But what if the weapons could think through those steps on their own and send feedback to other munitions and airmen?

“The first two of us that got here four minutes earlier, we actually took out this target,” Genatempo said, describing how weapons could chart out attacks. “So the two of you that were coming in behind us just to make sure, you can go to Target B. Within that four-minute flight time, there would be time to adjust to go to Target B.”

AFRL, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and weapons manufacturers are collaborating to create such a network, but Genatempo said he hasn’t taken the step of offering a company a contract to install it.

That's one of the things I was thinking. If the first ones hit, its just a simple strategy to revise the target cords for the follow up. That's something I think even the GPS SDB can achieve.

[marauder2048]

Yet the USAF picked the dual shot LSDB for the MQ-9 before the SDB II...

You mean they selected LSDB over a weapon that hadn't (and hasn't) even IOC'ed? Shock.
Sacrificing a volume market like F-35 for the MQ-9/AC-130 niche market is silly in any event.

Don't think the LSDB is perfect, it can't do zero-visibility but its certainly a scale up from the GBU-39A. My understanding is the USAF has been using the LSDB with the sniper pod and that's been positive feedback thus far.

Why is the pod relevant? LSDB isn't dependent on lead-laser.
And it's practically an AFSOC exclusive weapon so unless there's buddy-lasing going on this isn't fast jet usage.

[marauder2048]

That's one of the things I was thinking. If the first ones hit, its just a simple strategy to revise the target cords for the follow up. That's something I think even the GPS SDB can achieve.

Provided you ignore the whole communicating back to airmen thing i.e. battle damage assessment and weapons status.
"four minutes earlier" at typical sub-sonic munitions speed is ~40 miles.
That's likely still going to require more power than SDB I can handle.

And quite how a weapon like SDB I without a seeker does hit assessment in the GPS denied
environment envisioned is mysterious.

[kimjongnumbaun]

That's one of the things I was thinking. If the first ones hit, its just a simple strategy to revise the target cords for the follow up. That's something I think even the GPS SDB can achieve.

Provided you ignore the whole communicating back to airmen thing i.e. battle damage assessment and weapons status.
"four minutes earlier" at typical sub-sonic munitions speed is ~40 miles.
That's likely still going to require more power than SDB I can handle.

And quite how a weapon like SDB I without a seeker does hit assessment in the GPS denied
environment envisioned is mysterious.

The plane and the SBD both have INS. I'm guessing the CEP for INS is classified, but I know it's good enough to kill whatever you're shooting at.

[gc]

Nope. I can tell you for sure that the drift of INS without GPS updated is significant. With the SDB warhead size, a kill is not possible without a terminal seeker.

[kimjongnumbaun]

Nope. I can tell you for sure that the drift of INS without GPS updated is significant. With the SDB warhead size, a kill is not possible without a terminal seeker.

Point or area target? The SBD warhead and blast radius is enough to take out any area target with INS, unless we are talking dismounteds.

[SpudmanWP]

Drift all depends on range, speed, and altitude when dropped.

CEP from 40k @ m.06 and 40+nmi away is a hell of a lot different than 1 mile @ 10k.

[weasel1962]

Even Jdams are getting <6m for ce50 performance in ins only mode in terms of horizontal target accuracy.

[kimjongnumbaun]

Drift all depends on range, speed, and altitude when dropped.

CEP from 40k @ m.06 and 40+nmi away is a hell of a lot different than 1 mile @ 10k.

The CEP doesn’t change based on distance. As long as INS is working, the guaranteed CEP is what it is. Every time I’ve seen it deliver higher accuracy in a war zone than the brochure number.

[SpudmanWP]

CEP depends on the range as the INS is not perfect. If the INS were perfect, you would not need GPS.

If GPS data is denied, the JDAM will achieve a 30-meter CEP or less for free flight times up to 100 seconds with a GPS quality handoff from the aircraft.

https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets ... bu-313238/

A JDAM dropped within 5 miles of a target that is on a ballistic path only specs a 30 meter CEP for 100 seconds, basically 1.5 minutes. A gliding SDB that is dropped from 40+ miles away will not maintain it's GPS-Denied CEP for the entire flight. That flight time can be over 4.5 minutes. Using a conservative .03 CEP per second of flight and not even including the increased INS errors introduced in a gliding flight model, a 4.5 minute flight-time CEP in a GPS-Denied environment would be at least 80 meters.

https://sldinfo.com/2010/03/weapons-dev ... i-block-9/