F-35 unconventional tactics - your ideas?

F-35 Armament, fuel tanks, internal and external hardpoints, loadouts, and other stores.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5483
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post20 Jan 2018, 16:05

vilters wrote:
What's the future of AWACS (as we know it now) with the modern avionix in the newer fighters.
But then again, when they "grow" into full bore Command and Control centers as primary function?



Its actually becoming more decentralized, not less.

They stay a "high value target" worth the risk to invent "out of the box" tactics.


And your idea wouldnt work. no matter how many buzzwords and phrases you use. Maximize paradigms out of the box thinking!

Euh, Somebody got brown underpants along the way? => Stall speed of the F-16 at 120 kts? => Ahunm . . . . . .
What's on your wings? Bombs and tanks?


Missiles are on the wings, and lots of fuel.

On such a mission, I"ll find me a block 10-15 at the most, have gun, drum, transponder and all other "dead" weight removed, and with a cg as far aft as possible. (A block 5 would be the lightest, but they have the small tails.)
Give some, take some.


And it still won't be able to pull 100 knots.

Everytime you come up with some stupid scheme here, that makes you sound like a Teenager who thinks Xbox is real life, someone points out the probelems, then you double down.

Then you act like you are superior for thinking up something different that is not feasible. But its different!

Then people point out just how full of crap you are, and you back down until the next vilters idea crops up. You do it over and over, and crown yourself some deep thinker.

Is this what you need to do to feel special vilters? make up crap on the internet?

Image

Vilters anyone can think of unconventional tactics that dont work. thats easy.

The primary goal is to get the AWACS (or equivalent high value asset) . Getting home is optional.
That's what "thinking like a terrorist" is all about, and its completely outside of your "comfort zones".
Start thinking like a terrorist who's on a mission.


My comfort zone is actual phyics. my box is actual physics. No amount of Buzzword phrases (the irony of you using these phrases to be unique when I've been hearing "think like a terrorist" since 1999, is amazing where have you been the last 20 years boyo?)


Sometimes, its hard to believe believe how conservative you guys are over here.
It's not behind a desk that you win a war, but by individual initiative and taking calculated risks from time to time.


Hey Vilters Im a Marine, an infantry men, a disabled vet, and a veteran of the war on terror. Behind a desk?

Who do you think you are talking to Mr belgium air force in the 1980s??? You want to lecture me on terrorists?


Listen carefully. Just because you came up with an idea that is different, and we said it wouldn't work, doesn't mean we can't comprehend anything that is not in a manual, so stop acting like a snob, and don't insult people who actually served in real wars against real terrorists. You act like you are some brilliant misunderstood thinker. Youre not. Youre a dolt, who given the background you claim should know better.

I'm beginning to wonder if you have been lying about your creditionals completely. I just figured you were one of those guys they kept in a room full of computers, but I'm begining to think you werent even that.

On the ground we have suicide bombers who blow themselves up for whatever the reason they believe in.
In WW2 we got the Kamikaze pilots. Same thing, different tool.
You only have to get someone mad enouch to do it.

And what's more (again thinking like the "bad" guy).

You get twice the price money. The AWACS and the 72 virgins. :devil: (But you can put those on hold), because a good pilot will land.


LOL wow vilters its just amazing how full of it you really are. You realize there are people on this forum who have done war games and actually played as OPFOR/Terrorists? I have. Unconventionality is encouraged, but if you do silly stuff that doesn't work, you die easy and its bad training. No one learns that way.

We are actually trying to pull back all the "Think like a terrorist" mindset that has been dominating the military since 2001. WE are actaully trying to get back to conventional tactics. Weird things like combined arms operations against entrenched foes etc.

you don't kill an AWACs by crashing an F-16 into a train LOL

Don't be so "open minded" your brains fall out! Don't get it twisted vilters, You aren't some swashbuckling red force commander Van Riper disciple. Youre just an idiot who doesn't understand what a stall is.
Last edited by XanderCrews on 20 Jan 2018, 16:15, edited 1 time in total.
Choose Crews
Offline

monkeypilot

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 188
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2017, 09:35
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post20 Jan 2018, 16:14

Name some, I'll wait. In fact I think there is only one:


Rafale C. Every show. F-18 probably also
Last edited by monkeypilot on 20 Jan 2018, 16:19, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5483
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post20 Jan 2018, 16:16

monkeypilot wrote:
Name some, I'll wait. In fact I think there is only one:


Rafale C. Every show.



yep. Airshows.

F-18 probably also


Nope.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 569
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 01:51

monkeypilot wrote:In fact we are walking at a pretty fast pace towards a "demarialization" of AWAS into a network (with much fewer nodes) of assets (see F-35, Rafale F4, EFCAS etc.).

AWACS can (and have been) sneaked in, and still are very important and powerful for any modern airforce. For how long is another subject.


Yes, that's what I meant, a network conduit and network multifunction enabler (like so many others now, manned and unmanned, and changing fast) but foreseeably not so vital from say 2025 onwards.

Important, yes, but you can still dominate without it. Someone above, evoked the 1980s view that taking down the AEW&C would reduce fighter capability by 50% ... not anymore ... that ship sailed, that was my meaning.

Thus going after supports is desperate, misguided, not going to get disproportionate capability degradation in a battle. It will degrade, but not in a precipitous battle-winning way.

Thus not as critical, not as high-value in that sense, and you can operate efficently in battle without it, so is the baddie so well served, looking for results that way?

Nah.

______________________
As for the unrelated stuff about suicide tactics, these chaps are not exactly the brightest, best trained or most skilled, they are dumb bombs. Did the Rising Sun empire win doing that? It was desperation, one step above a scorched-earth tactial reteat. An 'airforce' that does stuff like that has already lost ... very desperate ... and is being lead by morons.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5483
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 15:34

Even if you lose A, A as in ONE. We fly more in. That's why we built more than one of them. If you fly them non stop they can be there in a half day from CONUS.

I'm a little amazed at the folks who talk about war with Russia or China and fret about individual losses. These wars would be massive. You can't expect to not take some hits and have set backs. Losing individual aircraft will be the least of our worries

And if it's a "smaller war" like say against Iran or NK, losing an AWACs also won't effect the outcome
Choose Crews
Offline

tailgate

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 117
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2017, 02:46

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 16:22

Greets Xander, I agree with your assessment but also offer.......even if you were able to "take down" a AWACS/JSTARS, the war won't stop. Can't speak for the 35 but the 22 alone can act as a mini AWACS to a point. These platforms are not an end all/ be all. They make things a whole lot easier, but no means would strategic/tactical initiatives stop for any reason.
Offline

monkeypilot

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 188
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2017, 09:35
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 16:54

tailgate wrote:Greets Xander, I agree with your assessment but also offer.......even if you were able to "take down" a AWACS/JSTARS, the war won't stop. Can't speak for the 35 but the 22 alone can act as a mini AWACS to a point. These platforms are not an end all/ be all. They make things a whole lot easier, but no means would strategic/tactical initiatives stop for any reason.


But how can F-22 assign targets and play mission commander role without L-16 emitting capability? I know the F-35 is MC qualified, but??? Or what do you mean by acting like a mini C2?
Offline

tailgate

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 117
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2017, 02:46

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 18:14

The F-22's ability to operate close to the battlefield gives the aircraft threat detection and identification capability comparative with the RC-135 Rivet Joint, and the ability to function as a "mini-AWACS", though the radar is less powerful than those of dedicated platforms. The F-22 can designate targets for allies, and determine whether two friendly aircraft are targeting the same aircraft. This radar system can sometimes identify targets "many times quicker than the AWACS".[119] The IEEE 1394B bus developed for the F-22 was derived from the commercial IEEE 1394 "FireWire" bus system.[134] In 2007, the F-22's radar was tested as a wireless data transceiver, transmitting data at 548 megabits per second and receiving at gigabit speed, far faster than the Link 16 system.



This is not "new" news. We successfully used this in the ME and elsewhere.
Offline

monkeypilot

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 188
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2017, 09:35
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 19:20

tailgate wrote:The F-22's ability to operate close to the battlefield gives the aircraft threat detection and identification capability comparative with the RC-135 Rivet Joint, and the ability to function as a "mini-AWACS", though the radar is less powerful than those of dedicated platforms. The F-22 can designate targets for allies, and determine whether two friendly aircraft are targeting the same aircraft. This radar system can sometimes identify targets "many times quicker than the AWACS".[119] The IEEE 1394B bus developed for the F-22 was derived from the commercial IEEE 1394 "FireWire" bus system.[134] In 2007, the F-22's radar was tested as a wireless data transceiver, transmitting data at 548 megabits per second and receiving at gigabit speed, far faster than the Link 16 system.



This is not "new" news. We successfully used this in the ME and elsewhere.


Well a friend of mine told me after Trilat exercise (Langley) that F-22 had an awesome SA, even in its six. And that it used to stay at the the back of the courtyard "sending" Rafale or Typhoon on targets. So i guess F-22 can send a type of VMF via its radar? (Both Rafale and Typhoon can receive Jmessages)? Impressive! Thank you so much i was really wondering how they managed to transmit the relevant data. Determine if two allies are targeting the same target is done via L16 i guess?
Thanks again for clarification!
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7160
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post22 Jan 2018, 00:07

In a Northern Edge in Alaska LFE more than a decade back the Raptor proved it's usefulness in detecting threats using terrain for cover that were hidden from AWACS radar.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2660
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post22 Jan 2018, 04:11

monkeypilot wrote:
tailgate wrote:Greets Xander, I agree with your assessment but also offer.......even if you were able to "take down" a AWACS/JSTARS, the war won't stop. Can't speak for the 35 but the 22 alone can act as a mini AWACS to a point. These platforms are not an end all/ be all. They make things a whole lot easier, but no means would strategic/tactical initiatives stop for any reason.


But how can F-22 assign targets and play mission commander role without L-16 emitting capability? I know the F-35 is MC qualified, but??? Or what do you mean by acting like a mini C2?

Voice and BACN.
Offline

lrrpf52

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 29 Mar 2018, 01:52

Unread post16 Apr 2018, 03:26

If I have a helmet fed from fused multi-spectral sensors, with CPU processing speed of over a trillion cps, with one of the world's most capable AESA radars, next gen offensive ECM capabilities, MADL, and 360 spherical SA from those sensors...

The countermeasures for missile launch will be breathtaking. Do the logical thought sequence if you have a TD box on the missile launch, generated by the EOTS/DAS, handed off to the AESA via the CPU. (Cue the video from Cape Canaveral where F-35 EOTS/DAS/APG-81 detected and managed the flight with booster separation from an insane distance.) What can you do about it with what you have onboard? (Don't think 4th Gen typical CM chaff/flare/towed, think "I want to wreck those missiles' brains." i.e. "What would a Sparkvark EWO do if he had what I have?")

That is a game-changer for defensive counter-SAM/IADS tactics, for the ones that survive the initial SEAD. I bring this up first because SAMs are the biggest threat US fixed wing combat aircraft have faced statistically over the last 61 years.


In the air dominance mode: Just think about what you could do with directionally-linked MADL with a 4 ship split into 2s, or a 4 ship on one off-centric approach, and a 2 ship on another. Brutal. Have you seen the F-35 Helmet NAV mode? Now think about the NAV mode features choreographed with cooperative, net-centric A2A in air dominance.

Since you have such a powerful CPU with mission data files that include the threat Ps, you could bloody nose people so viciously, they wouldn't know what hit them, choreographed based on their known flight performance, which the CPU updates in sync with Fire Control as a net, not just a single-ship. That's before even mentioning the Electronic Attack fight.

I imagine fighter pilots in nations who aren't in the F-35 procurement loop gaming this all out right now, frantically thinking, "Blyat! Blyat! They are going to screw us hard no matter what we do!" The demands from their tactical fighter communities are going to be high on their aerospace RDT&E just to try to catch up with 5th Gen.

I suspect the threat nation fighter pilots know more about what the implications are than many in the engineering side of things that actually build components for the F-35. There are geopolitical consequences too, outside of conflict.

If you overlay the 4th Gen air campaigns of 1982 Bekaa Valley and 1991 DS, understanding the roles swarms of drones/AWACS/Threat air G2(no side RWR sensors on Syrian MiG-21s, MiG-23s)/and F-15/F-16 played back then, and now imagine you have F-35s, there is a legit disproportionate overmatch here (even with S-300 or S-400 IADS). The unfairness factor just got much larger.

The Euro partners are going to have fun with the Meteor in this regard. They have a pretty sadistic WEZ/NEZ for a net-centric cooperative air dominance tactics set.

That's "just avionics and weapons", not even factoring in the superior endurance, kinematics, cruising speeds, climb rate, and sustained turn rate at altitude. The threat fighter pilots have to factor that in as well with the old 4th Gen metrics, in a sea of lies about what a dog the F-35 is they pimped with their loyal presstitutes from the Mockingbird brothels.

All I can say is that if I was an Su-35S or Su-57 pilot, this crap would keep me up at night and make me want to look at a career change. It must suck to know you're a TD box before you even taxi to the runway, which was already true for the Syrians in 1982.
Previous

Return to F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests