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 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6038
  • 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

Banned

  • Posts: 187
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2017, 09:35

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 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6038
  • 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

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1404
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

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 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6038
  • 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: 139
  • 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

Banned

  • Posts: 187
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2017, 09:35

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: 139
  • 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

Banned

  • Posts: 187
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2017, 09:35

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 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7707
  • 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 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3343
  • 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

markithere

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 65
  • Joined: 25 Mar 2009, 17:26

Unread post23 Oct 2018, 14:52

Since wireless network printers are not and don’t need to be hack proof ( maybe they do need to be hack proof ) then I would think using the 4 ship flight wing spare computational power might be able to bruit force hack into the targeted network and print from the printers. The F-35 could then send pages to print for a desired effect. What that might be the situation would determine. Maybe as a message to someone? Or to put fear into recipients? My point is this. If you have spare cpu cycles either single ship or 4 ship combined cpu cycles then why not have the app available for this or other network related attacks or control available?

While you are in the printer/copier you could simultaneously upload, if sensors are sensitive enough, the images of all or targeted parts of documents ever printed from that printer/copier to the plane.

If sensors are not that sensitive you could launch a WiFi configured miniature drone to land on target building and boost the signal.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3343
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post24 Oct 2018, 01:00

You don't need a 4 ship, to introduce malware in an electronic attack.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1404
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post24 Oct 2018, 03:30

markithere wrote:Since wireless network printers are not and don’t need to be hack proof ( maybe they do need to be hack proof ) then I would think using the 4 ship flight wing spare computational power might be able to bruit force hack into the targeted network and print from the printers.


Or take just down an electrical substation and turn everything off.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

markithere

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 65
  • Joined: 25 Mar 2009, 17:26

Unread post09 Nov 2018, 17:52

I am not sure how useful this would be however here it is. If we know the amount of certain types of weapons an enemy has would there be any benefit in showing it on the screen in such away as if they have 10 AAA in inventory and the plane spots 6 of them could there be a benefit for the pilot knowing that he can target and destroy 60% of the enemy’s resources? Would seeing this have helped with tactics for any of you squadron commanders of flight wings? Forgive me if I stated the wing structure incorrectly. Now if you think they have 10 but the sensors show 15 would knowing this or seeing this discrepancy help commanders?
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests