AARGM-ER cleared for EMD [for F-35A/C & other aircraft]

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

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5346
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post09 Apr 2019, 17:42

marauder2048 wrote:
squirrelshoes wrote:Here is a video of a JSOW-A, it has a timestamp running that shows the time from submuntion dispersal to striking the ground is less than 5 seconds.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KapgbVRPjaI

IMO it takes a suspension of disbelief to consider a gun (or even many guns) having any effect on that cloud of 145 submunitions, regardless of how fancy the ammunition. It's what hornetfinn said, you either hit the JSOW container unit before it releases payload or you're toast.



Which implies a dispense altitude in the 600 feet range; typical dispense altitudes for JSOW-A were around 3000 feet.


For the bus to avoid getting killed before it dispenses it needs to release the submunitions miles before impact. Obviously this means smart, maneuverable sub-munitions. Think ATACMS/BAT.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8382
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post09 Apr 2019, 18:33

The dispense altitude will depend on how large an impact zone you are looking for. Don't forget that the JSOW is an LO platform that will be very hard to detect & track before it released it's payload.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Online

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2773
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post10 Apr 2019, 08:25

viper12 wrote:Hyvææ pæivææ ! (spoken (nearly) like a true Finn :mrgreen: )

Just to be sure, what's RWS in this context ?


Hyvää päivää sinullekin! :D

RWS in this context means Remote Weapons Station. Basically a small unmanned turret equipped with small to medium caliber weapons and thermal/optical sights.
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 756
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post10 Apr 2019, 19:24

Submunitions are typically ejected with a combination of pyrotechnics and either direct or indirect (think airbag)
contact with a hot gas generator. So they are pretty warm when first ejected.

Because of the UAV threat, you're starting to see more RWS capable of being directed by small radars.
This is the Blighter A400 which if you look at the data sheet is more than capable of tracking lots of slow moving
metallic cans at tactically useful ranges.

Then there's firing doctrine; pattern fire is generally what's called for in this situation particularly if you have a
proximity round.
Attachments
rws-with-radar.jpg
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3223
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post10 Apr 2019, 20:58

There isn't a cannon in existence, that can stop hundreds of incoming projectiles, regardless of how well the projectiles are tracked.
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 756
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post10 Apr 2019, 22:06

I don't think it's going to be the case of single cannon vs threat cloud given the number of RWS stations
that can accommodate the LW30 and the number of the C-UAS vehicle mounted radars out there.

And we haven't started in on APS.

So my view on the utility slow, non-stealthy weapons against threats equipped with all of the above is not favorable.

Aside from AARGM-ER, JSOW-C-1 would be a useful bus for a weapon with a high-speed terminal stage.

I'll also note that there's already money to add seekers to TACMS and GMLRS-ER for land-attack against
moving targets; their high approach velocities are harder for terminal systems to counter.
Offline

squirrelshoes

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 101
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2016, 23:53

Unread post12 Apr 2019, 01:20

marauder2048 wrote:I don't think it's going to be the case of single cannon vs threat cloud given the number of RWS stations that can accommodate the LW30 and the number of the C-UAS vehicle mounted radars out there.

So the IADS elements are immune from submunitions because each will have a fleet of vehicles parked around them with advanced gun systems that can somehow coordinate and each pick out different submunitions to engage? Still skeptical.

marauder2048 wrote:So my view on the utility slow, non-stealthy weapons against threats equipped with all of the above is not favorable.
It isn't physically possible to engage 145 slow, non-stealthy, soda can sized objects using gunfire especially with such a small window of opportunity.
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 756
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post12 Apr 2019, 02:50

squirrelshoes wrote:So the IADS elements are immune from submunitions because each will have a fleet of vehicles parked around them with advanced gun systems that can somehow coordinate and each pick out different submunitions to engage? Still skeptical.


I never claimed immunity just reduced utility. By virtue of this and APS.

Most of the C-UAS radars of this type are typically integrated into SHORAD networks; FAAD C2 in the US.
The coordination required here is on par with a multi-gun C-RAM engagement which is a combat reality
but more relaxed in some ways since you aren't reliant on body-to-body contact to deflect, damage or destroy
thick-walled artillery shells.

But there's nothing particularly advanced about the LW30 or the C-UAS radars.
You might call a medium caliber proximity round advanced but it's well within the state-of-the-art.

squirrelshoes wrote:It isn't physically possible to engage 145 slow, non-stealthy, soda can sized objects using gunfire especially with such a small window of opportunity.


Given about 30 seconds time-of-flight from the typical dispensing altitude. Yeah. You have lots of time.
The lower the dispense altitude, the less area of uncertainty a cluster munition system can cover which
tends to require greater expenditure of munitions. The point of JSOW is standoff so you have the time-of-flight
of the weapon + the time of flight of the sub-munitions which given the typical standoff range means
there's a lot of area to cover. Hence the higher dispense altitudes.
Offline

squirrelshoes

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 101
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2016, 23:53

Unread post12 Apr 2019, 05:10

marauder2048 wrote:I never claimed immunity just reduced utility. By virtue of this and APS.

You said: "These slow-moving sub-munitions aren't going to have much utility against modern SPAAGs"

To me that implies a belief they aren't a threat to them.

marauder2048 wrote:Most of the C-UAS radars of this type are typically integrated into SHORAD networks; FAAD C2 in the US.
The coordination required here is on par with a multi-gun C-RAM engagement which is a combat reality
but more relaxed in some ways since you aren't reliant on body-to-body contact to deflect, damage or destroy
thick-walled artillery shells.

A C-RAM engagement is targeting a single incoming round come in on a ballistic trajectory, that doesn't seem to be same coordination to engage 145 rounds popping into existence on a downward trajectory that might have less than 5 seconds until impact.

squirrelshoes wrote:Given about 30 seconds time-of-flight from the typical dispensing altitude. Yeah. You have lots of time. The lower the dispense altitude, the less area of uncertainty a cluster munition system can cover which
tends to require greater expenditure of munitions. The point of JSOW is standoff so you have the time-of-flight
of the weapon + the time of flight of the sub-munitions which given the typical standoff range means
there's a lot of area to cover. Hence the higher dispense altitudes.

You keep talking about this typical dispensing altitude but as others pointed out it depends on what you're trying to hit. If a particular IADS element is the target it could well be a lower burst just like you saw in the video where there was less than five seconds from from burst until impact. Higher burst has more utility for convoys of vehicles and other dispersed targets. Do you have a source for this 30 seconds thing, specifically for SEAD/DEAD role?

Even if it was 30 seconds how many submunitions do you really believe could be targeted by a gun given time to track, calculate firing solution, physically aim the weapon, and confirm a shoot down before moving on to the next?
Online

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2773
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post12 Apr 2019, 07:08

There is so simple and inexpensive counter to any gun based defence system and that is launching multiple weapons against one target. Launching say 4 JSOWs against one AD target (like SPAAG) is going to result in almost 600 cluster munitions at once. How about 2 bombs releasing their load at 3,000 ft and 2 bombs doing the same at 500 feet?

One real problem with such gun defence is that it requires a lot of vehicles parked near each other just to protect one AD system. Gun systems have short range to begin with and accuracy goes down with range meaning a lot more rounds need to be fired to hit targets. 30 mm prox fuze has very short effective range as it simply does not contain much explosives or fragments. So it doesn't really matter if they shoot one burst against single submunition at a time or if they fire in pattern to cover a large area at once. The kill probability per round will be very low in any case and a very large number of guns is needed and parked in a very small geographical area. All those vehicles also need to be in suitable overlapping firing positions with all systems up and running at the time the submunitions are released. That sounds like a juicy target to me.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5346
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post12 Apr 2019, 12:32

The notion that a cloud of 100+ submunitions is going to get shot down with guns is laughable. You need directed energy weapons for that, with little need to lead the target and zero time of flight. Even then it isn't instant. The most THEL ever tried to engage simultaneously was five. FIVE. And that was with a laser. Just go watch C-RAM shooting at targets. Now multiply that by 100+. To defend ONE target.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 543
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post12 Apr 2019, 15:34

sferrin wrote:The notion that a cloud of 100+ submunitions is going to get shot down with guns is laughable. ... Just go watch C-RAM shooting at targets. Now multiply that by 100+. To defend ONE target.


He's gonna say that 20mm don't have proxy fuzes :D



Marauder, I gotta say that nobody on this thread so far agrees with you even remotely that SPAAGs can successfully defend against submunitions. Those include people who served with a weapon system like this:


A not something as flimsy as M230, just lookat the dispersion:


Besides, if what you say is true, and a couple of RWS can take care of 140+ submunitions, what chance does a single missile have? :devil:

Oh and BTW I don't know a single APS in service that 1) protects from arial attack 2) ismeant to defend against several projectiles coming from the same sector.
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8382
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post12 Apr 2019, 16:34

Remember that nothing works alone.

If the defensible nature of the target was a serious enough threat to it's success, then just add a little icing on the cake in the form of some standoff jamming or a MALD-J.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 756
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post12 Apr 2019, 18:36

hythelday wrote:
sferrin wrote:The notion that a cloud of 100+ submunitions is going to get shot down with guns is laughable. ... Just go watch C-RAM shooting at targets. Now multiply that by 100+. To defend ONE target.


He's gonna say that 20mm don't have proxy fuzes :D


They have self-destruct fuzes. Mainly to prevent UOX from the rounds that miss.


hythelday wrote:A not something as flimsy as M230, just lookat the dispersion:


Dispersion is desirable for pattern fire.

hythelday wrote:Besides, if what you say is true, and a couple of RWS can take care of 140+ submunitions, what chance does a single missile have? :devil:


Quite a good chance since the approach velocity is much faster.

hythelday wrote:
Oh and BTW I don't know a single APS in service that 1) protects from arial attack 2) ismeant to defend against several projectiles coming from the same sector.


They protect against top attack munitions.
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 756
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post12 Apr 2019, 21:27

hornetfinn wrote:There is so simple and inexpensive counter to any gun based defence system and that is launching multiple weapons against one target. Launching say 4 JSOWs against one AD target (like SPAAG) is going to result in almost 600 cluster munitions at once. How about 2 bombs releasing their load at 3,000 ft and 2 bombs doing the same at 500 feet?


So that's all of the JSOWs a two-ship formation of F-35s can carry. For a single emitter.

hornetfinn wrote:One real problem with such gun defence is that it requires a lot of vehicles parked near each other just to protect one AD system. Gun systems have short range to begin with and accuracy goes down with range meaning a lot more rounds need to be fired to hit targets. 30 mm prox fuze has very short effective range as it simply does not contain much explosives or fragments. So it doesn't really matter if they shoot one burst against single submunition at a time or if they fire in pattern to cover a large area at once. The kill probability per round will be very low in any case and a very large number of guns is needed and parked in a very small geographical area. All those vehicles also need to be in suitable overlapping firing positions with all systems up and running at the time the submunitions are released. That sounds like a juicy target to me.


Judging by the HEI-T round, the effective radius is around 5 m. That's not very short.

You don't need to kill a submunition; deflection is sufficient since it can only kill a vehicle protected by
the most basic B-kit armor by direct contact.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests