F-35 Fifth Gen and new way of thinking

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

rheonomic

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 667
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 03:44

Unread post09 Sep 2017, 17:44

blindpilot wrote:Massive amounts of distributed decisions and actions across the web of networks is not exactly "in Kansas any more, Toto." We'll need to have a controlled manner of pushing information into the cloud, and managing the responses pulling data from it, that will not be a direct chain of command direction.


And then, what do you do when the network is faulty? How do you deal with latency in the information presented? Can you provide assurance on the data and systems in the network, and prevent the enemy from manipulating it via information warfare? To degrade the advantage of the network it's probably sufficient for them to damage trust in the network.

How do you avoid people becoming reliant on the unlimited, "perfect" flow on information?
"You could do that, but it would be wrong."
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1222
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post09 Sep 2017, 18:52

count_to_10 wrote:... Chances are, it will look a bit like Uber, ...


That simple aside highlights what is changing in a simple and stark manner. The green 2Lt says, "Well Uber does it this way," and the Major answers, "What's an Uber?" That echoes the description of training in the F-22 that Berke spoke of.

It's a culture shift along with new approach. (and that night the Major takes Uber home, and leaves his car in the parking lot, because he realizes that he has a lot to learn.)

MHO,
BP
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1222
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post09 Sep 2017, 19:21

rheonomic wrote:...

.. what do you do when the network is faulty? ... latency in the information presented? ... assurance on the data and systems in the network, ... information warfare? To degrade ... damage trust in the network... people becoming reliant on .., "perfect" ... information?


When I first started downloading my Airline boarding pass onto my Samsung S-4, I used to print out a paper copy at home, "just in case". As I used it I began to realize that the system actually keyed on the Pass Code ("XK52U6" or whatever.) If I had that I didn't even need a pass. The security, gate check, etc. people could just type it in and I would still be allowed to fly. They knew who I was, my birthdate, the rest of my itinerary, even if my phone died.

Since then I have always just used the smart phone, and I never needed a paper pass. Now if the airline system servers go down ... well I have bigger problems than my boarding pass ... which is also something to ponder. The CONOPS will need procedures for that.

But those exists as well. I participated in an evacuation of all US aircraft from Kadena in a few short hours, and those procedures including pouring pilots from the O-Club bar into the back of flight line pickups, and aircraft flew with known maintenance problems (our crew chief boarded our plane with parts in a bag and a box for takeoff). Not sure how safe that was, but it worked and happened as if it was well rehearsed.

But your point is well made.

FWIW,
BP
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23319
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post09 Sep 2017, 22:14

Perhaps this long SLDinfo article with PDF? addresses some issues: [best read at source - graphic for context below]
The Maritime Services, the Allies and Shaping the Kill Web 06 Sep 2017
http://www.sldinfo.com/the-maritime-ser ... -kill-web/

Graphic: http://www.sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploa ... espace.jpg

3.42Mb PDF link is at end of article at above URL.
Attachments
OpPrevEXbattlespace.gif
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1360
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post14 Sep 2017, 07:42

popcorn wrote:F-35s tag team with F-22s for boost phase intercept of ballistic missile launches. DAS provides wide area sensor coverage and once it detects a launch high-flying Raptors use AIM-120s to take them out. F-35s get to deal with the TELs.


Superficially it looks like a great idea, except you are duplicating an expensive and adequately functioning capability in SM3 ... in a Joint engagement force - why? It works, and the debris end up in space, then the sea.

Plus F-22A have a job to do and the near borders are China and Russia - they have to stick to their knitting.

Plus if you have 4 to 8 F-35 over DPRK airspace they can see into all the valleys and spot any new contact in near real time, and they may not classify it as a suspected TEL immediately, but give it a minute, and an EOTS image will confirm it. Then when confirmed drop SDB on moving target.

In 2006 it was necessary for IDF to follow the launchers of rockets back to their base hide out the reload, then kill them. With 5th gen you just point the arrow of time backward, and have a look at where that TEL first appeared in the data track, then go look for its LAIR and hit with 5k bomb, rinse, repeat.

The F-35 + SDB is the world's best pre-boost-phase interceptor. Won't probably need SM3s.

F-35 is not mere Airpower, F35 is Datapower. That with distributed Joint weapons is the key.

Combine MDF system with real world data, for US, Allied and mobile LHD and Carrier F-35s aircraft, and thus build a real-time global data picture.

Said data picture improves the MDF, the MDF is built into the SIM engine for training the F-35 Crews, and extended to Air Ground, Sea and Space sim, using same data and engine, to create a global sim to create a massively parallel Global Joint Operations Paradigm, Global Joint Experimentation sim environ, Global Joint Allied Training tool, Global Battle Planning tool, and Weapon Requirement development tool, to test concepts of operations before building an implementing them in the real world.

That BP, is how you will bring it about, step by step.

I am NOT in favour of 5th gen data being used as an excuse for 'open' systems and excessive data access. Need to know only. Mainframe with isolated terminals for tasks and coordinates/targets and a tactical data display that you can not alter, and can be turned off in the event of overrun of forces.

i.e. like what probably exists right now.

DPRK soldier with claw hammer hits junior officer's toes until he provides access. They have access, they better not be able to change things or see everything on that display or terminal. Else they will form small teams to do just that, armed with a hammer.

The data links are the string in the bow, thankfully they're so secure they struggle to give data to teenager aircraft.

I LIKE that! This is good. The system will probably stay up.

The computers attached to the very secure datalinks are the obvious targets, they will be attacked. Why make it easier than it needs to be? Open systems must take a back seat to ensuring data security, in my (defensive conservative) view. I am all for maximising hitting, but let's not lose sight of the big picture.

This is State on State BIFFO! Not COIN.

Why insert a few people in an F-35B? To mess with their heads? Make a headline? NAH!

I want to blow their head off. If I just "mess" with their head, they will not surrender, but if I blow their head off they do not need to surrender. If I keep doing that, the ones with their head still on, will decide sooner or later, that they may like to surrender instead.

You will be ordered to WIN.

Wagon wheel concept looks good, in conjunction with F-35s over NORK proper.
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1222
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post14 Sep 2017, 08:34

element1loop wrote:...Open systems must take a back seat to ensuring data security, in my (defensive conservative) view. I am all for maximising hitting, but let's not lose sight of the big picture.


Good summary, IMHO. These are exactly the questions that have to be washed, rinsed and dried, to decide how we use the new potential. That will take time, "what if" 'ing, and actual experience in trying approaches, including approaches that "Well that didn't work!"

The best we can say in that regard, is that we have been trying to mix and match F-15s F-16's and F-117s, implement F-22s, using JSTARS etc. for a fairly long time now, the US does have a significant head start in trying to wade through those questions. Building a model airplane(ie. PAK FA, J-20) does not a CONOPS make. You have to fly it ... a lot.

MHO,
BP
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7703
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post14 Sep 2017, 11:00

element1loop wrote:
Superficially it looks like a great idea, except you are duplicating an expensive and adequately functioning capability in SM3 ... in a Joint engagement force - why? It works, and the debris end up in space, then the sea.

If you are suggesting the SM-3 will have the ability to do boost phase intercepts, then I'd appreciate a source stating this is feasible. It was designed for mid-course intercept using a kinetic impactor that has no propulsion and only has thrusters to steer it into the path of an oncoming warhead. Not something you would use to chase down a BM accelerating away from you.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3270
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post14 Sep 2017, 15:42

popcorn wrote:
element1loop wrote:
Superficially it looks like a great idea, except you are duplicating an expensive and adequately functioning capability in SM3 ... in a Joint engagement force - why? It works, and the debris end up in space, then the sea.

If you are suggesting the SM-3 will have the ability to do boost phase intercepts, then I'd appreciate a source stating this is feasible. It was designed for mid-course intercept using a kinetic impactor that has no propulsion and only has thrusters to steer it into the path of an oncoming warhead. Not something you would use to chase down a BM accelerating away from you.

SM3 is exo-atmospheric only. The SM6 on the other hand, might be able to be used.
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2177
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post14 Sep 2017, 15:49

How close would the SM6 launch platform have to be to the missile launch site to be able to make a boost-phase intercept?
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1222
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post14 Sep 2017, 18:14

steve2267 wrote:How close would the SM6 launch platform have to be to the missile launch site to be able to make a boost-phase intercept?


Close enough that it would be a tail chase, even at 100-200 miles away. I'm not sure a Standard Missile could pull off a tail chase intercept, considering the speed of the BM by the time the targeting data is available. At the least you've lost the "boost" part of the boost phase and might as well wait till it reaches "mid-course," top of the arch.

I read element's comment as saying that if the current mid course anti-missile tech works (an if that needs examining) then creating an alternate "boost" approach may be redundant. Redundancy brings with it costs and risks. I lean with Popcorn here, in that the costs should be close to zero. We have the data whether we respond or not. The AMRAAMs likely can do the job right "out of the box." That doesn't mean that we don't look at the risk of what I called "Pushing data into the cloud," and over tasking resources unnecessarily. Element is right about that.

But these are all exactly the type questions I opened the thread for, and frankly "we" (current Air Force's/Navy/Joint) don't have all those answers "Yet." But folks like the USMC are running full speed to find the answers.

MHO,
BP

PS- Long ago in a galaxy far away, I was a mission qualed Missile Warning Officer (and other jobs) in Cheyenne Mountain. (That's how I ended up in Colorado). Initial first look launch information, second sensor confirmation, and targeting data resolution is not instantaneous. It's an evolving information flow. Yes we knew the instant a launch happened, and yes we could cue secondary sensors, and yes we knew it PROBABLY was a missile launch. "Probably" is the operative word here. And we also have set off alarms for Sunrises and Moon rises, in the past. The BM is going pretty fast by the time you are sure, even with rapid computing.
Last edited by blindpilot on 15 Sep 2017, 01:51, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3270
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post14 Sep 2017, 19:00

steve2267 wrote:How close would the SM6 launch platform have to be to the missile launch site to be able to make a boost-phase intercept?

I'm not sure if it could. I was merely pointing out that the SM3 absolutely can't, rather than trying to speculate about the SM6. The best option is orbiting aircraft with AMRAAM/NCADE.
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1222
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post14 Sep 2017, 19:50

Full disclosure.
blindpilot wrote:PS- Long ago in a galaxy far away, I was a mission qualed Missile Warning Officer (and other jobs) in Cheyenne Mountain. (That's how I ended up in Colorado).

Note: From Wiki (FWIW) "In the U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force, ... Award of the MSM to company grade officers in pay grades O-1 through O-3 (2d lieutenant, 1st lieutenant, captain),... is rare and typically by exception."

This noted. My background on the question, along with other US Space Command, blue suit and contractor work, includes.
MSM BP- -.jpg
Rare perhaps but O-3 MSMs do exist

FWIW per MHO,
BP
Last edited by blindpilot on 14 Sep 2017, 20:02, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1222
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post14 Sep 2017, 19:53

wrightwing wrote:... The best option is orbiting aircraft with AMRAAM/NCADE.


I would tend to agree but Element's cautions are not to be lightly taken. Which is the heart of 5th Gen discussion. We are only beginning to understand what the capabilities can mean, and wonder what that should look like.

I'd like to see a basic AMRAAM 120D test before committing to NCADE. Money spent on hit-to-kill might bring next to no additional benefit. see the SM-6 testing they did. https://news.usni.org/2016/12/15/mda-co ... nched-sm-6 “The SM-6 missile uses an explosive warhead to defeat ballistic missile threats, differing from other missile defense interceptors, such as the Standard Missile-3, which use non-explosive hit-to-kill technology”

MHO,
BP
Last edited by blindpilot on 14 Sep 2017, 20:18, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23319
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post14 Sep 2017, 19:58

blindpilot wrote:Full disclosure.
blindpilot wrote:PS- Long ago in a galaxy far away, I was a mission qualed Missile Warning Officer (and other jobs) in Cheyenne Mountain. (That's how I ended up in Colorado).

Note: From Wiki (FWIW) "In the U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force, ... Award of the MSM to company grade officers in pay grades O-1 through O-3 (2d lieutenant, 1st lieutenant, captain),... is rare and typically by exception."

This noted. My background on the question, along with other US Space Command, blue suit and contractor work, includes.
FWIW per MHO,
BP

:mrgreen: :applause: Colorado - what a nice place it is too - glad you are not in Kansas anymore ChemoSavvy (Ke-mo sah-bee) :notworthy: :mrgreen:
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7703
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post15 Sep 2017, 00:19

wrightwing wrote:
steve2267 wrote:How close would the SM6 launch platform have to be to the missile launch site to be able to make a boost-phase intercept?

I'm not sure if it could. I was merely pointing out that the SM3 absolutely can't, rather than trying to speculate about the SM6. The best option is orbiting aircraft with AMRAAM/NCADE.

F-35/F-22/AMRAAM solution for BMD exists today and in the not-so-distant future could integrate with a UAV-based system for greater redundancy/coverage.
https://www.hudson.org/research/12321-t ... oost-stage
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests