US military, technology, arms, tactics

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Lockheed delivers laser for AC-130J gunship

Lockheed Martin said in an Oct. 6 release it has finished factory acceptance testing for its Airborne High Energy Laser and has delivered the laser to the Air Force to be integrated with other systems, ground tested, and then flight tested on its newest gunship.

The Ghostrider — the fourth generation and latest model of the Air Force’s AC-130 series of gunships — is already heavily armed with 30mm and 105mm cannons and AGM-176A Griffin missiles and has the ability to carry Hellfire missiles and GBU-39 small-diameter bombs.

But for years, the Air Force has been musing about the possibility of further arming the gunship with a laser.

Now-retired Lt. Gen. Bradley Heithold in 2015 floated the possibility of adding a laser — possibly in place of the 105mm cannon — that could first operate defensively to take down a missile coming for the gunship. Or, Heithold suggested, it could be used offensively, to disable enemy vehicles or aircraft without anyone seeing or hearing anything.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

https://mobile.twitter.com/Ghost_Roboti ... 0570203137 ----->
Latest lethality 6.5 #creedmoor sniper payload from
@SWORDINT. Check out the latest partner payloads
@AUSAorg Wash DC. Keeping US and allied #sof #warfighter equipped with the latest innovations.
@USSOCOM #defense #defence #NationalSecurity #drone #robotics

Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

The first >500 km (non glide body equipped) ground based fires capability since the US left the INF treaty. It will be fielded in the next fiscal year -

Image

LINK

Background - https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/1 ... r-us-army/
Through an other transaction authority agreement, Lockheed will take the Navy’s Raytheon-built SM-6 and Tomahawk missiles to put together a Mid-Range Capability, or MRC, prototype that consists of launchers, missiles and a battery operations center, according to an RCCTO statement.

A variant of the Tomahawk missile was used in a land-based cruise missile capability test last year. The SM-6 is a long-range, anti-air missile that has a surface mode.

This mid-range missile — expected to hit targets at distances beyond 500 kilometers — is to be fielded to an operational battery in fiscal 2023.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

USAF Awards Exosonic Contract for Supersonic UAV Concept with Adversary Air Mission Potential


Image
Low boom supersonic transport company Exosonic, Inc. is proud to announce a Direct to Phase II Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) contract award from the US Air Force (USAF). The contract will fund the development of a low boom supersonic uncrewed aerial vehicle (UAV) demonstrator. Awarded by the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center’s AFWERX, the contract is in partnership with Air Combat Command and the Air Force Research Laboratory, and the Presidential and Executive Airlift Directorate.


Exosonic is excited to develop the first purpose-built supersonic UAV to aid the USAF in its pilot training mission. This vehicle will demonstrate technologies directly relevant to Exosonic’s quiet supersonic airliner and build a short-term path to revenue. The company plans to reinvest the profits from UAV sales to fund future supersonic product developments, such as the airliner....
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Rakesh »

NSA to Pentagon: Lock Down Your Weapons Before Hackers Get to Them
https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... tack-risk/
12 October 2021
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Boeing wasn't completely unserious when they predicted the market for their T-7 family could be in the four figures -

Air Force Wants Up to 400 Advanced Fighter Trainers Like T-7s

The Air Force is seeking “at least 100” and as many as 400 Advanced Tactical Trainer aircraft both to train fighter pilots and to serve as adversary aircraft in training, a role similar to that now performed by the AT-38.

While the Air Force seems likely to be looking at adding to the role of the T-7A, the service did not mention that airplane or its maker, Boeing, in the request for information published Oct. 12.

The service said its RFI is “very similar” to one issued by the Navy for a post-T-45 jet trainer, and to “reduce the burden of crafting a response,” contractors can simply submit the same information as they did to the Navy. The Air Force said it is conducting “market research” to determine what company might be able to respond to the requirement.

Air Force leaders have for several years suggested that the T-7 Advanced Jet Trainer could likely be the basis of a companion trainer/aggressor aircraft in the mold of the T-38/AT-38 but have insisted that the new jet must first pass muster as an advanced jet trainer before being adapted to other roles. Former ACC Commander retired Gen. James Holmes said he also could envision the T-7 as the basis for a lower-cost, lightweight export fighter or a homeland defense platform, but the T-7 as yet lacks external hardpoints for weapons and has only an optional aerial refueling system.

The Air Force plans to buy 351 T-7A advanced trainers. If Boeing were to receive the additional work as well, the figure could exceed more than 700 airplanes. In the past, Boeing has suggested a market for the T-7A and variants of at least 1,500 airplanes. Boeing is partnered with Saab of Sweden on the T-7A. Its website says the T-7A has “provisions for growth” to be a light fighter or attack aircraft. Boeing did not return calls by press time.

Lockheed Martin and Korean Aerospace Industries submitted the runner-up in the T-X competition, the T-50A they jointly developed and could potentially partner on for the Advanced Tactical Trainer program as well. That aircraft, plus a combat-capable F-50, have been exported to countries such as the Philippines, Indonesia, Iraq, and Thailand. Air Combat Command has discussed buying or leasing a handful of T-50As or similar aircraft to develop the “Reforge” future basic fighter trainer program in advance of the T-7As arrival in service, now set for 2024. Full operational capability of the T-7A is slated for 2034; in the interim, the Air Force will continue to operate the T-38.

The RFI said the aircraft sought will be used for initial tactical training, “adversary air support,” and as a “tactical fighter surrogate of existing and future” Air Force frontline fighters. The Air Force wants “feasibility, estimated cost, and schedule for at least 100” of these aircraft and as many as 200 more in lots of 50. The service wants a two-seat airplane “plus an option for a single seat” model with options to use the rear seat area for other mission gear.

The airplane sought would have capability for a speed of Mach 0.9 and be able to “replicate current and future fighter aircraft systems” by providing an embedded training environment to build “transferable skills, systems management skills, and decision-making skills” for weapons employment. The jet is to have a large cockpit display and one hardpoint on each wing to carry at least one Air Combat Maneuvering Instrumentation pod or a Combat Air Training Missile. The hardpoints also have to be able to carry an external fuel tank or an electronic attack or countermeasures pod or “other future pods.” Endurance is to be 90 minutes, of which 30 minutes would be “tactical maneuvering.” The jet is to have a ceiling of at least 45,000 feet and have a structural instantaneous G of 7.5, plus a sustained 6G maneuver.

The controls must have a “universal stick and throttle connection” to “enable reconfiguration of the flight controls to mimic Hands on Throttle and Stick of frontline” Air Force fighters.

The jet is to have a “secure open architecture.”

The Air Force is “also interested” in capability to use a helmet-mounted display system, onboard power sufficient to power wing stations and electronic countermeasures pods, and an infrared sensor. It has a preference for an airplane with an automatic ground collision avoidance system (GCAS) and a zero-zero ejection seat, as well as an “engineering analysis or option” for aerial refueling and an infrared search and track system (IRST), among other nice-to-have features.

To go with the jet, the Air Force wants a “smart chair” simulation-like device that can provide a virtual reality for ground-based flight practice.
Image
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Pratyush »

I would assume that the potential 1500 aircrafts will not be only for the US market.

Tejas in its current form is a perfect fit for this market. It's only limited due to an absence of domestic engine.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Yes that is for the market for an advanced training solution and its natural offshoots like agresssor, light attack, unmanned test bed (QF16) etc. If ACC convinces the USAF on the value of embedding these into operational wings then that could boost the overall USAF order to nearly 600. Add the USN demand and half of that 1500 could come from the US operators alone.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Indranil »

I have been saying from day one that Boeing will sell more than 1000 T-7s. I won't be surprised if they touch 2000. So many F5s to replace!
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

BAE Systems’ and Sierra Nevada Corporation’s open architecture signals intelligence technology selected for the first phase of a U.S. Air Force program
Open architecture design for full-spectrum intelligence
The U.S. Air Force has awarded the BAE Systems-Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) team a contract to provide a prototype design for the next-generation open architecture signals intelligence (SIGINT) technology under its Global High-altitude Open-system Sensor Technology (GHOST) program. The award continues BAE Systems, Inc.’s development efforts to provide full-spectrum awareness and actionable intelligence with a SIGINT sensor design.

“Our SIGINT technology is one of the few on the market designed from the start with open architecture,” said David Logan, vice president and general manager of C4ISR Systems at BAE Systems. “We worked closely with the customer community to design our solution in this way – giving the U.S. Air Force the ability to easily add new capabilities in the future to counter evolving threats.”

Under the contract, awarded earlier this year, the team will provide a sensor prototype that gives insight into adversaries’ actions by collecting and analyzing electronic signals. It will exploit the radio frequency (RF) spectrum, critical to battlefield superiority, to detect, identify, locate, and track RF emissions.

BAE Systems offers a range of adaptive signals intelligence products that allow the warfighter to address emerging and dynamic threats across all phases and domains of battle. The company has more than 20 years of experience developing software-defined open architecture SIGINT systems, and our customers have logged more than 100,000 operational hours on our systems. The BAE Systems portion of the development work for this contract will take place at its facility in Hudson, NH.

SNC pioneers scalable open-architecture SIGINT solutions for airborne, ground, and maritime applications and is a world leader in Electronic Intelligence. SNC will perform GHOST work in Folsom, CA, San Antonio, TX, and Dayton, OH.

Ref. No. 127/2021
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »



brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Rakesh »

https://twitter.com/RealAirPower1/statu ... 13059?s=20 ---> Did you know that Marine pilots serve at least a year in the infantry before they are eligible to fly? The logic being: this creates a bond between the Grunts on the ground & the flyers in the air. To symbolize this connection, USMC pilots wear camouflage covered helmets.

Image
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

https://twitter.com/TheDEWLine/status/1 ... 8691982351 ----->
The U.S. Space Force has taken the next step to create a Deterrence Layer of orbital space vehicles that will keep track of enemy spacecraft operating from geosynchronous orbit (GEO) to the Moon and beyond.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

The US Air Force Is Building Its First Micro-Nuclear Reactor
By Ameya Paleja
Oct 21, 2021


And it could be finished by 2027.

Image

As the U.S. military looks for ways to secure its energy requirements in the near future, it has now taken a significant step in this direction by selecting a site for its first micro-nuclear reactor. The Department of Air Force has selected the Eielson Air Force Base (AFB) in Alaska to pilot this next-generation energy capability, a press release said.

With increasing reliance on electronics in warfare, the U.S. military's power needs have ballooned over the years and are expected to surge further. However, with an aim to rein in carbon emissions even in matters of national security, the Department of Defense is now turning to nuclear energy as a "cleaner" and reliable source. Last month, we reported that the Department of Defense was moving ahead with plans of installing a portable nuclear reactor in Idaho.

The press release also goes on to state that the micro-reactor pilot is being built in response to the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 that requires potential locations to be identified to build and operate a microreactor before 2027. The Air Force will work with the Department of Energy, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to facilitate the micro-reactor pilot, and to ensure this pilot is conducted with safety as the number one priority, the press release said. Licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the micro-reactor will be owned and operated commercially.

“Micro-reactors are a promising technology for ensuring energy resilience and reliability, and are particularly well-suited for powering and heating remote domestic military bases like Eielson AFB,” said Mark Correll, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Environment, Safety, and Infrastructure.

Eielson AFB, located just 110 miles south of the Arctic Circle, relies on a coal-based power plant for its energy needs. As temperatures drop 50 degrees below zero, two locomotives at the AFB move up to 1000 tons of coal every day to the power plant in the coldest months of the year, an older press release states.

However, it is not just heating problems that nuclear reactors are expected to resolve on Earth. Portable nuclear power plants are also being looked up to push propulsion in space and power human settlements on faraway planets such as Mars.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

The US Military Plans to Build Mobile Nuclear Reactor in Idaho
Two companies are already in the fray to build the first prototype.

By Ameya Paleja
Sep 27, 2021

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) is moving ahead with its plans to build a mobile nuclear reactor and has released a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) for building and demonstrating one at the Idaho National Laboratory. The nuclear reactor will be designed to deliver one to five megawatts of power, for at least three years of operation, a DoD press release said.

Currently, the DoD consumes 30 terawatts of power every year and 10 million gallons of fuel per day. In an executive order signed earlier this year, President Biden had called for climate change consideration in matters of national security as well. With plans to move to an electric fleet for all non-tactical vehicles and the maturation of energy-intensive capabilities, the DoD's demand for energy is expected to rise further. It is pursuing nuclear reactors as a carbon-free energy source.

To this effect, the DoD launched Project Pele to prototype the fourth-generation nuclear reactor that is capable of working in even remote and austere environments. After a preliminary design competition, the DoD has shortlisted two firms: Virginia-based BWXT Advanced Technologies LLC and Maryland-based X Energy LLC. Both companies are currently working with the Strategic Capabilities Office (SCO) to independently develop their concepts. Also, to facilitate rapid transport and use, the reactor design is required to be operable within three days of delivery and safely removed in not more than seven days. A final design review is scheduled for early 2022, and one of the companies will be selected to build the prototype afterward.

The DoD also needs to complete an environmental analysis before embarking on the prototype construction. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the recently released draft EIS is now open to public comment for a period of 45 days, which will be used in the final EIS and decision regarding construction and testing in 2022.

The EIS also lists the vulnerability of local electrical grids as another reason for switching to portable nuclear reactors. However, critics cite that these reactors could themselves become risky for troops. "There is always going to be a way that an adversary can damage a nuclear reactor and cause dispersal of its nuclear content," Edwin Lyman, director of Nuclear Power Safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists, a non-profit organization told AP.

According to the EIS, the prototype will be built at one location, tested, then moved to another location, and tested again. The second location is expected to mimic real-world scenarios. "Unless the Army is willing to spend what it would take to make them safe for use, especially in potential combat situations or foreign operating bases, I think it’s probably unwise to deploy nuclear reactors in theaters of war," Lyman added.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 3651992576 ----->
US deploys B-1B supersonic strategic bombers in Diego Garcia base in Indian Ocean along with aerial refuelling tankers.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Live testing to begin in the summer of 2022. Northrop Grumman, and the Raytheon-TNO SFRJ shells will also begin their trials in Q2 of 2022 and go through the end of next year before they select the winner.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Pratyush »

What is the advantage of shooting a ram jet from a howitzer. As compared to just adding a solid booster and firing it independent of the gun as a miniature supersonic cruise missile. A light vehicle like the Hummer can carry 8 to 12 of those and will have a considerably lighter footprint.

Or if implemented as a vertical launch solution. It can also be used as a longer ranged NLOS-M type solution.

Because essentially that's what it is.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

They're already introducing a new RAP round with the current ERCA program that gets them to about 72 km with a long range PG Kit. A propulsion upgrade to SFRJ offers a good way to get to the objective range requirements that the US Army has for its 155 mm extended range (58 cal) cannon artillery. They need a round that, by 2027 (so that limits and defines tech maturity in terms of you needing a relatively mature tech like SFRJ that can be demonstrated in 2022/23 and be in advanced development by 2025 so that it can enter production by 2027), can get 120 km or more with the same precision of the Excalibur. The current Excalibur and other cheaper PGK-LR rounds that the ERCA can fire have a max range of about 65-72 km when launched from that platform. The only non ramjet option to get those ranges would be to go for an electromagnetic railgun with a HVP like projectile which is much more expensive since it would basically entail creating a completely new gun and all the logistics that come with introducing a brand new weapon system (not to mention the expense of fielding something like that) and the fact that it wouldn't be as mobile as a cannon artillery because it needs to carry a power source with it which is many times larger than the footprint of a deployed artillery unit.

They basically want to double or more the range of all their tactical fires. So the 227 mm Guided MLRS goes out to 150-200 km (150 is already ready but 200 needs a new motor), the cannon artiller goes from 60-70 km to beyond 120 km, and the ATACMS replacement goes from 250-300 km to 500-600 km.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Rakesh »

Is the Navy totally at sea?
https://thehill.com/opinion/national-se ... lly-at-sea
21 Oct 2021

By Steve Cohen
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Rakesh »

This Is Our First Look At The USS Connecticut After Its Underwater Collision
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4 ... -collision
22 October 2021
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

F-15 EX begins its formal OT part of testing. It will flow between DT and OT and is expected to be certified for combat and integration into the USAF by early 2024. The planned test fleet is 8 aircraft with six additional F-15EX's to join next year.

F-15EX undergoes first operational test mission at Nellis AFB

The F-15EX is undergoing its first-ever operational test mission paired with F-15Cs and F-15Es at Nellis Air Force Base Oct. 18-25.

“We’ve never done full, large-scale operational tests with the F-15EX, because it’s only been in the U.S. Air Force’s hands for six months,” said Lt. Col. Kenneth Juhl, Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center F-15 tester. “The fact that we’re going this fast in operational test is definitely owning up to the Chief of Staff of the Air Force’s accelerate change or lose mentality.”

There are currently two F-15EXes in existence. The Air Force accepted delivery of them at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, in March and April 2021. The platform is anticipated to join the F-35, F-16 and A-10 along with a sixth-generation fighter program as part of the four-plus-one concept intended to streamline the fleet.

At Nellis, AFOTEC Detachment 6 is leading the initial operational test and evaluation of the F-15EX with units from Eglin and Nellis AFB, the Oregon and Florida National Guard and contractors.

The plane has undergone a series of developmental tests to ensure the aircraft adheres to the required build specifications and safety standards. It has also conducted operational missions as part of Northern Edge in Alaska.

“The main focus here is to provide the initial push for operational tests and evaluation to really evaluate the platform from an end-to-end perspective with the addition of a robust threat environment that we have here at Nellis. That way, when we write our initial test reports, we’re giving an accurate look to the Combat Air Force and the Guard as to what the platform is capable of when it initially fields,” said Colton Myers, F-15EX test project manager, Operational Flight Program Combined Test Force.

In addition to operationally testing the aircraft, the two-week event also involves testing the aircraft’s Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability System.

“The EPAWS system is the next gen advanced electronic attack as well as electronic protects system that the EX and Strike Eagles are currently testing and developing and hopefully fielding in the relatively near future,” said Hand. “That’s going to give us the ability to essentially go into some of these more advanced threats or aerial denial kind of situations where we can now self-protect and self-jam our way through.”

Juhl said Nellis is the best place to do the operational testing because it offers the best air-to-air and surface-to-air training range and provides the highest fidelity data on the backend to be able to know whether the systems worked.

Following the tests at Nellis, Myers said the planes will return to Eglin for more developmental tests.

“We’ve been doing developmental tests for the last several months leading up to this event, which is more operational focus,” he said. “We’ll be transitioning back into developmental tests for the remainder of this year and going into next year, as we continue to test the additional capability of the platform to include the additional weapon stations and additional Operational Flight Program upgrades.”

Following that, Juhl anticipates the F-15EX will eventually participate in exercises like Red Flag-Nellis.

“The more situations that we can put this airplane in the better information we learn. That integration is probably the key thing in the Air Force, to be able to get multiple different kinds of fighters to work together, to be a more formidable force,” said Juhl.



Image

Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Here is the operationally focused large force exercise that was referenced earlier. The EX's were flown to Alaska for Northern Edge earlier this year and were used as operational assets and were tasked in the air to air mission.

Also the reference to the Air to Ground capability that each F-15EX has. The EX is basically the E on steroids but the squadrons receiving them don't have any air-to-ground mission and don't train for it. The first two test aircraft are in the "Qatar" configuration with a targeting pod and navigation pod. The next deliveries will be in the ANG configuration with no pods and room to plug in a Legion IRST data-linked pod. All the multi-role Air National Guard squadrons are upgrading to the F-35A (or retaining their F-16's through the 2030s) so it remains to be seen whether they expand the role of the current Air to Air / homeland defense units to also include Air to Ground mission.

F-15EX Wins Some, Loses Some in Northern Edge

Among the test points were how the F-15EXs could integrate with F-15Cs as well as larger forces, including fifth-generation F-22s and F-35s, O’Rear said.

“We flew them with two-ships of F-15C models, two-ships of F-15E models, … two-ships of EXs supporting other fourth-gen [flights], and integrating with the F-22 and F-35,” he said.

Though the F-15EXs “tallied some kills while they were up there,” O’Rear acknowledged there were also some losses.

“If you go into any large force exercise and you come back with everybody—with no blue losses—I would probably say that your threat is not as robust as it needs to be, in order to get the learning,” he said. Northern Edge was meant to be a multi-service exercise against a near-peer threat having some low-observable capabilities.

Although O’Rear couldn’t speak to the incidents where the F-15EXs were shot down, “in this kind of environment, most of your blue ‘deaths’ are probably going to be outside of visual range, just because of the threat we’re replicating,” he said. Visual range dogfights are “not something that happens a whole bunch.”

The jets also exercised the Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability System, an electronic warfare suite meant to buy the jet more survivability against modern threats. It was the second wargame outing for the EPAWSS, after a Black Flag exercise In December 2020 at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada.

“We’re still gathering data” on how the EPAWSS performed, but the initial, “anecdotal” results “look promising,” O’Rear said. “In general, it’s looking like it was on track for what we were expecting to see” at Northern Edge.

The exercises pitted about 50 Red team aircraft against a like number of Blue forces, he said. The EPAWSS “was able to integrate in a large force environment with multiple sources of … radio frequency being transmitted across the airspace … It was able to process that.”

In addition to the self-protection features of EPAWSS, a test point was to see if it could help stealthy F-22 and F-35s operating in proximity. The additional jamming “can help the F-35 get closer to the adversary,” O’Rear said. “The more clutter, the more electronic attack you have out there, the more difficult it is for enemy sensors to work through that.” The EPAWSS was able to integrate with “a coordinated electronic attack throughout the force package.”

The exercise also imposed severe jamming of communications and Global Positioning System data, compelling pilots to operate around those limitations and rely on “contracts” with other USAF aircraft, aircraft from other services, and ground fires to “be where they’re supposed to be” at the appointed time, O’Rear explained.

The F-15EX has “full air-to-ground capabilities,” but those were not exercised in the wargame, he said. “The EX’s primary goal was to go up there and execute the current C-model mission.” It performed air dominance as well as homeland defense missions, he said.

The threat was meant to be one ”where we don’t have the ability to go out … and take zero losses,” he said.

The point “is not winning every match. It’s to learn where our weaknesses are and how we mitigate those capability gaps,” added O’Rear.

Capabilities that the F-15EX adds to the F-15C are its fly-by-wire system; two extra weapon stations—which O’Rear said was “pretty impressive” in the overall mix—an updated cockpit with touch-screen color displays; EPAWSS and advanced radar capabilities.

“I’m a big fan of the touch screen,” he said.

Northern Edge is different from a Red Flag, O’Rear explained.

“You have the option to use baseline tactics, but the emphasis is not just getting upgrades for [Combat Air Forces] wingmen and flight leads. It’s to go out there and do high-end tests in a high-end, highly-contested, and degraded environment, and to see if the new tactics we’re developing are helpful or a hindrance.”

The F-15EX has been touted as being capable of carrying and launching “outsize” air-to-air and air-to-ground munitions, but none of these was exercised, even in simulated form, during the event. However, a B-52 involved in the wargame launched a simulated AGM-183 Air-launched Rapid Response hypersonic missile during the exercise.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Aditya_V wrote:The reason US took soo long for F-22 / F-35 a lot of technologies were freshly developed and back fitted to earlier Generation F-15/16. AESA radar, use of composites, Various avionics , OBOGS, inbuilt Jammers etc.
AESA radars were developed independently (programs existed in the Pentagon which were later organized so that they reported to the organization developing ATF requirements but the timelines for URR and other precursors (GaA industrial base initiative) pre-date even the ATF program) of the ATF program and were actually flying operationally on F-15's, and were flying even on F-16's even before the F-22A was declared operational. Likewise, an AESA based digital, integrated self protection EW/EA suite was flying on an F-16 around the same time the F-22 was declared operational in 2004/05. None of the US fourth gen EW suite upgrades (either on past, current, or future F-16/F-15) have the exact same functionality as what the F-22/F-35 suits are capable of. Composites were advanced (in terms of pushing the limits of tech) by the B-2 program and not the ATF or F-35 program. F-35 program pushed the limits of utilizing CNT and newer wideband low-observable materials that could help with LO right down to some of the lower frequency surveillance bands, but from a composite stand point it wasn't really doing any development but merely leveraging what was out there already (with more focus on affordable mfg. techniques and quality defect reduction).

The reason F-22 and F-35 EMD took this long was because of test points and the amount of development and operational test required (3500 sorties to finish development testing on F-22, and >9000 sorties to the same on F-35. This followed by a 12-18 month long operational test and evaluation phase). This has been the case for every ambitious 5th gen program out there. Russians have built 10 prototypes of the SU-57 and have been at it since the early 2000s (Sukhoi was selected to develop PAKFA same time as Lockheed won contract for F-35) and have just recently finished development testing of the stage 1 system before delivering the first serial production article. They wouldn't have built 10 articles if they only needed 2 but its likely that the volume of test points required pushed them to a large prototype fleet so that they could finish development within a reasonable amount of time. It has now been well established that if you are developing an integrated, low-observable fighter with an LPI/LPD comms suite and multi-role capability (weapons and sensors) then it is not a mere linear increase in test infrastructure and burden (measured in terms of test points which translates to sorties/hours flown etc) but quite a dramatic departure from 4th gen programs. There are more complexities involved with testing stuff that you already have in older aircraft, and then there are new test requirements that didn't even exist for previous gen aircraft. Both of these lead to significant discoveries which mean that several test points have to be repeated once you've identified deficiencies and introduced corrective measures into hardware and software.

A decade from production (prototype deliver/dev testing begining) to operationalization is a good benchmark for FGFA if the current 3-4 programs are indicative of this. The best anyone has achieved so far is 8 years on the F-22, from the first EMD aircraft delivery for testing to IOC. But then the aircraft IOC'd with mostly Air to Air and very limited A2G capability which came a couple of years later.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Year by Year breakdown of what Lockheed Martin will produce (F-35) at FW and other locations as part of the recently concluded agreement on the production smoothing on the F-35. They've scaled back annual deliveries and ramp rates, and will not be accelerating to get aircraft not delivered during COVID into the program (but will gradually ramp to those deliveries). The supply chain disruptions due to COVID and the difficulty in ramping up block--4 hardware production is having an impact with COVID related reasons alone causing a 60-90 day delay in aircraft deliveries that won't be covered till well into 2023 (with backlog cleared only in 2025-2026). They were expecting to be north of 170 in 2023-2024 but as per the plan won't likely begin getting to those numbers till 2027 at the earliest.

Image
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

28 page PDF

Navy Aviation Vision 2030-2035
.....................................


Carrier Air Wing (CVW)

The CVW remains the primary fighting element of the CSG. The Air Wing of the Future will
be increasingly lethal, survivable, networked, sustainable, and unmanned with autonomous
capabilities. Integrated passive and active sensors will provide battlespace awareness for the CSG
and Fleet Commander. No weapon system on the planet matches the agility, flexibility, or volume
of sea-space control enabled by the CVN/CVW team.

The future CVW will be composed of platforms able to deny and defeat air and surface-based
threats by employing kinetic and non-kinetic effects. It will deliver precision effects on any target
with next generation aircraft that will have greater range and speed. Integrated warfighting systems
will operate in a coordinated multi-domain environment and be interoperable with the entire CSG.
The CVW will coordinate maritime fires and provide persistence through endurance and tanking. It
will complement the capabilities brought to bear by surface and sub-surface components to ensure
the most efficient combined arms possible.

Investments in capability upgrades to the F/A-18E/F, EA-18G, F-35C, E-2D, and MH-60R/S will keep
the CVW lethal through 2030 and provide risk reduction to future platforms. The complementary
capabilities that the current aircraft bring—low-observable airframes, advanced tactical data
links, passive targeting, long-range collaborative weapons, increased sensor detection range and
identification, high-power, full-spectrum airborne electronic attack, and beyond line-of-sight
(BLOS) communications—will form the building blocks of the integrated strike force of the future.
To keep pace with peer threats, the future CVW will add updated passive detection systems, directed
energy weapons for offensive and defensive measures, non-kinetic techniques to influence
adversary decision-making, and hypersonic weapons capability to decrease time to kill.

RF detection and electronic attack capability coupled with passive broad-spectrum advancements
will be required to defeat the advanced Integrated Air Defense Systems (IADS) in the RF spectrum.
Investments in IR and RF signature reduction technologies combined with standoff electronic attack
assets will ensure platform survivability against adversaries that continue to make advancements
in targeting technologies. Integrated and layered effects (non-kinetic and kinetic) will provide the
tools required for operators to deliver precise lethal effects on the target in any environment.
The CVW of the 2030s achieves a complementary mix of F-35C Lightning II, F/A-18E/F Block III
Super Hornet, and next generation strike fighter (F/A-XX), with the F/A-18E/F Block III providing the
backbone of the CVW through 2035. F/A-18E/F Block III with reduced signature, Infrared Search and
Track (IRST) Block II, and increased computing, working in tandem with the capabilities provided by
the F-35C and E-2D, will make the entire CSG more lethal and survivable.

The F-35C of 2030 and beyond will serve as an invaluable force multiplier for the CSG. The F-35C’s
stealth and passive detection capabilities will allow the platform to gain critical intelligence and
share throughout the CSG, significantly aiding the kill chain. Additionally, in the maritime domain,
the Block IV F-35C will be the Navy’s strike platform of choice with Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW)
C1, Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile Extended Range (AARGM ER) and Small Diameter
Bomb (SDB) II incorporated. During Fighter Integration (FI) events with the F/A-18E/F Block III the
F-35C will allow the F/A-18E/F Block III to be a more survivable and lethal platform leveraging the
F-35C’s stealth and passive detection abilities to shape the overall air picture.

The F/A-XX is the strike fighter component within
the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) Family
of Systems (FoS). It is planned to replace the
F/A-18E/F Super Hornet in the 2030s. Its specific
capabilities and technologies are under development,
however analysis shows it must have longer range
and greater speed, incorporate passive and active
sensor technology, and possess the capability to
employ the longer-range weapons programmed for
the future. As the Super Hornets are retired from
service, a combination of F-35C and F/A-XX will
provide Navy tactical fighter aircraft capability and
capacity within the CVW. The advanced carrierbased power projection capabilities resident in F/AXX will maintain CVN relevance in advanced threat
environments.

The EA-18G Airborne Electronic Attack (AEA) will provide the bulk of the full-spectrum integrated
non-kinetic effects for the air wing and joint expeditionary force. The EA-18G will employ Next
Generation Jammer (NGJ) and other Non-Kinetic Effects (NKE). The F-35C and its emerging
capabilities will complement and augment the EA-18G.

The E-2D will continue to be the quarterback of the Fleet and the linchpin for the CSG’s self-defense
throughout this decade. The E-2D’s RADAR, additional active and passive sensors, and robust
networks and communications capacities simultaneously provide real-time actionable data to
platforms at the tactical leading edge and to the Composite Warfare Commanders (CWC) in order
to enable power projection, Theater Air and Missile Defense (TAMD), and anti-ship missile defense
(ASMD) in highly contested environments. Beyond 2035, the Navy’s assured command and control
platform will leverage manned and unmanned teaming; next-generation active, multi-spectral
(RF/IR), and passive sensors; and enhanced Combat Identification (CID) to provide an enduring
integrated fires capability across all domains.

.......................
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

https://twitter.com/beverstine/status/1 ... 9039157262 ----->
Breaking:
@GEAviation
wins $1,579b contract to provide 329 engines for the Air Force's F-15EX fleet.
Image
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

Just for kicks:
NRao wrote:28 page PDF

Navy Aviation Vision 2030-2035
.....................................


Carrier Air Wing (CVW)

.......................
https://twitter.com/TheDEWLine/status/1 ... 7338993671 ----->
NAVAIR has released new concept art of the F/A-XX, showing canards, a pseudo lambda/delta wing, and, I think, YF-23-style ruddervators (but they might be stabilizers.) The description also calls for more speed and range than F/A-18E/F Block III.

Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

NRao wrote:NAVAIR has released new concept art of the F/A-XX, showing canards, a pseudo lambda/delta wing, and, I think, YF-23-style ruddervators (but they might be stabilizers.) The description also calls for more speed and range than F/A-18E/F Block III.
The US Navy is not "there" with engines. They have not made the sort of investment required to develop and validate the adaptive engine technology for the carrier and naval environment. Not that they don't have efforts but they are nowewhere at the scale required to field in the early 2030s that they keep saying for replacing the early lots of non-SLEP'd F/A-18E/F's (which are now virtually guaranteed to be replaced by F-35C's). As of a couple of years ago the LM guys considered the Navy's FA-XX program to be such a mess that they thought they'd be able to sell at least a couple of design upgrades to the F-35C before the USN landed on what it wanted. That may have changed, but the program has gone fully classified so we don't even have great insight into what the Navy wants to spend on development (as opposed to the USAF which has a fully unclassified budget for its NGAD even though the program activities are classified). They are not as advanced primarily because the USN has a relatively young fleet of aircraft given they turned over their entire fleet of legacy aircraft to either the F/A-18 E/F, Growler or F-35Cs and continue to buy the F-35C through all of the 2020s and early 2030s.
Last edited by brar_w on 30 Oct 2021 19:39, edited 2 times in total.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Manish_P »

Rakesh wrote: https://twitter.com/RealAirPower1/statu ... 13059?s=20 ---> Did you know that Marine pilots serve at least a year in the infantry before they are eligible to fly? The logic being: this creates a bond between the Grunts on the ground & the flyers in the air. ..
Maybe USMC UCAVs can do cross-country patrols along-side USMC Tanks and IFVs to increase bonding

:) Just kidding
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Naval news with some timelines on the DDG-1000 hypersonic capability. During its late 2023/early 2024 dry-docking, the ship will have its two Adv. gun systems removed and have the advanced payload module tubes installed. This will allow the DDG-1000 to get underway in late FY24/early FY25 with the Navy's Intermediate Range Conventional Prompt strike capability. Each Zumwalt class ship will carry 12 , nearly 3000 km ranged IR-CPS hypersonic weapon. Increment 0 of the common boost glide vehicle used by IR-CPS (that is currently in production) has fixed target attack capability in the glider, while Increment 1 adds a data-link and seeker for moving maritime capability.

Latest Details On Hypersonic Missile Integration Aboard Zumwalt-Class Destroyers
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Manish_P wrote:
Rakesh wrote: https://twitter.com/RealAirPower1/statu ... 13059?s=20 ---> Did you know that Marine pilots serve at least a year in the infantry before they are eligible to fly? The logic being: this creates a bond between the Grunts on the ground & the flyers in the air. ..
Maybe USMC UCAVs can do cross-country patrols along-side USMC Tanks and IFVs to increase bonding

:) Just kidding
"Every Marine is, first and foremost, a rifleman. All other conditions are secondary" was coined by the 29th USMC Commandant and the service strives to live up to that. Amongst the US air components, it is by far the most heavily invested (training and equipment) and focused on Close Air Support to a point that their leadership despise the fact that big Navy (who pays their bills) asks that the USMC maintain squadrons that deploy on CVN's that get tasked with Carrier air wing missions and not those supporting the MAGTF. As you can see through the USMC transformation that is happening now, they don't like the fact that they (because of COIN demands) have begun to look a lot like the Army (lots of heavy equipment that a traditional ground force would employ) or an Air Force (lots of non MAGTF support missions to support COIN). This is what they are changing by shedding some of their armor, and tube artillery capability that they've built for an inland battle type situation.

Post Reply