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
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by ldev »

Hey brar_w, I was reading up on the Legion Pod and how data linking between 2 such pods allows range to target to be verified via triangulation. Would the acquisition range for these pods be comparable to the existing radars on the fighters that will eventually be equipped with them i.e. F-15s, F/A-18s and F-16s I presume. And what is the possibility that there could be both a Legion Pod and a Sniper Pod mounted on the same aircraft, the latter being primarily for AG targeting?
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

There is nothing really stopping them from carrying two pods though the F-15C's are mostly for air-air work and so will the F-15EX once it replaces it (though the platform is a multi-role system).
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Manish_Sharma »

brar_w wrote:
Manish_Sharma wrote:
No more matter how many times john and you say that LCH can't have a version able to "conducting manned-unmanned teaming missions..." I refuse to believe it.
Can you kindly point me to where I said that?
It's implicit:

A suggestion is put that more LCHs should be acquired.

John reacts by saying LCHs in big numbers is outdated idea as future is uav controlling Helicopters.

I object and say Apaches and SB-01 Defiants are inducted, so can LCHs.

You quote my post and support John. Same John means no need for previously decided numbers of LCHs.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

That's some logic.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Pratyush »

Could it be that the Indian armed forces are more confident of the ability of the US to get manned and unmanned teaming ready to go decades before DRDO can get it going?

That could be the reason why they are so keen on AH64E.

Whereas the HAL CATS warrior was not eve a gleam in someone's eyes 5 years ago.

Now that the concept is ready let's see how the Indian establishment gets the concept in operations with Indian hardware in the next few years.
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/beverstine/status/1 ... EutmKUQWSA ---> That F-35C that crashed into the deck of the USS Carl Vinson in January also struck an EA-18G. That Growler is now being repaired at the Navy's Fleet Readiness Center Southwest.

FRCSW Sets Sights on Growler Mishap Repair
https://www.navair.navy.mil/news/FRCSW- ... 82022-1005
18 April 2022

The VAQ-136 Growler is pictured in FRCSW's Building 94. (U.S. Navy photo)

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

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

US Air Force (Pacific Air Forces) has finished the F-35A bed-down at Eielson air force base Alaska. The base received its 54th and final aircraft earlier this month to complete fielding of the first two operational squadrons for PACAF.

Eielson completes F-35A Lightning II fleet
https://www.eielson.af.mil/News/Article ... -ii-fleet/
15 April 2022
“Finally receiving our 54th F-35 and completing our combat fleet culminates the end of a two-year beddown process that our team executed without delay, in spite of the global pandemic and our extreme Arctic environment. Today also marks Eielson as a premier, advanced airpower projection location.”

The arrival of the final aircraft cements Alaska’s status as the most concentrated state for combat-coded, fifth-generation fighter aircraft. The state also continues to be a premier training location as home to the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex’s more than 75,000 square miles of airspace..

After years of preparation and support from units around Eielson, the recently reactivated 356th and 355th Fighter Squadrons are eager to begin utilizing their full fleets.
Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

A good explanation of the Sikorsky Defiant design for the uS Army's FLARA (Blackhawk replacement) effort. The Defiant X has some subtle survivability and aero changes over the currently flying defiant but they are largely similar. Its an upward battle against the V-280 which has knocked it out of the park in testing/demos so far, but it is expected that the Sikorsky design will live in one shape or form even if it loses the competition this summer. Based on the program, the down-select decision between V-280 and Defiant is due by June, following which the winer will deliver prototypes of their final design (defiant and V-280 valor are technically "demonstrators") for testing by 2025.

ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by ldev »

ldev wrote:Hey brar_w, I was reading up on the Legion Pod and how data linking between 2 such pods allows range to target to be verified via triangulation. Would the acquisition range for these pods be comparable to the existing radars on the fighters that will eventually be equipped with them i.e. F-15s, F/A-18s and F-16s I presume. And what is the possibility that there could be both a Legion Pod and a Sniper Pod mounted on the same aircraft, the latter being primarily for AG targeting?
F-15 and F-16 Jointly Test Legion Pod Infrared Tracker
April 21, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak
An F-15 and an F-16 jointly and passively detected, tracked, and triangulated an aerial target using the infrared search-and-track Legion Pod on April 7, the Air Force’s 53rd test wing announced.

This capability will be useful as U.S. fighters go up against adversary aircraft having low-observable features that reduce their radar cross-section, making them hard to track and target using radar alone.

In the test, an F-15 and an F-16, each equipped with a Legion Pod, detected a target and then used the pod’s advanced datalink to “passively triangulate target position without the use of radar or other active ranging sources,” the 53rd Wing said in a press release. It was the first “multi-platform use” of the IRST pod, the unit said.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

F-35's with multi-ship IRST started testing this some time ago and the capability is probably already fielded -

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/f-35-no ... apability/
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by ldev »

brar_w wrote:F-35's with multi-ship IRST started testing this some time ago and the capability is probably already fielded -

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/f-35-no ... apability/
The F-35s would be using DAS I presume and then MADL for the data link. But the significance of the Legion Pod IMO is that it gives legacy 4th gen aircraft that same passive capability. Obviously the range is classified but clearly they would not have operationalized it if it did not have the capability to detect and triangulate the position of LO adversary aircraft at ranges comparable or superior to adversary LO fighter radar's counter detection capabilities of the Legion Pod carriers i.e. it improves the odds of legacy 4th gen fighters in counter air operations against adversary LO platforms.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

ldev wrote:
brar_w wrote:F-35's with multi-ship IRST started testing this some time ago and the capability is probably already fielded -

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/f-35-no ... apability/
The F-35s would be using DAS I presume and then MADL for the data link. But the significance of the Legion Pod IMO is that it gives legacy 4th gen aircraft that same passive capability. Obviously the range is classified but clearly they would not have operationalized it if it did not have the capability to detect and triangulate the position of LO adversary aircraft at ranges comparable or superior to adversary LO fighter radar's counter detection capabilities of the Legion Pod carriers i.e. it improves the odds of legacy 4th gen fighters in counter air operations against adversary LO platforms.
F-35s would be using their EOTS which has IRST. The fusion engine does this work autonomously on the F-35 using whichever singular or combination of sensors on a single or multi ship that results in the highest probability of CID and track.

Image

As described at the AIAA rollout of f-35 presentations, , the fusion engine can use EOTS for detection and initial long range track, and once a PID is achieved, use DAS for constant tracking, revisiting With EOTS or radar if track is lost.
Cyrano
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5462
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Cyrano »

Don't let the clickbait title dissuade you, fairly balanced video from a guy with fighter a/c maintenance experience
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Official audited data -
The F-35A rate declined from 76.07 percent to 68.8 percent from 2020 to 2021 as an increasing number of F-35s came due for their first big engine overhauls.
https://www.airforcemag.com/fighter-mis ... l-in-2021/

MCR is the metric they aim to boost or maintain given readiness and training structure. Even that is imperfect because you balance it with other investments on readiness or training such as quality of your range infrastructure and range time for squadrons especially the ones on expeditionary duties. Material readiness is only one component of overall readiness and ability to "fight tonight". It must be balanced with how hard you train and how well equipped and resourced your training is. A squadron with 50% MCR that spends much of its time at an advanced Gulf or Nevada training ranges (with their threat emulators and air-defense radars) is going to be much more ready than one with 70% aircraft MCR but no specialized training support. So its a balance in terms of where you land when you spend more on your depots (impact material readiness) vs ranges, large force exercises, and other specialized training. This is why the USAF resisted a blanket order by Jim Mattis to hit 80% MCR across the board because it didn't balance the various factors that impact overall force readiness and ability to deploy and conduct combat operations in an expeditionary high threat environment.

Navy and MC readiness is more nuanced because they tier their readiness based on carrier deployment schedules.

In 2020 the F-35A had the best mission capability rate of all US fighters. In 2021 this has dipped because the induction of fighters is currently outstripping the depot stand up, construction, and hiring which is leading to some ridiculously high turn-around times for engine components. There is a plan to get back on that glidepath for depot by 2024 or so but since the enterprise is adding 80-90 F-35's a year (just US deliveries) its an uphill task given the volume of new aircraft arriving.
Last edited by brar_w on 24 Apr 2022 02:28, edited 3 times in total.
Cyrano
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5462
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Cyrano »

Do F35s bought by foreign nations need to be sent to the US for significant maintenance?
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

None come back to the US (I suppose Canadians ones may). Users can access the globally dispersed depot footprint (even US jets in Europe and Pacific will use that) or can spend more to replicate that in house via their own industry partnering with Lockheed Martin (negotiated on behalf of all mission system providers) or P&W. Europeans will use facilities in Europe (I believe Israel will use some of those as well), and Asian users can use the facilities in Japan and South Korea if they don't want to build their own. Even then, you seldom would need to physically fly the aircraft to the depot. Most depots will be for components like engine modules, avionics modules, etc so you swap those out and send the ones that need to get overhauled. Aircraft go for overhauls when they are being upgraded with new hardware like the current block 4 modernization program. Most of the other stuff is sub-intermediate level depot work which each user will do themselves. Users are free to even have intermediate level work if they chose. The US doesn't currently do this but is thinking about it and I believe Finland and few others have had intermediate level depots from the get go.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Here's an interesting data point in Aerojet's press release regarding comparison of their current generation scramjet engine on the USAF-DARPA program (HAWC) and its first generation scramjet engine used on USAF's X-51 demonstrator -
An advanced Aerojet Rocketdyne scramjet engine powered the successful flight test of the Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept (HAWC), in a joint effort with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) and Lockheed Martin.

The goal of the DARPA / Lockheed Martin HAWC program is to develop and demonstrate critical technologies to enable an effective and affordable air-launched hypersonic cruise missile system.

“Aerojet Rocketdyne is well-positioned to support our nation’s hypersonic development and production,” said Eileen P. Drake, Aerojet Rocketdyne CEO and president. “By applying decades of advanced research and development, together with engineering know-how and innovative manufacturing and materials, our products optimize performance while dramatically reducing costs and development time.”

Through the use of additive manufacturing, Aerojet Rocketdyne is using 95% fewer parts in its scramjets than it used for the history-making scramjet engine that powered the United States Air Force X-51A Waverider to sustained hypersonic speed. Aerojet Rocketdyne has continued to improve the aerothermal performance, affordability, scalability and rapid manufacturability of scramjet engines to meet emerging needs for hypersonic missile and aircraft applications.

Along with innovative scramjets, Aerojet Rocketdyne manufactures a wide range of products to support hypersonics, including solid rocket motor boosters, warheads and missile defense technologies.
https://rocket.com/article/aerojet-rock ... cle-flight
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Looks like the stealthy escort tanker idea (for the next air superiority fighter mission) can be safely put to rest -
The last three heads of Air Mobility Command have speculated that the KC-Z might be a significant departure from the modified-airliner approach taken with the KC-135, KC-10, and, overseas, with the KC-30 and KC-767 tankers. They have speculated that it might possibly be a stealthy platform that could operate inside an enemy’s air defense zone.

Brown brushed that notion aside, however, saying the Next Generation Air Dominance family of systems, intended to operate inside an enemy integrated air defense system (IADS), will have “the range to go where it needs to go” and that an escort tanker is probably not needed. Brown specifically said, “I wouldn’t call [KC-Z] an escort tanker.”
https://www.airforcemag.com/brown-kc-y- ... eds-to-go/
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

A data point from the latest US mil (for next year) budget rolled out a few weeks ago -
Air Power
@MIL_STD
Nothing shows the DODs pivot to preparing for a different future fight better than the AF/Navy missile buys for FY23 (beyond).They are buying nearly 1000 air to air missiles in 2023 and 1,000 anti-ship missiles over 5 years. JASSM-ER and ARM (AARGM) production is fully maxed out.

https://twitter.com/MIL_STD/status/1517873007368146944
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

A neat graphic showing the evolution of the various iterations of the M1 Abrams over the years and some rough production numbers for the US Army-

LINK

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

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

brar_w wrote:The Search To Replace The Air Force’s Geriatric E-3 Sentry Radar Jets Has Officially Begun (Updated).

Officials from across the service have earmarked the Boeing E-7 Wedgetail as their preferred Sentry successor.

The U.S. Air Force has officially launched the process of finding a replacement for its fleet of E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning And Control System, ...
The USAF yesterday announced that it has selected the E-7 AEW&C as its interim AMTI solution and the aircraft will replace a portion of the E-3 fleet in the coming years. The service will award a formal contract next year for the first prototype to be delivered by FY-2027. This will be the USAF configuration and should include some fairly significant changes that have been quietly developed and previewed by Boeing and Northrop Grumman over the years but have not yet been part of an international program.

Air Force identifies Boeing E-7 as solution to replace the E-3 capability

Based on market research, the Department of the Air Force has decided to replace a portion of the E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning and Control System fleet with the E-7 Wedgetail, which is produced by The Boeing Company.

The Boeing E-7 is the only platform capable of meeting the requirements for the Defense Department’s tactical battle management, command and control and moving target indication capabilities within the timeframe needed to replace the aging E-3.

A contract award is planned in fiscal year 2023.

The FY23 President’s Budget request includes $227 million in Research, Development, Test and Evaluation funds starting in FY23. These funds support the acquisition of a rapid prototype aircraft planned to deliver in FY27.

The notional schedule plans for a second rapid prototype aircraft funded in FY24, and a production decision in FY25 to continue fielding aircraft.

The FY23 PB proposes a partial divestment of the E-3 AWACS fleet, 15 of 31 aircraft, and redirects funding to procure and field its replacement.
[/quote]
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/TotherChris/status/ ... _V3pG7ixJw ---> AH-1Z with an Apache Longbow system in a wing-mounted pod. With Hellfire ATGMs underneath.

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/jamie_aviacom/statu ... 3033700353
Woah!! Check out that lead shot. New stealthy drop tanks, EW pods, and JATM!!

https://twitter.com/ACC_Commander/statu ... 7220414464
15 years ago today, ACC gave the F-22A Raptor demonstration the official seal of approval. The F-22 was then the world’s only 5th gen fighter – more advanced & capable than anything else in the world in maneuverability, stealth, supercruise, integrated avionics, & supportability.

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

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

^^ Those stealthy pods are actually real and F-22's have been testing them. Appear to be some sort of passive targeting system.

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

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by NRao »

NGAD Price Per Tail Will More Than Double That of F-35
April 27, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

The manned fighter aircraft that will form the centerpiece of the Air Force’s Next Generation Air Dominance program will cost hundreds of millions of dollars per plane, Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall told members of Congress on April 27—but the service can reduce costs in development and sustainment.

Speaking before the House Armed Services Committee on the fiscal 2023 budget request, Kendall specified that the main NGAD fighter would cost “multiple hundreds of millions of dollars … on an individual basis,” acknowledging that such a price tag “is a number that’s going to get your attention.”

By comparison, the F-22 cost roughly $135 million per tail, making it the most expensive fighter the U.S. Air Force has ever developed. The F-35A, meanwhile, costs around $80 million per jet, but that number could rise.

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

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

They will be lucky to get NGAD at 2x the F-35's URF. 3-4 x will be more like it. You are talking about a 6th generation fighter, operational in the early 2030s (probably a good decade and a half before anybody else fields anything like it) that will have the size, range and magazine for PACAF (as opposed to the smaller requirements for Europe) and will be produced at roughly 1/5 the F-35's production rate.
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Manish_Sharma »

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/04 ... c-flights/

The Pentagon will have to live with limits on F-35’s supersonic flights
By David B. Larter, Valerie Insinna and Aaron Mehta

An issue that risks damage to the F-35’s tail section if the aircraft needs to maintain supersonic speeds is not worth fixing and will instead be addressed by changing the operating parameters, the F-35 Joint Program Office told Defense News in a statement Friday.

The deficiency, first reported by Defense News in 2019, means that at extremely high altitudes, the U.S. Navy’s and Marine Corps’ versions of the F-35 jet can only fly at supersonic speeds for short bursts of time before there is a risk of structural damage and loss of stealth capability.

The first F-35C Lightning II sortie takes off from the U.S. Navy F-35 Strike Fighter Squadron VFA 101 at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. A design issues means the Navy's and Marine Corps' F-35 versions will have some limits on supersonic flights. (Samuel King Jr./U.S. Air Force)
WASHINGTON — An issue that risks damage to the F-35’s tail section if the aircraft needs to maintain supersonic speeds is not worth fixing and will instead be addressed by changing the operating parameters, the F-35 Joint Program Office told Defense News in a statement Friday.

The deficiency, first reported by Defense News in 2019, means that at extremely high altitudes, the U.S. Navy’s and Marine Corps’ versions of the F-35 jet can only fly at supersonic speeds for short bursts of time before there is a risk of structural damage and loss of stealth capability.

The problem may make it impossible for the Navy’s F-35C to conduct supersonic intercepts.

“This issue was closed on December 17, 2019 with no further actions and concurrence from the U.S. services,” the F-35 JPO statement read. “The [deficiency report] was closed under the category of ‘no plan to correct,’ which is used by the F-35 team when the operator value provided by a complete fix does not justify the estimated cost of that fix.

“In this case, the solution would require a lengthy development and flight testing of a material coating that can tolerate the flight environment for unlimited time while satisfying the weight and other requirements of a control surface. Instead, the issue is being addressed procedurally by imposing a time limit on high-speed flight.”
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

Wrapping up air-defense testing ahead of maiden COCOM deployment (ship has deployed under USN but later this year will be the first COCOM tasking) -

USS Zumwalt Conducts Live-Fire Missile Exercise


Image
PACIFIC OCEAN — Guided-missile destroyer USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000) conducted its first in-class, live fire missile exercise, April 14, as the crew prepares for their maiden employment.

During the live fire exercises, Zumwalt’s crew engaged live targets with a series of Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile Block 1 (ESSM) (RIM 162D) and the Standard Missile 2 (SM-2) as part of the stealth destroyer’s final air defense testing.

“Demonstrating the capability of our combat suite and the lethality of our systems is critical to furthering the Zumwalt class,” said Capt. Amy McInnis, Zumwalt’s commanding officer. “Zumwalt continues to make great strides and we are excited to continue to test her limits later this year.”
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

F-22 Being Used To Test Next Generation Air Dominance ‘Fighter’ Tech

The Pentagon's Fiscal Year 2023 budget request documents provide interesting details that may help add a bit of explanation to the sudden jump in unignorable testing of new features on the F-22 Raptor, all of which The War Zone was first to report on. The documents describe how the F-22 is being used as something of a test surrogate for technologies that are being developed under the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program, as well as adopting technologies that have been designed for NGAD, but can be fielded early on the F-22 to meet emerging threats.

NGAD is much more than a 'new fighter.' In fact, calling anything it produces a fighter probably isn't even that accurate. It is a broad initiative that aims to create a 'system of systems' that will ensure U.S. tactical air dominance for the decades to come. It includes a highly adaptable and optionally manned platform that possesses substantial range, enhanced survivability, and next-generation modular sensor capabilities. It also supposedly developing companion unmanned aircraft and weapons, as well as a high-end networking architecture to connect them all together. Beyond these top-end items, NGAD includes a series of studies and development efforts needed to substantiate and bring to life the technologies required to underpin the NGAD entire ecosystem. Some sort of demonstrator for NGAD has been flying for some time now, although what exactly it includes remains a mystery.

The documents read, in part, as follows under the Advanced Technology Development section of the F-22 Squadrons line item:

echnology maturation, risk reduction, studies, demonstrations and prototypes of classified F-22 development efforts. The F-22 Advanced Technology Development (ATD) program is conducted using a rapid acquisition construct leveraging commercial best practices such as agile and lean. This allows the F-22 Raptor enterprise to develop, test, and field software/hardware from multiple programs (product lines) using a scheduled cadence for capabilities as they mature.

The F-22 program attempts to maximize efficiency by utilizing technology transfer both to the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) portfolio, and from the NGAD portfolio based on emerging threats, AF priorities, and development pipeline capacity. Incorporating NGAD developed technologies will include developing, integrating, and testing capabilities on the F-22 weapon system.

So, technological development is going to flow both ways. Not only is the F-22 being used to trial NGAD technologies, but, when deemed appropriate, the F-22 will adopt technologies that have been developed under the program. In theory, this will speed these capabilities to the frontline long before the aircraft being developed under NGAD can deploy them while also helping to more rapidly develop and 'de-risk' capabilities that will eventually be leveraged by that broader effort.


Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Manish_P »

^ Hit close to the side & explode just below the waterline to give torpedo shock-wave effect?
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:^ Hit close to the side & explode just below the waterline to give torpedo shock-wave effect?
I believe that's how it is designed to operate but we don't know yet. This is just a proof of concept demo for the fuzing and seeker and I believe the fielded system would probably utilize an extended range kit which already exists for the JDAM family.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Rakesh »

Click the link below for twitter thread....

https://twitter.com/LeeHudson_/status/1 ... llWobY_aNw ---> JUST IN: Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall says he is not focused on counting end strength, squadrons or airplanes. This is a departure from then-Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein and his 386-squadron goal.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

It has been clear for some time that the US Airforce leadership isn’t interesting in growing for sake of growing or maintaining a particular footprint but ensuring that they grow the right side of the force structure and that they buy systems that will contribute positively to the joint fight in the Pacific. If they just wanted to keep current end strength or grow they would be pumping out new F-15s and F-16s just as they are with F-35 but those would be inadequate in the Pacific which is why you see them cutting F-15EX from 144 down to 80 which will be mostly for homeland defense. USAF has made it clear in that for they future Pacific focused capability they need later block 4 increments of F-35, B-21 and NGAD which are all in development or just entering production and in the meantime they would much rather ramp up munition buys as it waits for those programs to ramp up or complete development. This is also a good time for them to boost their ISR (RQ-180) and tanker fleets via KC-X and Y before they get to buying 8-10 B-21s a year and a couple of dozen NGADs a year which should be the state come 2030.

Unlike the Cold War force structure (build around Europe), a China focused USAF would be a bomber centric force which has a long range counter air platform and loads of UAVs and attritable aircrafts for ISR and targeting. As such many of those legacy fighter squadrons may not transition to a similar type as needs to grow is the bomber, unmanned and cyber side of the house and relatively short ranged strike fighter squadrons will be the bill payer for this transition. The previous plan was basically driven by combatant commanders who are incentivized to bias current capability vs the future which is why the US AF budgets were never really wedded to the 386 goal of the past even though they maintained that as an aspirational goal. To get to that would have meant buying platforms that are either too short legged, not survivable or have too small a payload for the Pacific so would have been a step backwards .
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

New Official Art Reveals Advanced F-22 Capabilities, Possibly JATM

An artist’s concept of the Lockheed Martin F-22, posted on Instagram by Gen. Mark D. Kelly, head of Air Combat Command, offers an official glimpse of new capabilities for the Raptor, including a possible first look at the highly classified AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missile.

The image, released April 27, portrays three F-22s flying in formation, each carrying what appear to be stealthy extended-range fuel tanks and slender outer wing pods with a chiseled aperture at their leading edges. In the picture, one of the F-22s has launched a missile, which is neither an AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile nor an AIM-9X Sidewinder, the two air-to-air missiles known to be qualified for the fighter.

The tanks seem to be the same ones described in new Air Force budget documents, while the pods are likely to be an infrared search and track and/or electronic warfare system. The only new missile publicly identified for the F-22 is the JATM.

The Air Force has spent more than $12 billion to continually upgrade the F-22 since production of the fighter ended in 2010. Revelations such as Kelly’s image usually precede new systems operating where they can be seen publicly.

Kelly did not comment on the new features of the F-22 shown in the artwork. The post accompanying the image noted that the 15th anniversary of the first 12-minute airshow demonstration of the F-22, flown by demo pilot Paul D. “Max” Moga, now a brigadier general who is Commandant of Cadets at the U.S. Air Force Academy. Kelly noted that, at the time, the F-22 was the only operational fifth-generation fighter in the world and the first to combine “maneuverability, stealth, and supercruise” in a single airframe.

When asked if the artwork is meant to show new F-22 systems, an ACC spokesperson replied, “We need every combat platform to go farther, sense farther, and shoot farther. This illustration is simply an artist rendering of an F-22 aircraft with any number of future capabilities.” The comment obliquely confirms that the illustration shows range-extending fuel, sensors, and weapons.

Images of an F-22 flying with the new outer-wing pods have circulated on the internet in recent weeks, taken near Lockheed’s Palmdale, Calif., facility, home of its Skunk Works advanced development shop. The Air Force has previously declined comment on what they might be. Asked recently about the pods and other images that show F-22s, F-35s, and F-117s flying with highly reflective silvery appliques, Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. answered only, “They’re for test.”

While external stores seem counter to the idea of radar low observability—and the reason why the F-22, F-35, and F-117 carry weapons internally—Lockheed’s early 2000s proposal of an FB-22 bomber variant of the Raptor included stealthy external fuel tanks and stealthy outer-wing pods that could open and release a non-stealthy munition.The potential for stealth aircraft carrying stores externally while preserving their low observability thus dates back at least 20 years.

The Air Force’s justifications for the fiscal 2023 budget request identify the new fuel tanks as the Low Drag Tank and Pylon system (LDTP), which USAF calls a “critical capability” to maintaining air superiority. The new tanks and pylons extend the F-22’s range while preserving its “lethality and survivability,” USAF said. They allow the F-22 to fly supersonically yet stealthily, but can also be jettisoned using “smart rack pneumatic technology,” apparently producing a stealthy-smooth surface after the tanks have been released.

The F-22 has operated for many years with 600-gallon tanks—and is not stealthy while carrying them— but when released for dogfighting, the attachment surface is not smooth, thus worsening the F-22’s radar cross section.

Providing the F-22 with an infrared search and track (IRST) system has been an Air Force priority almost since the Raptor entered service, as such a system provides an important way to spot an adversary whose radar cross section has been reduced.

In 2017, Lockheed F-22 program manager Ken Merchant told Air Force Magazine, “We really don’t have the real estate” inside the F-22 for a system like the F-35’s electro-optical targeting system, or EOTS, noting at the time, “we’re looking at other options.” Due to secrecy, Merchant could not say more.

Because an IRST couldn’t go on the F-22’s nose or under the chin of the aircraft—as they are on most fighters that have them—the two pods would provide full coverage to the front, as well as expanded capability to the sides.

It’s also likely that the pods have some kind of electronic warfare function. Lockheed’s “Legion Pod” IRST, which has flown on the F-15, has considerable unused internal space that the company has said could be used for other sensors, functions, or fuel. In fact, company literature mentions that the Legion Pod has “other sensors” but doesn’t describe them.

The JATM, the existence of which was first revealed at an Air Force Life Cycle Management Center industry conference in 2019, is also being developed by Lockheed Martin, and is set to begin replacing the AIM-120 AMRAAM sometime soon. When it was first mentioned, the Air Force said it would achieve initial operational capability in 2022. The JATM has been described by USAF officials as having sharply expanded range over the AMRAAM, to match or exceed the capability of newer versions of China’s PL-15, which outranges the AMRAAM and has diminished the F-22’s “first look, first shot” capability.

It’s also believed the JATM, which will be adopted by the Navy as well, has a multi-mode seeker, with both radar and infrared capabilities, with heightened resistance to jamming. Industry observers have speculated the missile will have a novel propulsion system, but the ACC artwork doesn’t show an air intake or unusual propulsive apertures, as on Lockheed’s “Cuda” advanced missile.

The artwork published by Kelly suggests the new missile will fit inside the F-22’s weapons bay, meaning it will not be appreciably larger than AMRAAM. The artwork may be deliberately misleading, however. The image also suggests a modular, “stacked” propulsion system, meaning the missile could be configured for longer- or shorter-ranged missions.
...
Atmavik
BRFite
Posts: 1985
Joined: 24 Aug 2016 04:43

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by Atmavik »

US Army OFFICIALLY Has a NEW RIFLE - SIG 6.8 X 51 round

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3oWZhjCrk8
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by brar_w »

New development around guidance for extreme range artillery round being competed (Boeing, Raytheon and BAE in the competition) for presently -
@MIL_STD
US Army's Tech Maturation Board has approved the Army to begin working on the Target Seeking-ExtRange Seeker for its #XM1155 ER round. TS-ER seeker will help Army's ext range requirement to prosecute moving or relocated targets in GPS denied environments at ranges up to 150 km LINK
Image
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: US military, technology, arms, tactics

Post by ldev »

US Airforce NGAD systems:

The Air Force’s Secret New Fighter Jet Will Be Wildly Expensive
Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall, in remarks reported by Defense News, told lawmakers that the crewed version of the NGAD fighter jet would cost “multiple” hundreds of millions of dollars. NGAD includes both crewed and uncrewed fighters; the uncrewed version would cost no more than half as much as the crewed version.
What will NGAD look like? Stephen Trimble, defense editor at Aviation Week & Space Technology, spelled out some ideas at the Check Six podcast. Trimble suggests a long-range fighter with the ability to cruise at 70,000 feet—much higher than current fighters—above the speed of sound, using breakthrough technologies such as daytime or optical stealth. :shock:
Post Reply