Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

[brar_w]

Wonder why the US is extending the life of its B-52s? Surely they don't mean to carry these punies in them?

But Pakis will use their LGB experience to take out such shelters with the bombs they have

Sure they do, the B-52 is platform for the SDBI (although I am not sure whether it has been integrated yet or is still in the process)..They absolutely do mean to because it makes a heck of a lot of sense. The bomb is designed around targets, all PGM's are, if your mission set involves taking out those target ranges you would be dumb to not strap more of these bombs and keep your aircraft longer on station through IFR..As bomber pilots say its now about targets per sorties and if your targets do not call for deep bunkers and are mostly urban, you are far far better off using a bomb that has not only passed all its testing and validation and met or exceeded the performance demanded from it, but has also proven to be effective in actual combat.

As mentioned, if you were to use a B-52 or another bomber or fighter based platform to take out an airfield using dumb bombs, you would ideally want multiple sorties and passes to make sure its at least mission killed, and to verify..Since the 80's and beyond the LGB's and later the JDAM changed things totally. I am sure there were skeptics about the JDAM and PGM's in general that would still have liked 4-5 times the dumb bomb drop per target like it was done in the 50's, 60's and 70's (even beyond that as GW had majority non PGM's, but that changed subsequently as the PGM inventory increased to beyond 50% with the USAF)..The objective was since the JDAM to miniaturize these munitions and to achieve that separate programs were launched..Some involved making the GPS/INS targeting more accurate. The SDB for example cuts the CEP in half compared to the original JDAM. Other programs were initiated to make the capable of penetrating up to 4-6 feet of steel reinforced concrete..For all practical purposes the SDB penetrates as well as a 2000 lb bomb, it just has a smaller warhead.. so for both larger hardened targets, and targets where you need much larger impact post penetration you would want the 2000 and 2000+ pound bombs. Those targets are mostly heavily fortified C2C targets and that is another mission set that the F-35 can perform. Of course it will carry less of them, but then you have bombers to go after those in addition to your tactical fleet. There are very few missions that the JDAM can do that the SDB or SDBII cannot..and these provide the flexibility to the tactical fleet to switch from urban to dispersed targets, from SEAD to CAS and stay on station... Try calling in an F-16 carrying 2000 lb bombs to do CAS, or switch from C2C targets to SEAD...Its capability will be greatly reduced..As mentioned earlier these munitions and there development have been driven by both advances in technology and actual hard lessons learnt in actual combat on how to deploy this technology.

The object with the JDAM was to give one B-2 pass an 80 target capability, as was demonstrated in a live exercise (video provided earlier)..The objective with the SDB was to give tactical flexibility while still being able to perform a very large and flexible mission set that included hardened shelters, SEAD targets, radars, and other soft or semi-hardened targets. The use has been demonstrated in live exercises and proven in actual combat.




Also note, that the first platform for the SDB was not the F-22 or F-35. It was the F-15E, and it can carry a lot of SDB I's and still have plenty of room to spare for a targeting pod or a SAR radar pod, self defense weapons (either Aim-120 or Aim-9X) etc.

This pic shows it carrying 20



Also note that the F-35, outside of its STEALTH profile can carry a max of 32 SDBI's (internal+external load).

[shiv]

Sure they do, the B-52 is platform for the SDBI..They absolutely do mean too because it makes a heck of a lot of sense. The bomb is designed around targets, all PGM's are, if your mission set involves taking out those target ranges you would be dumb to not strap more of these bombs and keep your aircraft longer on station through IFR.

And the world is dumb enough to lap it up,

Indeed it is - especially with the sort of hard sell propaganda that is filling up information space.

Taken together these two posts make a lot of sense.

The US retains the ability to hit anyone from punies to MOABs. Its is the other poor dumb bustards who believe published reports of what the US tells them who will lose the capability to think and act if they think the future of war is punies.

The US is taking its allies for an expensive ride - hard selling the F-35 with punies. When something cannot be taken down by punies, the only the US retains the capability to use biggies, having suckered everyone else into thinking that punies are the best thing since pav-bhaji

[srin]

letting the weapon impact nicely perpendicular to the target is mistake...instead growth a bunch of trees and iron rods like a forest atop the hangars sticking out randomly in all directions and let the light weapon fight its way through that and get deflected from its desired angle. wedges of steel scrap steel can also do it, as seen in MBT designs....key is volume not toughness...given enough volume you can deflect anything and make it harmless waste its energy in the wrong place and direction. forget about look or shape, only thing that matters is the entrance and exit rest can look like the backside of a buffalo if it works.

the japanese also used the trunks of coconut trees and sand the only materials available in pacific island to build bunkers in places like tarawa and guadalcanal that withstood huge barrages from cruisers and battleships.

Or may be put in tank ERA layer on the roof to explode it prematurely ?

[Austin]

To me The virtue of things like SDB does not lies in the explosive power it hold but how much the hardened nose tip can penetrate hence the 90 degree vertical dive , that probably is also a function of the height these bombs are dropped gaining KE.

Once the penetrator does the job say penetrated 1-2 meter then the directional charged explosive does the remaining job , which also means it needs much less explosive to do the job.

These things works like APFSDS which is nothing but a well deigned rod with hardened tip that penetrates layers of armour when travelling at hypersonic speed no explosive there.

[Pratyush]

Shiv,

I am at a loss to understand the point that you are trying to make. WRT, the small and the small and the big bombs. Cause, in any war you have phases of operations. From counter IADS to going after the deeply buried bunkers.

If you have taken out the ability of the enemy air to interfere and dismantled the IADS, the bunkers become sitting ducks. If you have not done so, even if you kill the burried bunkers, it makes no difference.

The puny one, if it hits on target will be sufficient for more than 75% of the target set. The ability to carry 2*1000 KG JDAM internally is should take care of additional 20% of the targets. Will it really matter, if the C2 nodes are left alone. What can the C2 node really, really do, if the forces in the field have been taken out?

If a bigger bomb is required, then it can always be deployed from the external hard points. After having defeated the enemy air and the IADS. Your stealth is gone. But so is the enemies ability to interfere with your operations.

And at this point you are really bouncing rubble from your strikes.

But I am sure that you are about to tell me that I have fallen for Khan's propaganda.

[brar_w]

Sure they do, the B-52 is platform for the SDBI..They absolutely do mean too because it makes a heck of a lot of sense. The bomb is designed around targets, all PGM's are, if your mission set involves taking out those target ranges you would be dumb to not strap more of these bombs and keep your aircraft longer on station through IFR.

And the world is dumb enough to lap it up,

Indeed it is - especially with the sort of hard sell propaganda that is filling up information space.

Taken together these two posts make a lot of sense.

The US retains the ability to hit anyone from punies to MOABs. Its is the other poor dumb bustards who believe published reports of what the US tells them who will lose the capability to think and act if they think the future of war is punies.

The US is taking its allies for an expensive ride - hard selling the F-35 with punies. When something cannot be taken down by punies, the only the US retains the capability to use biggies, having suckered everyone else into thinking that punies are the best thing since pav-bhaji

What does this have to do with the SDB? or how effective it is? I am sorry but those buying it (Including the US that developed it and will eventually have more than 30,000+ SDB family of weapons) and those that developed it are leading the charge in PGM development and have led it pretty much after they introduced PGM's that quickly became the best way to mount an affective air to ground campaign in the 21st century have infrastructure in place to both test and validate the capability...in fact it is through these live exercises that actually take place do they come up with future requirements for AFRL, DARPA and other agencies to work on for the future.... As the technology has advanced so have PGM's, and this covers both accuracy and their ability to be miniaturized and still retain the overall desired lethality as per missions.


As far as suckered, whats stopping any SDB customer from actually firing them at a weapons range? Are you claiming that they cannot penetrate and everything is one big fat lie? What is stopping the IDF for example from testing it?? or any other customer? As mentioned to you earlier the SDBI and II are only one of the choices the F-35 has it can also carry the 500, 1000 and 2000 pound. Yes less of them, but we re still talking about a "penetrating" mission, in a first-day strike scenario where you are going to go after targets that are stopping you from ending in the biggies and fully loaded jets. Basically fixed, and mobile targets that create the area denial situation in the first place. Once those targets are taken down, you can load even your F-35's with heavies and perform strike...In fact since the F-35 carries 18,000-20,000 (depending upon version) pounds of internal fuel and has all integrated targeting systems (EW, IR, SAR) you can mount munitions on each and every station without leaving room for EFT's, and pods or jammers..

The US retains the ability to hit anyone from punies to MOABs. Its is the other poor dumb bustards who believe published reports of what the US tells them who will lose the capability to think and act if they think the future of war is punies.

The US is taking its allies for an expensive ride - hard selling the F-35 with punies. When something cannot be taken down by punies, the only the US retains the capability to use biggies, having suckered everyone else into thinking that punies are the best thing since pav-bhaji

The SDBI and II complements the PGM inventory of 500, 1000 and 2000 pound bombs, and cruise missiles. It does not replace them. Hence the F-35 and the F-22 still carry the 2000 and 1000 pound bomb carrying capability...As described in the PDF posted earlier, the SDBI has been shown to perform well on the mission sets it is designed to perform..Its an option that the tactician has i.e. to choose tactical flexiblity and greater sorties per target if the threat so warrants it..With 1000 and 2000 pounders you have no such flexibility and you'll end up with a significantly smaller magazine and be forced to use these large bombs at targets that really do not need that much firepower..As a result you will be forced to conduct an air campaign with more fighters, more support aircraft, more tankers...all stress-points that your enemy can exploit. Those that plan capability for the future, most likely see (and saw) the benefits of having the tactical flexibility to kill more targets per sortie, just as the pioneers in missiles saw the benfits of having air to air missiles instead of just the gun. Once you set out and develop requirements, you develop the technology and then test and validate it before deploying it. The SDB has gone through this and has even been used plenty of times in actual combat. Its not something that is in development or a future-years capability.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... bs-350864/


BTW, here is the view from the opposite side of the video on the GBU-39, vs arch shelter and the A-7

https://youtu.be/qr9gqZ9Nv18?t=36

The US retains the ability to hit anyone from punies to MOABs. Its is the other poor dumb bustards who believe published reports of what the US tells them who will lose the capability to think and act if they think the future of war is punies.

The US is taking its allies for an expensive ride - hard selling the F-35 with punies. When something cannot be taken down by punies, the only the US retains the capability to use biggies, having suckered everyone else into thinking that punies are the best thing since pav-bhaji

All those that are buying the F-35 are buying multiple bombs for it, and not just the SDB. Israel purchased the SDBI for their F-15 fleet, and will buy more once the bomb is cleared on the F-16. The F-35 like the F-22 before it can drop the 1000 pound JDAM. It can also drop the 500 bomb, and the 2000 Pound JDAM. All partners have that capability..And as far as a reduced payload, heck they start off with ZERO denied environment capability to begin with.

What you think the PAKFA will field, 10 2000 pound bomb capability? It would most likely not be able to carry a 2000 pound glide bomb..What about the F-X in Korea? or even the AMCA? What munitions will they carry? These users don't have a Low Observable and survivable aircraft to conduct strike missions...The F-35 will be the first one for them..With a heavier load on their F-16's or F-15's they cannot even perform those mission sets in a denied environment.

[brar_w]

To me The virtue of things like SDB does not lies in the explosive power it hold but how much the hardened nose tip can penetrate hence the 90 degree vertical dive , that probably is also a function of the height these bombs are dropped gaining KE.

Once the penetrator does the job say penetrated 1-2 meter then the directional charged explosive does the remaining job , which also means it needs much less explosive to do the job.

These things works like APFSDS which is nothing but a well deigned rod with hardened tip that penetrates layers of armour when travelling at hypersonic speed no explosive there.

Yup, you are spot on. This is how the SDB and SPICE work, and they have been put through the paces a lot many times over the years both in the test and validation environment at the missile ranges and in actual combat..The ideal launch altitude for the SDBI is around 40,000 feet and the Raptor launches it at Mach 1.5+ to maximize range..

The most recent penetrating warhead to be introduced operationally is the TAM Garland manufactured 208 lb design in the new GBU-39/B Small Diameter Bomb, sized so that 8 rounds fit into the weapon bay of the F-22A Raptor (it is worth noting that an F-111G could be fitted with up to 40 SDBs). With 50 lb of a new high energy explosive filler, this weapon is designed to provide the lethality, against many targets types, of the legacy Mk.84 and BLU-109/B. Designed with a long and small diameter casing, the bomb is geometrically much closer in shape and form to a traditional armour piercing discarding sabot subcalibre tank gun round. As a result it is claimed to match the penetration capability of a BLU-109/B ie around 6 ft of reinforced concrete.

A unique feature of the SDB is its Optimal Guidance, which is designed to align the bomb body exactly with the weapon's velocity vector at the point of impact, as this maximises penetration of the target. All of the bomb's kinetic energy is used to drive the weapon in - older guidance systems did not achieve this and velocity components tangential to the impact would at best waste energy, at worst contribute to premature casing rupture.

If you have taken out the ability of the enemy air to interfere and dismantled the IADS, the bunkers become sitting ducks. If you have not done so, even if you kill the burried bunkers, it makes no difference.

The puny one, if it hits on target will be sufficient for more than 75% of the target set. The ability to carry 2*1000 KG JDAM internally is should take care of additional 20% of the targets. Will it really matter, if the C2 nodes are left alone. What can the C2 node really, really do, if the forces in the field have been taken out?

You are correct, the SDBI is not a bunker buster by any means, its designed for semi-hardened targets such as air fields and shelters etc..Its not going to penetrate deep targets or bunkers..for that you start off at the 2000 pound and go up from there. Even for deeply buried targets initiatives are on at the moment that could result in greater performance against deeper shelters and bunkers through the use of kinetic power in addition to the bomb itself..Basically putting a rocket motor behind a bunker buster...

http://aviationweek.com/blog/afrl-moves ... uster-f-35

As conceived, the HVPW is a solid-rocket-boosted 2,000lb-class weapon with the penetration of a 5,000lb gravity bomb, design for internal carriage in an F-35 and also able to increase the load-out on other bombers and fighters.

The US Air Force clearly sees the need for a new bunker-buster and tunnel-trasher, as AFRL's budget for HVPW was "plused up" to $35 million in FY12 and 13 to get technologies ready in key areas such as fuze and warhead survivability, anti-jam GPS, terminal seeker, angle-of-attack sensing and propulsion.

Contracts are being awarded in four research areas: ordnance technologies able to survive and function after a high-speed boosted impact into a hard target; guidance methodologies that provide maximum penetration and minimum miss distance; propulsion technologies that increase the terminal speed of the penetrator; and conceptual design of a next-generation air-launched weapon to attack hardened targets.

It's not an easy task, AFRL says. The angle of obliquity to the target and angle of attack of the weapon at impact are both critical and must be controlled closely to ensure maximum penetration and fuze survival. But boosting the weapon with a rocket can introduce issues with thrust misalignment, control authority, acceleration and vibration that must be overcome.

Basically, a lot has advanced since the 50's-70's when all the option one and was mount a ton of weapons on bombers and strike fighters and unleash them...PGM's started with LGB's and GPS resulted from the second offset strategy. Ever since then there have been and continue to be efforts in place to make them better, more lethal and to miniaturize them. Just we went from sorties per target to target per sorties with the bombers, weapons like the SDB's and SPICE (and future weapons designed by Russia, China, Europe, India etc) will have tactical strike aircraft acheive a similar goal. Some will do it earlier, and others will take time - basically the same thing with the PGM development, some got LGB's and GPS earlier because they made the hard investments, others got it later but all have or are planning to switch over to PGM's. The SDB's and similar weapons are just the next chapter...

Other weapons in this class -

Israel Spice 250

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spice_(bomb)

China

http://chinesemilitaryreview.blogspot.c ... b-sdb.html

[shiv]

As far as suckered, whats stopping any SDB customer from actually firing them at a weapons range? Are you claiming that they cannot penetrate and everything is one big fat lie?

brarji we have been through this before and the last time I asked you copped out and said "Ask Google".

Please allow me my penchant for using sexual analogies. A man could not get his wife pregnant because he was aiming for the navel for 6 months after marriage.

These piddly punies need to be aimed right. That means either djinn technology or the technology that the US possesses in terms of satellites, AWACS, drones and other means to get real time information that enables these piddly bombs to hit trucks and other pinpoint targets.

Now you tell me what stops Israel from launching satellites and having a GPS system of its own? How about Belgium? Australia? Japan? Anyone who throws his lot in with the US will earn US goodwill and a pat on the head, a cookie and these targeting signals stay on for them in war. For those of us who do not kowtow to the US, we have to use huge dumb bombs in larger numbers with lesser accuracy. You Americans find it difficult to understand the Indian viewpoint but there it is, up front

Simply put the US will share its vast aiming an targeting resources with its poodles and allies and will withdraw those facilities for upstarts and other inconvenient powers.

So while the F-35s piddly punies might work, they work only because they can be aimed at the real pindliyon ka gooda rather than the navel.

[shiv]

Too much blah blah. Targeting has become accurate now compared the back then - but only for those with access to worldwide targeting resources like GPS, fully mapped areas of the earth, realtime surveillance from drones and AWACS and other networked systems

if you don't have all this - keep you piddly punies in the display cabinet and hit with what works for you. Not what works for The US of A. The US will gladly sell us the snake oil of its piddly punies to us, but in a crunch the signals will be turned off.

[shiv]

Shiv,

I am at a loss to understand the point that you are trying to make.
<snip>
The puny one, if it hits on target will be sufficient for more than 75% of the target set.

How would a puny hit a target? Tell me. You can hit individual trucks and even cars I am told. How? How does one target individual trucks and cars? Please explain where those resources are available to us in India? Apart from piddly punies could you make an honest list of all the ancillacry and support systems needed to make those punies hit where the are supposed to hit. Please don't tell me "We are going to have them all in future" This is one of my problems with the AMCA. AMCA with piddlies is no good without the targeting systems. And the AMCA is not even here let alone the support infrastructure for targeting.

Are we going to tell a potential adversary to come back in 25 years when we are ready to use our piddlies?

But I am sure that you are about to tell me that I have fallen for Khan's propaganda.

Well thanks for recognizing it as propaganda. It is indeed powerful especially if it comes from a confident American firing away on all cylinders.

[brar_w]

but only for those with access to worldwide targeting resources like GPS, fully mapped areas of the earth, realtime surveillance from drones and AWACS and other networked systems

And why would the SDB user not have access to that? And if you want something even more accurate get the SDBII that should be available for export shortly..You can use it in non GPS modes. This is from an F-35 export pov and not for the IAF that is not acquiring the platform nor the weapon.

Remember this convo started when you claimed that with the SDB all you need is a tin shed worth of protection.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6842&start=520#p1867827

if you don't have all this - keep you piddly punies in the display cabinet and hit with what works for you

Or buy alternatives like the Spice 250 that also add EO targeting.

The US will gladly sell us the snake oil of its piddly punies to us, but in a crunch the signals will be turned off

This wasnt about selling them to the IAF or IN now was it? There isnt even a platform that can launch it and no one is advocating the IAF invest in the F-35 or this bomb. This was about the rather absurd claim that the SDB cannot attack aircraft shelters to which I pointed out that it has been tested and approved for those type of targets with up to 6 feet of steel reinforced concrete...

[Singha]

the ERA layers idea is good and fairly cheap. I am sure Cheen is doing a lot of R&D on how to defeat the new range of american munitions.

[shiv]

And why would the SDB user not have access to that?


And if you want something even more accurate get the SDBII that should be available for export shortly..You can use it in non GPS modes.

You Americans will not understand SDREs will never get that from the US when we are fighting against US allies like Pakistan

I presume whatever is available for export will not be for India because you did say

This wasnt about selling them to the IAF or IN now was it? There isnt even a platform that can launch it

Remember this convo started when you claimed that with the SDB all you need is a tin shed worth of protection.

Exactly. I did say that. Imagine 200 tin sheds scattered around an airfield. 184 dummies and 16 with aircraft in them. How many F-35 sorties with 8 punies per sortie would be needed to take them out? Assume 30 airfields need to be put out of action

How many tin sheds can be taken out with one large airburst fuel-air expolsive?

[brar_w]

Exactly. I did say that. Imagine 200 tin sheds scattered around an airfields. Some dummies and some with aircraft in them. How many F-35 sorties with 8 punies per sortie would be needed to take them out?

A lot lot less than if it carried 1000 or 2000 pound bombs, or if a legacy fighter carried larger bombs..You can open up the envelop once your IAD's are dealth with and that gives the F-35 the ability to mount 32 SDB's and still have the ability to generate EO tracks, and carry 18,250 pounds of fuel.

Dispursed targets, lack of discrimination-ISR, and multiple decoys are the reason you have these weapons in the first place (one of them anyways)..In such situation its much better to send an F-15E up with 20 SDB's vs 3 1000 pound bombs and a couple of 2000 pounders (if that is even possible as a combo)...

You Americans will not understand SDREs will never get that from the US when we are fighting against US allies like Pakistan

Where does Pakistan even come into the equation? It was never about the IAF/IN getting the bomb, but the capability of the weapon and other such weapons...

[shiv]

Exactly. I did say that. Imagine 200 tin sheds scattered around an airfields. Some dummies and some with aircraft in them. How many F-35 sorties with 8 punies per sortie would be needed to take them out?

A lot lot less than if it carried 1000 or 2000 pound bombs, or if a legacy fighter carried larger bombs...

Sorry that is snake oil. A 2000 pound bomb will shake out the foundations of a city block let alone tin sheds so a flight of Jaguars can drop 48,000 pounds of bombs. Compare that explosive damage to one-puny-one tin can 200 times.

But I digress. The reason blast pens exist is to protect from the blast of large bombs. Punies might get them but India ain't gonna get no punies soon for all the reasons stated so its a waste of time talking about them here.

[brar_w]

Sorry that is snake oil. A 2000 pound bomb will shake out the foundations of a city block let alone tin sheds so a flight of Jaguars can drop 48,000 pounds of bombs. Compare that explosive damage to one-puny-one tin can 200 times.

If the enemy is dumb enough to place all his assets together in one block instead of dispersing real IADs and decoys over a much larger geographic area....Instead of having a real radar and a couple of fake ones within a block of each other, its much wiser to have full blown decoys spread miles apart so that you confuse the enemy and challenge his discriminating power..I think it was the ONI (naval intel) that reported that China has built IAD decoys that actually also have an emission signature now..Those are hardly going to be sitting right next to the real thing..

[shiv]

Where does Pakistan even come into the equation? It was never about the IAF/IN getting the bomb, but the capability of the weapon and other such weapons...

Boss this is "Bharat-Rakshak.com" It's all about India. Didn't you know?

[shiv]

If the enemy is dumb enough to place all his assets together in one block instead of dispersing real IADs and decoys over a much larger geographic area....Instead of having a real radar and a couple of fake ones within a block of each other, its much wiser to have full blown decoys spread miles apart so that you confuse the enemy and challenge his discriminating power..I think it was the ONI (naval intel) that reported that China has built IAD decoys that actually also have an emission signature now..Those are hardly going to be sitting right next to the real thing..

Same thing holds true for punies in their F-35s.

[brar_w]

Same thing holds true for punies in their F-35s.

What same thing is that? The SDBI and II allows the F-35 to attack multiple targets. As explained, and shown through video and other operator material the SDBI can successfully attack many targets that larger bombs used to be the go to for a decade or so ago. Simply put with the SDBI the F-15, F-22, F-35 or any other fighter that uses it (such as F-16 soon enough) has the ability to attack multiple targets per sortie, and in some cases that is a multiple of the number of targets the aircraft could attack with the JDAM. Going back it was the LGB and JDAM that allowed a similar thing i.e. allow tactical fighters and bombers to attack multiple targets per sortie instead of dedicating multiple sorties per target as was the case with dumb munitions of the past.

Will the SDB replace all the JDAM (1000 and 2000 pound) targeting? NO..It was never meant to, the slide I posted earlier (and provided down below) shows exactly which targets it is meant to take over or be an option for and there will be plenty of other much more hardened, deeply buried and critically important (infrastructure) targets where the 1000, 2000 and 5000 pound bombs will be used for. The subset of mission that the SDB I can accomplish is quite comprehensive and that is why the F-15 operators in the US and Israel have selected it and why most F-35 customers will also pick it...

The SDBII is essentially a new weapon and it frees you up from GPS if you so desire, but it is not designed around the same mission..Its job is CAS, strike against soft targets and most importantly attack against mobile targets which many C2C targets are likely to employ (earlier it was fixed or buried, but the developers expect mobile to also come into the equation)

As far as the IAF, and I assume here that you are reffering to the AMCA as the conversation had earlier occured - My point is still that its not about what PGM capability India has now but what it plans on having in the 2030's and beyond when the AMCA will likely show up in decent numbers. If the IAF is not planning to have 250-500 pound Precise Weapons like or better than the SDB by then it would be far behind in the PGM domain as even China (and through it, Pakistan) plan on acquiring it before that. I dont think the IAF is going to end up in that situation. 15-20 years is a lot of time for the indigenous technology to advance and the accuracy of Indian Sat. guided munitions 20 years from now will likely be superior to what the SDBI fields now.




The SDB, Spice250 chapter is now closed, they are operational. A decade down the road you will hear of 2000 pound penetrating bombs that will have the effectiveness of the 5000 pound glide munition. Kinetic performance, better warheads, harder impacts, and more accuracy and aim point selection will result in this leap. Thats the next chapter with PGM's. Most likely the reliance of GPS as the source of cheap and cost effective precise targeting option (as GPS is much much cheaper to MMW or EO/IR targeting) will be shed in favor of another low cost alternative..PGM's have come a long way since they first came to the limelight in the gulf war (and those weapons began their development decades before 1992)...there will be a long path ahead to make them more lethal. India does recognize the impact of PGM's, just as SU realized this with LGBs, it gives a small force the ability to affect targets on the ground with a level of speed and accuracy only possible (earlier) through tactical nukes..I expect India to invest a ton of money into this capability over the next few decades not only for the AMCA specifically but for other fighters and unmanned aircraft.

[shiv]

What same thing is that? The SDBI and II allows the F-35 to attack multiple targets. As explained, and shown through video and other operator material the SDBI can successfully attack many targets that larger bombs used to be the go to for a decade or so ago. Simply put with the SDBI the F-15, F-22, F-35 or any other fighter that uses it

Ah - so the F-35 may not carry enough punies and now you need F-15s or "any other fighter".

You need a lot of punies for a lot of targets plus the support infrastructure. If the F-35s capacity is not enough, the US retains other fighters that can carry more punies or bigger bombs. There is a choice unlike what the F-35 provides. That is exactly what I said earlier.

But this forum is about India. I can see that you are a capable spokesperson for the US but that is completely pointless for India

[shiv]

.I expect India to invest a ton of money into this capability over the next few decades not only for the AMCA specifically but for other fighters and unmanned aircraft.

And hopefully not discover that punies are no good after an enemy shoots out your GPS satellites and kills your AWACS with BVRAAMs or blinds them with an atmospheric nuke burst. Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya who declared war on the US never had this capability. But China and US ally Pakistan, who might fight India, do have this capability

[Karan M]

India is investing in a bunch of PGMs and recon assets too
Eg
http://www.sps-aviation.com/exclusive/? ... raft-fleet (long range targeting, desig pods)
http://www.indiatvnews.com/news/india/i ... 47639.html (PGMs)
http://www.airforce-technology.com/news ... on-4594387 (ASTOR)
http://teleradproviders.com/nbn/print.p ... e=c3Rvcnk= (Divya Drishti is deployed)

Our only constraint is cost because of which the AF is waiting for DRDL programs to mature so they can purchase en masse.

[brar_w]

Ah - so the F-35 may not carry enough punies and now you need F-15s or "any other fighter".

The F-15E was slated to carry the SDB long before the F-35 first flew. It was the first platform intended to be cleared to carry the weapon and it is still the largest employer of the weapon at exercises. Any aircraft that carries bombs on a strike mission will benefit from a greater magazine depth. Even the F-35. It carries 8 in steathy profile but you can go up to 32 in a non-stealthy profile. The F-15E can also carry a lot more...20 are pictured above..

The F-15E's in the USAF will be in service till the late 2030's..Of course they will employ the SDB I and II in large numbers because it considerably increases their capability on many missions..

The IDF cleared the weapon on its F-15's as well. Its not an F-35 specific weapon although the physical shape of the weapon was fixed so that the F-22A could carry 8. The SDBII is something that had its shape fixed so that the F-35 could carry 8, but even that had other platforms in mind such as the F-15E which is also the first platform to carry the SDBII.

But this forum is about India

You brought up the point about the SDB only being effective against tin protection which was totally wrong as has been shown to you.

I can see that you are a capable spokesperson for the US but that is completely pointless for India

It was never about India or India's weapons choices because you clearly never had that as a context when you brought up a weapon that India does not have, brought up a fighter that India does not plan on acquiring and claimed something that was totally wrong. I provided you with reference to demonstrate that what you claimed was factually incorrect (Vis-a-vis hardened aircraft shelters and the SDB).

f the F-35s capacity is not enough, the US retains other fighters that can carry more punies or bigger bombs. There is a choice unlike what the F-35 provides. That is exactly what I said earlier.

This is what you specifically said -

Or maybe not even one considering that puniness is the order of the day - with 125 kg slim bombs. Maybe a day will come when tin roof shed is fine.

All I did was show to you that the GBU-39 is desigend to defeat a lot more in terms of hardened aircraft shelters.

To your point about other platforms...The F-35 can also carry larger munitions if required. In a non-permissive environment, the chances of a successful mission with heavy loads on a tactical fighter go down considerably...You are going to loose a lot of capacity if you send in an F-15E armed with heavy bombs, lots of fuel over a heavily defended target...For that you need the F-22 and F-35...Same logic applies to F-35 customers, they currently use the F-16, F-18 or F-15..Neither of those aircraft can conduct an effective strike campaign over heavily defended areas of the future..so the hypothetical capacity to carry 6 1000 pound bombs is immaterial.

This was precisely what I was claiming in the AMCA discussion..You cannot compare a 2.5 ton payload of the AMCA to a full external payload of the Mig-29..It makes no sense because the Mig-29 cannot operate in areas (with that load or perhaps any load) where you need the AMCA for..And if you want to kit the AMCA out to perform in areas where the Mig-29 can, the AMCA can carry more with more fuel and is better overall....

Same thing with the PAKFA vs Su-35..On internal payload the PAKFA is not going to be able to carry as much as the Su-35...but the PAKFA can go and attack targets in areas where the Su-35 will be severely challenged..and in the future denied..So the payload superiority of the Flanker to the PAKFA (int) applies to missions that the Flanker cannot perform with a reasonable degree of probability of success (that is only going to get lower over time)..and is therefore irrelevant.... When you kit the PAKFA out to perform in areas where the Flanker can perform, the PAKFA will be able to carry a lot more since it has a bay and the ability to mount external payload. This is the entire concept around medium or heavy sized stealth fighters and was precisely what I tried to explain over at the AMCA thread.

[brar_w]

.I expect India to invest a ton of money into this capability over the next few decades not only for the AMCA specifically but for other fighters and unmanned aircraft.

And hopefully not discover that punies are no good after an enemy shoots out your GPS satellites and kills your AWACS with BVRAAMs or blinds them with an atmospheric nuke burst. Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya who declared war on the US never had this capability. But China and US ally Pakistan, who might fight India, do have this capability

And thats why they are making a considerable effort to get rid of the GPS reliance. The SDBII is the first operational weapon in the class for the US to do that.The SDBII can operate in a totally GPS denied environment. The Spice 250 also can operate in a GPS denied environment.

[ramana]

Guys why are discussing SDB in SU-30 MKI Thread?

Focus please.

Instead discuss how to increase the accuracy of the IAF 110 kg weapons.

Its about India after all.

[sudeepj]

Now you tell me what stops Israel from launching satellites and having a GPS system of its own? How about Belgium? Australia? Japan? Anyone who throws his lot in with the US will earn US goodwill and a pat on the head, a cookie and these targeting signals stay on for them in war. For those of us who do not kowtow to the US, we have to use huge dumb bombs in larger numbers with lesser accuracy. You Americans find it difficult to understand the Indian viewpoint but there it is, up front

Simply put the US will share its vast aiming an targeting resources with its poodles and allies and will withdraw those facilities for upstarts and other inconvenient powers.

..

Snipping away the nonsense, are you forgetting IRNSS? 4 Satellites are up in the air and the full system is going to be functional in another year. Combine IRNSS with the Remote Sensing capabilities India has and you have the full targeting chain. b.t.w. the key component in the IRNSS satellites, the atomic clocks, were imported from the US.

btw. India actually has its sat based navigation system in place **before** the Europeans.. Only the US, Russia, China and Japan have managed to do this before us.

[sudeepj]

.I expect India to invest a ton of money into this capability over the next few decades not only for the AMCA specifically but for other fighters and unmanned aircraft.

And hopefully not discover that punies are no good after an enemy shoots out your GPS satellites and kills your AWACS with BVRAAMs or blinds them with an atmospheric nuke burst. Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya who declared war on the US never had this capability. But China and US ally Pakistan, who might fight India, do have this capability

You arent the first one to come up with these scenarios.. There are fully functional capabilities to serve GPS signals in the absence of satellites. Basically, the same signaling scheme is used, but aboard a UAV or a jet (or even on the ground, but for shorter ranges), that flies with a very high quality INS. This allows existing hardware to function with no modifications. Using the higher quality INS is also possible on the weapons themselves.

[Viv S]

How would a puny hit a target? Tell me. You can hit individual trucks and even cars I am told. How? How does one target individual trucks and cars? Please explain where those resources are available to us in India? Apart from piddly punies could you make an honest list of all the ancillacry and support systems needed to make those punies hit where the are supposed to hit. Please don't tell me "We are going to have them all in future" This is one of my problems with the AMCA. AMCA with piddlies is no good without the targeting systems. And the AMCA is not even here let alone the support infrastructure for targeting.

Every IAF fighter aircraft (with the exception of the retiring MiG-21 & MiG-27ML) can field the Litening LDP, of which we just ordered 150 of the latest G4 models. So yes, we already have the capability of hitting individual trucks and even cars.

We also have our own AEW&Cs, will soon have our own JSTARS, have our own GPS equivalent and our own C4I systems.


India Requests ISTAR Aircraft From US
India has offered to buy two intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance (ISTAR) aircraft from Raytheon on a government-to-government basis. <SNIP> The Air Force has already been briefed by Raytheon about the ISTAR aircraft and has evinced interest in wanting to procure planes that will use an active electronically scanned array radar and be able to scan more than 30,000 kilometers in a minute and analyze that data in 10 to 15 minutes to identify the targets.


As far as the AMCA is concerned, we've got plenty of time to develop an SDB-analogue as well as the option of directly integrating the SDB-II onto the aircraft.

Are we going to tell a potential adversary to come back in 25 years when we are ready to use our piddlies?

With respect Shivji, your arguments are about 25 years out of date.

BTW I suggest you take a look at what a CBU-105 SFW delivered by an IAF Jaguar can do.

[sudeepj]

the ERA layers idea is good and fairly cheap. I am sure Cheen is doing a lot of R&D on how to defeat the new range of american munitions.

Yep, that is going to be the only defense. Missiles are not the right approach because of the expense disparity in the SDB and the missile. The key thing is 'ownership' of designs and technology. It will always be a race between the sword and the shield. If you own technology, you can always one up what the other guys comes up with.

[Kanson]

*I think people are not properly understanding Shiv saar argument. It is NOTTTT about Indian weapons or Indian GPS/IRNSS and its accuracy. It is about US weapons.

Whatever the claim made by US on its weapons are valid and function very well in US step up. Moment it is out of US set up, those claims are just claims.

Take for example F-35, it may fulfill whatever it is meant for perfectly in US setup with its associated assets like ISR planes etc. Say if IN gets F-35, will it be as effective as under US setup?

Will we have access to threat libraries as US do? Already Israel started to say, the edge offered by F-35 will last only for 5 to 10 years and they want their own customization. When US holds all cards of its weapons that are supplied to other nations, do we really get the same combat effectiveness as the claim made by US. It may function well under US set up. So the argument from Shiv goes...

Tomorrow if India have to go to war with Pak, will the US weapon function as advertised....

[Karan M]

Interesting thing is that with a Litening even dumb bombs can be delivered with high accuracy. In that Shiv;s concerns are served (about overexpensive PGMs vs dumb bombs etc).

[brar_w]

*I think people are not properly understanding Shiv saar argument. It is NOTTTT about Indian weapons or Indian GPS/IRNSS and its accuracy. It is about US weapons.

The point in his claims was that the SDB class munitions cannot target aircraft shelters so if these munitions proliferate air-forces can get away with simply tin protection to fend off from such threats. That is plain and simply wrong and has been demonstrated in the material provided.

Some of the missions it can perform can be seen here including the A-7 targeting at White Sands..




The Official release from the Pentagon on the A-7 test with the SDB -

A small diameter bomb hits an A-7 parked inside a concrete aircraft shelter during a test at White Sands Missile Range, N.M. SDB is an autonomous, 250 pound class weapon that can be used in adverse weather and has a standoff range of more than 50 nautical miles.



Here is the link back to the DOD website - http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/t ... ional.aspx


As far as US weapons, who is or was advocating for them? The Spice 250 exists and it does not have to rely on US GPS..Heck it doesn't have to rely on Satellites at all. When expanding the discussion to cover the AMCA, we cannot go by what capability exists today since the AMCA is not available today. For the AMCA that is likely to be inducted in the 2027-2035 time frame (and thats a reasonable time-frame in my opinion but extend that if you so wish, or pull it back) and likely to serve for at least 4 deacades beyond that, the Indian Air Force WOULD have better precision than early 2000's SDBI and the rest of the world (including India) would be far far ahead in the PGM evolution.

Whatever the claim made by US on its weapons are valid and function very well in US step up. Moment it is out of US set up, those claims are just claims

A ) That was never in contention for obvious reasons and B ) India does operate LGB's, and SDB class weapons (including the II) come with multiple seekers...The US, Israel and the UK have either made, or are in the process of kicking off program to have SDB or SDBII class weapon that can operate in GPS denied (totally denied) environments...The rest of the world may be behind in this because of the technology gap but its not something that these nations have a monopoly on..These technologies will proliferate with time..And finally C ) How PGM's proliferate has been crystal clear since they were developed..They do not follow the linear long lead times of aircraft development and induction..fourth generation aircraft started off with dumb bombs, and transitioned into 1st generation PGM's..They will most likely retire with 3rd or 4th generation PGM's..Ranges have also gone up considerably while at the same time the CEP has been reduced to an unclassified 10-12 m to around (unclassified) 5-8 using just the GPS...LGB CEP is around 1-2 m depending on the munition concerned...No longer are the modern crop of PGM's just GPS...The SDB II actually only uses GPS/INS for navigation and relies on MMW radar, Imaging Infra-red and Laser targeting to actually target the air to ground location.. Today you can use a guided glide PGM and drop it from 30 km and hit a mobile target...Hows that for CEP?? Now fast forward 20 years to 2035...Where will this technology be? And would nations have the capability to mass produce 2015 technology in 2015?? With India's technology development and economy, why would it be unreasonable to assume that India would exceed this? These aren't the 80's and we aren't talking about going to Mars..PGM's have evolved (much like UAV's) at an extremely fast pace..

Tomorrow if India have to go to war with Pak, will the US weapon function as advertised...

The discussion was never about US weapons, but about miniaturized Precision guided munitions and how they have evolved due to technology, and the mission sets that overlap for them and the larger 500, 1000 pound bombs...

[sudeepj]

The key to solving expense is scale. This being industrial production, the key to scale is in your own hands.

For instance, every smart phone these days has a GPS chip that will likely beat the military grade GPS receivers in sophistication (number of correlators, full INS integration, number of satellites it can track, number of satellite constellations it can track, usage of assistance data and 'other' position sources) yet the cost is only around $1 per receiver. The numbers being manufactured - hundreds of millions per year has brought the cost down. In general, the first ten thousand pieces of silicon are extremely expensive, then the cost falls rapidly. For mechanical systems, perhaps the first few thousand pieces are expensive and the cost falls to a lower number thereafter. For software, the first copy is extremely expensive, then the cost falls with the number of copies deployed.

If the US were to fight a large scale war as opposed to an insurgency tomorrow, the cost of these weapons would drop really fast. But if these weapons are rejected at the first stage itself, they will always be high cost to us, and will never be available in the numbers needed at the time of need.

So the cheapest solution is not the best, its the solution that does not kill other weapons programs and that would be the cheapest if needed in numbers.

[NRao]

Take for example F-35, it may fulfill whatever it is meant for perfectly in US setup with its associated assets like ISR planes etc. Say if IN gets F-35, will it be as effective as under US setup?

It is silly to expect a service to mimic. Do not expect the US Marines to do exactly what the USAF does. So why even bring the IN into the equation?

Each service - at best - will share most of the concepts and perhaps hardware. Beyond that it is up for grabs as to what each of them do. They could have a lot in common and perhaps none.

Gone are the days of sitting and figuring out "what is going to replace our Jags?".

I think a lot of questions arise primarily due to lack of reading or reading based on bias. Up to each one. But, the net has a lot.

[ramana]

Interesting thing is that with a Litening even dumb bombs can be delivered with high accuracy. In that Shiv;s concerns are served (about overexpensive PGMs vs dumb bombs etc).

KaranM, Is Litening type pod used with Su-30 MKI for dumb bomb delivery?
I have seen pictures of Mig-27 drop 500 kg dumb bombs with 15m accuracy from quite far.

---
Dumb question. 150 Litening G4 are being bought for Su30 mki among others.

[ramana]

brar_w, I think SDBII will be acquired by IAF.

[brar_w]

brar_w, I think SDBII will be acquired by IAF.

I seriously doubt it..A ) There is no platform with the IAF that is integrated, B ) It is not yet clear for export, and C ) The integration of this weapon has a ton of US systems to certify..From the F-22 to the F-16, to the bomber fleet..Even the F-35 doesn't get it till 2022..The point is to look into the future when India has platforms of her own such as the LCA & AMCA, and is not slaved to intergration through licenses and multi party agreements...Once you have your own PNT (Percission Navigation and timing) setup as was shown to be the case earlier in the discussion, you can work on things yourself..Sure they may take time but don't confuse PGM development with LCA or AMCA..Once you have the building blocks and particularly the satellites, you can whip something up much faster than you can develop a new aircraft. And that was my point in the AMCA discussion. Creating an SDB I equivalent is far easier for India than the AMCA so YES, its quite reasonable to expect that given the fact that India has her own sats, it can achieve that munition capability before or by the time it develops a 5th generation supersonic stealth aircraft with internal weapons bays. SDBII may be harder but there is plenty of time..and the Israelis can definitely help out if an arrangement is made to extend the SPICE family to also sport tri mode seekers..

I respect Shiv's opinion and his experience and understand his frustration having followed the Indian defense industry and development for decades..But PGM's are much different from uber hypersonic weapons or even stealth bombers and fighters...Much like computing, and electronics and semi conductors and advanced sensors (AESA's) they do not conform to the linear learning curve and developmental timelines, as is evident from the constant increase in capability since they first fielded in respectable numbers.

Remember back in the Cold War Days, a threshold of 15% munition to be PGM's was considered by analysts to be the equivalent of enjoying an overwhelming superiority in tactical nuclear weapons..Why? Because, the only way you could rapidly, accurately, and with high flexibility destroy very large formations, or at best neutralize them or bring them to a halt was through the use of tactical nukes..Everything else involved huge amount of aircraft, support aircraft which could be dealt with from the ground and the air..So the race was on to develop extremely accurate weapons. The Second Offset strategy, created PGM's and GPS and that changed the entire equation...The world took note of this back in the 80s and again when these cold war weapons came to the forefront through the popular media coverage of the Gulf War in the early 90's. Since then advanced militaries have upped their total munition inventory to have PGM's that are now > 50%...Others have seen this trend and there is a race to get to a similar state if not to exceed and skip the learning curve that generally comes with "first of a kind" technology. China is investing in them big time..India has her own sats and can cover its entire region of interest and provide controlled and indigenous PNT capability for weapons deployment. Concurrently, electronics have become much better, power requirements shrunk, and at the same time battery tech advanced to a point where glide weapons can now autonomously pick targets using MMW...The PGM side of the business is evolving rapidly and unlike GTE, and other hard to master technologies such as stealth or hypersonics, a valuable capability in this domain can be built up through commercial technology and base...Hence capability here has skipped generations and does not conform to usual military development and innovation timelines..

[Viv S]

brar_w, I think SDBII will be acquired by IAF.

I seriously doubt it..A ) There is no platform with the IAF that is integrated, B ) It is not yet clear for export, and C ) The integration of this weapon has a ton of US systems to certify..From the F-22 to the F-16, to the bomber fleet..Even the F-35 doesn't get it till 2022..The point is to look into the future when India has platforms of her own such as the AMCA..Once you have your own PNT setup as was shown to be the case earlier in the discussion, you can work on things yourself..Sure they may take time but don't confuse PGM development with LCA or AMCA.

Identifying a platform is not a hurdle at all. And while a domestically developed L-SDB analogue is very doable (with a foreign wing-kit if necessary), an all-weather weapon like the SDB II may still need to be imported.

AMCA aside, consider our more short-term concerns, the SDB I/L-SDB is a perfect fit for the Tejas. Its long glide range offsets the Tejas' (relatively) shorter legs, and its tight packing is ideal for the limited number of hard-points available. Get a quad-pack on the centre-point and the Tejas transforms into a superb swing-role fighter [2 x 1200L tanks + 4 x Astra/Derby + 2 x Python-5 + 4 x SDB].

The SDB is already part of the Gripen's MS20 upgrade. I'm surprised the IAF hasn't placed a request yet, but perhaps they're waiting for the program to stabilize before demanding further capability. One can be quite certain that the SDB II will be under strong contention for the Tejas Mk2.

[brar_w]

Yup, the PNT setup is the hard part and India has done well there to cover its geographic areas of interest..The munitions and that capability is far cheaper comparatively..The laser bit is also something that is achievable..the only benchmark is to be more accurate than dumb bombs, it doesn't have to be as good or as advanced as the absolute cutting edge. Plenty of help can be sought from Israel if need be.

[ramana]

ViVS, Aage, Aage dekho.