The military concept of Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) is a theory about the future of warfare, often connected to technological and organizational recommendations for change in the United States military...
What do the above airplanes all have in common?
Not one of them features all aspect stealth.
The Russians have moved toward retaining high agility with moderate stealth and the Chinese (reading from our playbook) appear to be trying for basically the same.
The Europeans have only gone down the stealth path when it comes to UAVs and are instead concentrating mostly on high speed air to air missiles along with tweaking their AESA arrays...only God knows what the Navy is up to, but they have some fully funded classified projects in the works that seek to keep the Super Hornet viable until a 6th gen fighter is developed. The Air Force is probably teamed up on some of those projects which would explain the upgrades being pushed to the F-15/16.
Considering the price that the US military is paying for the F-35. Thinking about the combat experience that is going to shoved out the door to get that airplane, the question must be asked. Is stealth worth the price? Are we going to trust the same leadership team that promised us an affordable fighter to get it right when they say that the F-35 will be competitive for the next 50 years when our enemies have produced stealth aircraft 10 years before their estimates?
This high tech force in lieu of retaining personnel is nothing but Rumsfeld's "Revolution in Military Affairs" just watered down. Instead of cutting edge aircraft, armored vehicles and communication systems...all we get is an airplane.
Dude, the F-35 IS an all-aspect fighter aircraft. The Chinese and Russian knock-offs are NOT.
ReplyDeleteQuit drinking APA kool aid dude on THAT subject. You're embarasssing yourself here.
The Europeans have gone down a stealthy UAV path have they? How many have they produced? More than one? They've got one single tech demonstrator in Australia at the moment, learning how to fly it. They've got neither the funding nor the political will to sustain even the "planned" 4th Gen fighter and airlifter programs they have at present, let alone some sort of uber-UCAV program. France isn't buying 16 odd Reapers cause their own UAV programs are kicking so much ass...
I agree the Corps needs a decent armoured vehicle fleet (nice flip-flop on M1A1 too while we're on the subject of USMC armor) but to suggest the F-35 should be cancelled is a joke. Who wants to face those decent (but less than doomsday providing) PAK-FA's, SU-35's or J-Whatever's in a Hornet, F-16 or AV-8B?
A way has to be found to accomodate both decent armor for the Corps AND the F-35. That has to be your argument!
if the F-35 is now considered an all aspect stealth platform then the definition of all aspect has changed. the rest of what you have to say is irrelevant.
DeleteJason Simmons,
DeleteThere is more than one European Stealthy UCAV project. There is the Taranis prototype that is currently in Australia, like you said. There is also the NEURON project which had it's first flight last December. Those are the two main current ones. But there is also the Barracuda that had its first flight in 2006. Plus the BAE Corax that flew in 2004 could be argued that it was stealthy, being a flying wing and feeding into the Taranis project.
As for the future, well there is a joint project between the UK and France to develop a stealthy UCAV for enter into service late next decade. I'm sure there will be problems along the way, but I find it nearly impossible to believe that it won't be developed and enter service. As if it doesn't then Europe will basically be out of the Fighter aircraft manufacturing business. Which the various European governments are just not going to want or accept.
As for France buying 16 Reapers, well they are for now not in 10-15 years time. France and the UK are also meant to be designing and producing a MALE UAV for enter into service for around 2020. Which at least for the UK is planned to replace the Reaper. Now that France has just agreed to buy these 16 Reapers, there is some doubt if they will continue with that project. Even then the current plan for the UK is still to replace the Reapers around the end of this decade. Either way, the UCAV for entry into service around 2025-2030 is still safe and progressing.
I'm not sure what 4th Gen fighter or airlifter program you think is in danger, but all are progressing basically as planned. There was delays in the A400m but it is now entering service and there are no plans to cancel it. The number ordered is less than first planned, but that happens with basically every aircraft project. The number of F-22 produced was lower than first planned. The number of F-35 produced will be lower than first planned.
Now onto the F-35. I guess different people have different definitions of 'all aspect'. Especially when it comes to marketing a aircraft. But from all that I have read and heard, the F-35 is meant focus it's stealth on the front aspect. I'm sure there is some signature reduction on the rear but it will be quite a lot less than that of the front and side aspects. If you listen to some of the interview from the project managers and the pilots etc involved in the project then you will hear them talk about the front aspect stealth.
Not really related, but while talking about future aircraft production, has anyone considered what effect automated manufacturing will have on the military in the future. Manufacturing is getting more automated all the time, and there are already some factories that have no people working in them. I find it hard to believe that it won't be a possibility in 20-30 years time, that military aircraft and other equipment (ships etc) won't be built completely automated. So if it is just a question of paying for the factory and then the raw materials, maybe we will see the size of all militaries increase again.
So clearly you've seen the RCS pole data, is that right Soloman?
ReplyDeleteThis is an all-aspect low observable platform.
http://www.hightech-edge.com/wp-content/uploads/f-117-nighthawk-cruising.jpg
This is an all-aspect low observable platform.
http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acimages/b2a_roelreinje.jpg
This is an all-aspect low observable platform.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Lockheed_Martin_F-22.jpg
How can this be? 3 distinctly different shapes. OMG! How can all 3 possibly be different and yet ALL 3 be all-aspect low observable designs?
Quite simple. Technological evolution. Low observable technology isn't static, it evolves. F-35 is EVERY bit an all-aspect LO design. Believe otherwise if you want, but be prepared to be increasingly irrelevant to any discussions that matter.
Nice dodge on the M1A1 issue too...
how did i dodge you on the M1A1 issue. you're a clown. now one calls them amtracks. in the Corps they're called tracks. thats it. i refer to it as an armor issue because the M1A1 is obsolete by US Army standards and a decision has to be made. do we keep the M1A1 or do we go to the M1A2. do we wait to go to a future M1A3? i talk about our armor house because we had a chance to get MPCs. we had a chance to get a lower tech EFV and we still haven't heard from the sorry son of a bitch with regard to the ACV.
Deletei haven't seen one thing about the radar cross section except that everyone claims that the F-35 is all aspect stealth. except that for some strange reason the F-22 and B-2 have serious engineering work done to the rear section of the plane to keep it low observable. that work wasn't done with the F-35 and its plain to see.
so yeah. unless the all aspect stealth has been dumbed down then it doesn't apply to the F-35. you can pull out every article from across the internet and it won't change a thing. i'll believe my own eyes.
Clearly you haven't been paying attention. Notice the "feathers" on the F-135 exhaust? Notice the saw-toothing on the airframe bulge around the exhaust? Notice the "buried" engine from most angles?
ReplyDeleteThe work WAS done. The aircraft has the shaping, RAM and internal structures required to be considered all-aspect LO from any reasoned consideration of it.
Next like Carlo, you'll be telling us you can assess LO signature from pictures and your own wire diagrams...
no. i noticed them but i'll tell you one other thing that you happen to ignore. the Chinese stole the secrets to the F-35 and could have replicated the look if not the function of those "feathers" ... they chose not to. the Program Manager stated that the secrets of the F-35 are showing up in the J-20 and J-31...he also said that he wasn't confident that the contractors had safeguarded their information against further theft.
Deletelong story short. if it was worth pursuing then the Chinese would at least give us the illusion that they're doing it. they aren't. also i can do a visual and see the difference between the F-35 and F-22. the people behind the plane tells us that it isn't as stealthy as the F-22. so what is the difference? it has to be rear aspect stealth. it isn''t rocket science, its simple observation.
Chris Chadwick, President of Boeing's Military Aircraft Division has even stated that the F-35 is an all aspect platform.
ReplyDeleteIt would make little sense to build a strike fighter lacking all aspect stealth, as the aircraft would be incredibly vulnerable upon egress.
Revolutions are based on ideas and it takes people to conceive those ideas and act them execute them.
ReplyDeleteThe RMA was as phoney as a 3-dollar bill because all it did was talk about technology and hardware without involving the people or the ideas.
And now we have a confederacy of dunces in the five-sided puzzle palace telling us we need to invest in expensive programs that will leave us with fewer ships, planes, vehicles and manned by a force a fraction the size of a military already deemed too small to wage war. 380,000 man Army? fuck that jive.
PEOPLE: you need men and women of character and intelligence who are smart enough to know what to and strong enough not to do something just so they get promoted. We need a new personnel system to recruit, train and evaluate these people so they can develop the tactics and the weapons they will need to get the job done. Out with the Old Cold Warriors, in with the next generation of Colonels and Generals.
IDEAS: these people will generate new ideas and innovations to take advantage of technology rather than rely upon it; find the weaknesses of the enemy and build a strategy around strengths.
HARDWARE: Lastly, this is the least important, but it is still necessary. Is it better to lump the F-35, LCS, etc. and update our legacy systems to prepare for a new generation of weapons and platforms e.g. rail-guns, directed energy, intelligent drones, in number that won't bankrupt the Republic but will still put the fear of God, Confucious, Allah, Buddha into our enemies.
Make it the mantra of A REAL revolution in military affairs. Allow the creative destruction of the Soviet-style design bureaus that Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics have become and create the space that allows for innovation on scale the nation can afford.
People, Ideas, Hardware: IN THAT ORDER!
I'll give Solomon one thing - he's never afraid to double-down on stupidity.
ReplyDelete