USAF News and Discussion

[John Fedup]

Interesting article on the logistics of getting a billion dollar satellite to its launch site. The AEHF communication satellite is the fourth of six to be launched. As the article mentions, these large super satellites may have to replaced by many smaller ones that will allow a comm network to be more survivable. Then again, perhaps there are future defence systems that will be built into future large satellites.

How A Billion-Dollar Satellite Gets to the Launch Pad

 

[the concerned]

If it was possible for a B-2 to launch a bunker buster and hit say a aircraft carrier. Would it be enough to destroy the ship

 

[John Fedup]

Bunker busters are designed for deep penetration so would the bomb just slice threw a vessel and explode well below the ship hull or is there enough steel structure to cause detonation. For a carrier, this is likely. The other issue is the ability of a bunker buster to hit a moving target.

 

[the concerned]

I was considering the gbu-57 mop. That's a 30,000lb bomb

 

[John Fedup]

According to this link, the MOP is designed for penetration into 200 feet of reenforced concrete before detonating so my question is still, would the interior steel structure cause the MOP to detonate? Unlkey the answer is in the public domain and there is still the question of it's ability to hit a moving target. Certainly a hit anywhere midships that causes a detonation should end a CVN just from the nuclear contamination that would result.

We Have Found Ultra Rare Footage Showing A B-2 Spirit Stealth Bomber Dropping A 30,000-Pound Bunker Buster Bomb

 

[swerve]

Bunker busters are designed for deep penetration so would the bomb just slice threw a vessel and explode well below the ship hull or is there enough steel structure to cause detonation. For a carrier, this is likely. The other issue is the ability of a bunker buster to hit a moving target.

It'd depend on the fuse. There are fuses which count voids, so a missile warhead can be set to explode after passing through a set number of walls, e.g. the PIMPF fuse on the KEPD-350, & fuses with a variable delay, so they'll explode a pre-set time after initial penetration. It should not be beyond the wit of man to put a fuse of either type on a big bunker-busting bomb.

Guidance, though . . . . not sure.

 

[Todjaeger]

If it was possible for a B-2 to launch a bunker buster and hit say a aircraft carrier. Would it be enough to destroy the ship

Why would you want to use a B-2 vs. shipping, and/or employ a weapon as large as a bunker buster? A single Mk 48 heavyweight torpedoe (~1,700 kg) with a (~290 kg) HE warhead which detonates beneath a vessel would typically be sufficient to break the keel of a vessel and quickly sink it. That might not work if the targeted vessel was tied up alongside a wharf in shallow water, or in a dock, but conventional munitions should be sufficient in such circumstances to achieve a mission kill if scoring hits.

Now using something like a MOAB or MOAP to attack the infrastructure of a naval base or dockyard could be appropriate if at the start of hostilities, but that would not be specifically for anti-shipping.

 

[the concerned]

Because the best weapon available is fear. Subs can be detected, missiles can be decoyed, but a bomb once it's dropped is going to hit. Especially with the guidance these days.

 

[barney41]

Because the best weapon available is fear. Subs can be detected, missiles can be decoyed, but a bomb once it's dropped is going to hit. Especially with the guidance these days.

A CIWS would make short work of it.

 

[the concerned]

A CIWS would make short work of it.

Could a B-2 be tracked before it is able to release the bomb. If not the flight time of the bomb at say max altitude of the bomber would be less than 1min that's not a lot of time to react. And even of you could by the time you engaged the weapon would the size of the blast cause significant damage anyway.

 

[John Fedup]

Don’t think the 1 minute time is right, there is likely a glide procedure to target. As for tracking a B-2 by naval vessels, don’t know but probably not. Won’t be in the public domain in any event.

 

[John Fedup]

I guess it was only a matter of time before a F-22 version 2 or F-22/F-35 hybrid was shopped around to the USAF considering the recent proposals to Japan. The question of export sales would have to be addressed before anything happens IMO. Even though the development should be less and faster than a 6th Gen, the costs would be more than even the US is likely going want to fund alone at present. Not sure whether partners other than Japan would be interested as long as the current POTUS is around.

Should this concept gain traction, will NG dust off their YF-23 plans and start modifications? Then their is Boeing and what about the USN 's need for a decent long range air superiority fighter? It will be interesting to see if any of this actually sees the light of day.

Lockheed Pitching F-22/F-35 Hybrid to U.S. Air Force

 

[ngatimozart]

I guess it was only a matter of time before a F-22 version 2 or F-22/F-35 hybrid was shopped around to the USAF considering the recent proposals to Japan. The question of export sales would have to be addressed before anything happens IMO. Even though the development should be less and faster than a 6th Gen, the costs would be more than even the US is likely going want to fund alone at present. Not sure whether partners other than Japan would be interested as long as the current POTUS is around.

Should this concept gain traction, will NG dust off their YF-23 plans and start modifications? Then their is Boeing and what about the USN 's need for a decent long range air superiority fighter? It will be interesting to see if any of this actually sees the light of day.

Lockheed Pitching F-22/F-35 Hybrid to U.S. Air Force

With materials science advances since the F-22 was originally manufactured and of course the F-35 brain and sensors, it would certainly be one mean machine. I think that it almost would be a 5+ generation aircraft. One thing that I believe that they should do is change the F-22 20 mm gun to the 25 mm gun of the F-35 and increase the ammo supply significantly. Or use a 30 mm gatling or revolver.

 

[John Fedup]

I guess it really boils down to the following from a US POV;

1. Are 187 Raptors sufficient?
2. How much will a F-22 hybrid cost and how much better would it be than the current version?
3. Will the number of F-35s have to be reduced?
4. Will a hybrid acquisition delay development of a 6th Gen fighter for the USAF?
5. If the USN pushes for its own 6th Gen fighter (navalized hybrid likely too expensive and unworkable), would USAF still be interested in a hybrid at the expense of their own 6th Gen fighter being delayed?

With the huge outlay needed for the B-21, I don't see Congress rushing to fund this. If any immediate new fighter is needed, it should be for the USN.

 

[south]

With materials science advances since the F-22 was originally manufactured and of course the F-35 brain and sensors, it would certainly be one mean machine. I think that it almost would be a 5+ generation aircraft. One thing that I believe that they should do is change the F-22 20 mm gun to the 25 mm gun of the F-35 and increase the ammo supply significantly. Or use a 30 mm gatling or revolver.

Curious to hear why you would change the gun?

 

[ngatimozart]

Curious to hear why you would change the gun?

Easy, the F-22 has the M61A2 Vulcan 6-barrel 20 mm gatling gun which is sub standard today because of shorter range and less hitting power than other currently used F and F/A guns.

• F-35A has the 4 barrelled GAU-12A 25 mm 4 barrelled gatling gun with 180 rnds and a rof 3,600–4,200 rpm,
• EF Typhoon and the SAAB Gripen have a single 27 mm revolver cannon with 150 rnds and a rof of 1700 rpm,
• Russian Su-35 has a 30 mm recoil cannon with 150 rnds and a reputed rof of 1800 rpm.

To put it into context, the USMC AV-8 Harriers have the General Dynamics GAU-12U Equalizer 25 mm 5 barrelled gatling gun with 300 rnds and a rof 3,600–4,200 rpm. The AV-8B entered service with the USMC during the 1980s, so it's not as though the already in service technology wasn't available when the F-22 was being designed and built, but I suppose USAF sensitivities and inter-service politics etc., would have precluded such an idea.

 

[south]

Easy, the F-22 has the M61A2 Vulcan 6-barrel 20 mm gatling gun which is sub standard today because of shorter range and less hitting power than other currently used F and F/A guns.

• F-35A has the 4 barrelled GAU-12A 25 mm 4 barrelled gatling gun with 180 rnds and a rof 3,600–4,200 rpm,
• EF Typhoon and the SAAB Gripen have a single 27 mm revolver cannon with 150 rnds and a rof of 1700 rpm,
• Russian Su-35 has a 30 mm recoil cannon with 150 rnds and a reputed rof of 1800 rpm.

To put it into context, the USMC AV-8 Harriers have the General Dynamics GAU-12U Equalizer 25 mm 5 barrelled gatling gun with 300 rnds and a rof 3,600–4,200 rpm. The AV-8B entered service with the USMC during the 1980s, so it's not as though the already in service technology wasn't available when the F-22 was being designed and built, but I suppose USAF sensitivities and inter-service politics etc., would have precluded such an idea.

It's an interesting discussion. As with anything it is always a compromise and much of it depends on what you are trying to kill. Against aircraft, particularly fighters, longer range isn't necessarily such an advantage; effective range against a manouevring opponent is quite small any way. Most aircraft are lightly skinned so heavier rounds aren't always more effective (to a point). Further considerations include the dispersion - small dispersion isn't necessarily great; if you miss with one round you will miss with all. The Vulcan cannon will produce a shotgun effect that combined with high rate of fire means it is still effective even if the target crosses through the line of fire for a very small period of time. Against vehicles and for ground strafe heavier rounds with longer range can be more effective; witness the GAU-8 dropped into the A-10.

The mere fact that the F-22 was selected with the Vulcan makes me believe that the USAF felt it was the most effective cannon available at the time - as we have seen with the F-35 a different cannon was selected. As you mentioned the GAU-12U was available when the F-22 was conceived. My personal belief was that if the USAF believed it was a more effective cannon for their intended target set they would have selected it or conducted a modification / new design ala what we have seen with the F-35.

 

[ngatimozart]

Just further to the discussion a video I just found. RAF Spitfires being used as ground targets for air gunnery practice. Not sure when it was shot, but presume in the 1950s. Just about cried when is saw those Spitfires being shot up. Anyway the film shows the destructive differences between the 50 cal, 20 mm and 30 mm rounds.

 

[John Fedup]

Continuing on with the F-22 discussion, the USAF just returned a F-22 to service after a lengthy repair/upgrade. This sort of confirms there aren't enough Raptors. The interesting details in the link are the 25,000 man- hours and over 11,000 fixes required to put this jet back into operation. There is no cost information but it must be significant. One really has to wonder what any future hydrid or sixth Gen fighter will cost if built in the limited quantities the Raptor was. One solution does seem obvious, export orders will be needed.

F-22 Deemed Too Expensive to Fix for 6 Years Finally Ready to Fly

 

[FORBIN]

Continuing on with the F-22 discussion, the USAF just returned a F-22 to service after a lengthy repair/upgrade. This sort of confirms there aren't enough Raptors. The interesting details in the link are the 25,000 man- hours and over 11,000 fixes required to put this jet back into operation. There is no cost information but it must be significant. One really has to wonder what any future hydrid or sixth Gen fighter will cost if built in the limited quantities the Raptor was. One solution does seem obvious, export orders will be needed.

F-22 Deemed Too Expensive to Fix for 6 Years Finally Ready to Fly

Enough they have but just and few normaly an AF have 10 - 20 % of the aircrats stored in reserve to replace losses etc.. dépends Countries, Air Service

The Fleet is to 186
100 combat coded Block 30/35s
39 combat coded Block 20
32 training Block 20s
12 development test/ operational test (DT/OT) Block 20/30/35s
3 pre-serie test aircraft

According recent GAO report 183 in units so 3 in reserve so " daddy " back to provide front line Sqns yet one a year ago.

For 2020 all combat coded Block 20 upgraded in Block 30/35s with especialy AIM-9X, AIM-120D and helmet in general Elmendorf AB is always the first to receive improved coz the more close of the Pacific Theater exist Hickham AB but different it is a ANG Sqn.