EA/18G Growler

[Ozzy Blizzard]

The BVR AMRAAM achieves the range by doing a ballistic trajectory. By gaining altitude from the rocket burn it can coast at higher altitude increasing range massively as it will suffer less drag and also manages its energy better. To do this it needs quality data as described above in order to optimise flight path and to avoid expending energy correcting its course. The IRST cued missile cannot do this. It does not know the range or have a poor sense of it. On top of that it expends more energy correcting its course.

Much less range. The NEZ of the BVR radar guided missile much much bigger.

BVR ranges depend on highly optimised flight path of the missile.

Example of flight profile.
http://www.ausairpower.net/Su-30MK+Kh-31-2.png

Link didn't work so it's attached.

Ok I'm starting to see your point. But how accurate does the initial data need to be? Since therse is a good chance that the intercept point (even on a bailistic trajectory) would have moved quite a bit from the time of launch. So is the accuracy of the initial target data wouldnt be that imposrtant, becaus as soon as the target changes direction it is irrelevant. So whats to stop a pair of flankers getting track information from triangulating the bairings on their IRST's, that could be done in real time given a datalink? The only difference for the missile would be that it would use IR instead of radar teminal guidence???

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Yeah and with more efficient flux capacitors time travel will be possible. Fact is ozzie how can you design a more effective RWR against LPI radar when the exact way it works is classified. Sort of like those pesky GPS jammers.

The way stealth is exactly achieved is classified too but there are still systems out there that can defeat it i.e. JORN. And i'm pretty sure the ruskies would be well aware of the principles behind LPI and working damn hard on countering it. The fact of the matter is that a trasmitter still has to emmit microwaves at the target which have to bounce of it to get a return. It will allways be possible to detect.

Making a bit of a stretch there ozzie. See, they fitted the plane with an LPI radar. Say while we are talking about the future how much do you want to bet that within a few very short years the US will come out with satellites that can track jet fighter and pass the targeting information on. I mean hell we can all speculate on “future” capabilities can’t we?

1. As i have said 5 times allready we are talking about the future of the RAAF for the next 40 years. Gee it would be really smart not to debate potential of future threats to the platform we are spending $20Bn on.

2. I'm not talking about the USAF or USN, i'm talking about the RAAF. They might well be able to do that but we wont.

And LM is going to be sitting on their hands in the meantime. Ever consider how far stealth has come since the F-117 days? It is not a zero sum game. Both sides make advances.

No. Thats BS. Unless your talking about plasma stealth or some new paint, stealth is fundimental to the design. Sensors can be installed and upgraded as new systems come out. Sure there will be improvements in stealth technology but they will have to be incorporated into a new platform and are irrelevent to RAAF F35's that will have to maintain air dominance throughout the region for 3 decades.

Yeah that and the fact that it has a huge RCS and massive heat signature.

Sure does, but as soon as both sides detect each other thats irellevent.

Of speed are no longer relevant. If it where, there would be Mach 3 fighters already in production. As I recall the Mig 25 had Mach 3.2 capability. Where is it today. The US has built a Mach 3 bomber 35 years ago. I am sure they could build a Mach 3 fighter today with ease. Why don’t they? Why didn’t they give the Raptor that kind of speed?

That is another ridiculosly simplistic analogy. Kinetic advantage is very important, and how long could those platforms keep up that speed? They did give the F22 that kind of speed, IIRC its top wet speed is well in exess of M2.5 & its dry speed is M1.5~1.7. Its accelaration is higher than any other aircraft. Your ability to go real fast without burning much fuel, change dirceion quickly while maintaining high supersonic speed, and accelerate quickley makes it very har for a missile to hit you. Thats why its so dam hard to shoot down the F22 even if you do see it. If the F35 is seen well then its pretty easy.

When will you start using facts other than those of Kopps? I am not attacking him. You asked if he is to be believed. I pointed out that he has an obvious desire for the RAAF to acquire the F-22 and he has tried to make an argument for it using exaggerations, cherry picking and incorrect/uncorroborated data and speculation passing as data.. That is not attacking someone, just pointing out the shortcomings of his logic. I am not attacking you, just pointing out where you are wrong. Try citing a source other than Kopp’s.

But you didn't. All you did do is pick selective quotes were he outlines the strengths of the F/A18E/F. You didn't rebutt his data or his logic, just attempted to dicredit his analysis by questioning his motives. That is not arguing the facts but questioning the man. You did the same thing with ELP. What he said on annother forum has nothing to do with the stregth, relevency or competancy of his argument. So dont go around nit picking what other people may have said in previous articles/statements as it really has nothing to do with what they have actually argued here.

The radar feeds it updated targeting information.

And triangulating IRSTs with datalink wouldn't?

Almost missed this gem. Are you serious?

What like clean SH's sneaking up on AWACS for a gun kill?

Don’t be so sure they put a lot of work into IR suppression as well.

I'm sure they do, although all the public stuff i've read states that the F35's IR supression is pretty minimal.

 

[Todjaeger]

Several thoughts on this thread

I'd like to make a general observation about this thread. It could just be me, but the tone of the thread is beginning to turn nasty. People might want to remember that when posting, otherwise the mods may end up closing this thread too.

And i could have thrown in a couple of R 172's fired at extreem range at the wedgetail from below its radar horizon that either force it to shut down or shoot it down.

I have to question the effectiveness of this tactic. The Wedgetail has a publicly declared detection range of 200 n miles, and the R-172 has a declared range of 215 n miles. Given how closemouthed Western manufacturors get with actual Milspec performance, I believe the Wedgetail range is understated. Similarly, I believe the effective range of the R-172 is overstated, particularly given the observed Q/C issues in Russian aerospace production. Add into this the possibility of the MESA to jam or conduct DEW attacks upon the missile itself, as well as issues of missile guidance to target, I don't believe the R-172 carrying aircraft could close to launch range without being detected.

Another observation I have on this debate. While people acknowledge the superior aircraft handling characteristics of the Su-27/33/35 etc. al. Flanker, and the technological advantages of the F/A-18F Super Hornet and F-35 Lightning II, I note a flaw in the arguements of the people who feel the Flanker is superior. Assumptions are made that the technological edge held by the Super Hornet and Lightning would be lost with possible future developments for the Flanker, while the future upgrades for the SH and JSF would remain static. Yes, there is room to expand the Flanker series in terms of avionics development. At the same time, as things develope, the SH and JSF can also increase in capability.

The areas where expansion isn't possible without a re-design, is things like RCS, IR signature, max speed and maneuverability. The question then becomes which is more important, fast and agile, or somewhat slower but sneaky. Given what appears to be the balance between the two, if the "slow but sneaky" crowd maintain the level of separation in technology, they will win IMV.

-Cheers

 

[gf0012-aust]

Time to settle down folks. Pause or come back in a few days.

 

[Thumper]

The way stealth is exactly achieved is classified too but there are still systems out there that can defeat it i.e. JORN.

Oh my god! JORN? You better do a bit more research. It does not in any way defeat stealth. You cannot track with it, you cannot target with it. You get luck with it because of the frequency it works at. The information you get at great distances from it from LO AC is that ther may be an object out there and a vague heading. Once the AC gets closer JORN is useless. Thjis is real old stuff and went over years ago.

Oh almost forgot. Its a land based array that so far no one else but the Australians have produced. Its a great radar for its purpose but it in no way defeats stealth.

Ozzie if I no longer reply to you don't take it personal, but after the JORN statement you have lost all credibility.

I'm sure they do, although all the public stuff i've read states that the F35's IR supression is pretty minimal.

Reread the post we where talking about the raptor.

 

[gf0012-aust]

The way stealth is exactly achieved is classified too but there are still systems out there that can defeat it i.e. JORN. And i'm pretty sure the ruskies would be well aware of the principles behind LPI and working damn hard on countering it. The fact of the matter is that a trasmitter still has to emmit microwaves at the target which have to bounce of it to get a return. It will allways be possible to detect.

JORN is actually unable to provide meaningful assist on stealth assets. It can see (some) of them, but is in no way able to provide targetting data.

Its also why the current plan is to include JORN into some of the other US systems (such as BMD/DEWS) so that it does become a more precise instrument.

We've been able to see rockets and missiles launch way beyond the advertised range, we've been able to see aircraft rotate off of land base strips, and in one test about 8 years ago, I know we were able to periodically track a vehicle across some test space - but none of it would be suitable for targetting data unless you were going to use an area denial weapon that had a volumetric impact on that location (or maybe a ground based target)

as an independant aircraft targetting system? not a sausage

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

I'd like to make a general observation about this thread. It could just be me, but the tone of the thread is beginning to turn nasty. People might want to remember that when posting, otherwise the mods may end up closing this thread too.

Tod i have to say that another logical, rational and well though out post. You and tassie are the most level headed poster on this forum IMO.

I have to question the effectiveness of this tactic. The Wedgetail has a publicly declared detection range of 200 n miles, and the R-172 has a declared range of 215 n miles. Given how closemouthed Western manufacturors get with actual Milspec performance, I believe the Wedgetail range is understated. Similarly, I believe the effective range of the R-172 is overstated, particularly given the observed Q/C issues in Russian aerospace production. Add into this the possibility of the MESA to jam or conduct DEW attacks upon the missile itself, as well as issues of missile guidance to target, I don't believe the R-172 carrying aircraft could close to launch range without being detected.

With the range given on the Wedgetail at what altitude is that? The lower the target flyes the lower the detection radius is due to the radar horizon. Although the lower the altiutde of launch the lower the missile range too. But if the equasions added up ( like below the radar horizon but within NEZ or range of the missile) then the lauch platform would not be detected. However if the equasion did not add up (below the radar horizon was beyond the range of the missile) then the launch platform could make a high speed and high altitude pass into the lauch reange, fire and bug out. It wouldn't really matter if it was detected. Also this tactic would not be used on its own, it would not inted to use a sneaky shot to down the Wedgetail. Its best use would be just as your fighters are about to angage the enemy. The R172's would probably not down the wedgetail, although they might, but they would force it to shut down, and the RAAF would then loose its AWE&C right as battle commenced. It may be up and running in a few minnets if it got a soft kill on the missiles but if you have a few platforms hurling R172's they would practically negate your AWE&C capability because it would not be observing and directing the battle but dodgeing missiles.

Another observation I have on this debate. While people acknowledge the superior aircraft handling characteristics of the Su-27/33/35 etc. al. Flanker, and the technological advantages of the F/A-18F Super Hornet and F-35 Lightning II, I note a flaw in the arguements of the people who feel the Flanker is superior. Assumptions are made that the technological edge held by the Super Hornet and Lightning would be lost with possible future developments for the Flanker, while the future upgrades for the SH and JSF would remain static. Yes, there is room to expand the Flanker series in terms of avionics development. At the same time, as things develope, the SH and JSF can also increase in capability.

Thats not what i was arguing at all. Advances in Radar, avionics, missiles and software will no doubt continue in the F35 just as fast as other advances will continue on the Flanker. However the fundimental advantages the F35 has that it will rely on to counter its dissadvantages are being erroded by advances in sensors and networking in the flanker. These errosians can not be recovered by the F35 as they are fundimental to the design. The F35 will continue to increase its radar lead but this will not be decisive because it allready has an advantage in this respect. The crutial argument is systems and technices that will be employed in the Flanker are all intended to counter the LO on the F35 and its the nature of the beast that the F35 ca not just make the aircraft more stealthy like they can install new sensors or avionics.

The areas where expansion isn't possible without a re-design, is things like RCS, IR signature, max speed and maneuverability. The question then becomes which is more important, fast and agile, or somewhat slower but sneaky. Given what appears to be the balance between the two, if the "slow but sneaky" crowd maintain the level of separation in technology, they will win IMV.

-Cheers

The point i'm making is the critical advantage that the F35 holds, which is intrenched in its design, is being erroded advances in sensor technology. Without that advantage i dont believe it gives the RAAF the regional air superiority we need.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

JORN is actually unable to provide meaningful assist on stealth assets. It can see (some) of them, but is in no way able to provide targetting data.

Its also why the current plan is to include JORN into some of the other US systems (such as BMD/DEWS) so that it does become a more precise instrument.

We've been able to see rockets and missiles launch way beyond the advertised range, we've been able to see aircraft rotate off of land base strips, and in one test about 8 years ago, I know we were able to periodically track a vehicle across some test space - but none of it would be suitable for targetting data unless you were going to use an area denial weapon that had a volumetric impact on that location (or maybe a ground based target)

as an independant aircraft targetting system? not a sausage

I agree. I wasn't trying to say it could be used to target aircraft. Just the principle that it has a stealth detection capability, when the designers may not have been aware of the way LO aircraft acieve their low RCS.

How capable is it in reality? I'm not asking for specifics but will it deliver what is promised???

 

[rjmaz1]

Alot of good info is being posted here

Of speed are no longer relevant. If it where, there would be Mach 3 fighters already in production. As I recall the Mig 25 had Mach 3.2 capability. Where is it today. The US has built a Mach 3 bomber 35 years ago. I am sure they could build a Mach 3 fighter today with ease. Why don’t they? Why didn’t they give the Raptor that kind of speed?

An F-22 sized aircraft designed for mach 3 performance would be lucky to travel 2000kms at that speed. The F-22 airframe is designed to have optimal drag at Mach 1.5 the fixed inlets prevent it from travelling much quicker than this. Most aircraft rarely travel supersonic for its entire mission, having an aircraft that can cruise at Mach 1.5 is sensational. Its all about compromise there is no point having the fixed inlets designed for Mach 2.5 if you have to use full afterburner to reach that speed. Having inlets designed for that high speed would then reduce the supercruising speed. Considering the F-22 doesn't have the fuel capacity to use its afterburners constantly then its much smarter to have fixed inlets for Mach 1.5

If the Mission profile called for a high speed stealth recon aircraft that required Mach 3 performance im sure that the F-22 could easily be adapted to have offer Mach 2.8+ performance with full afterburner. Though its short range wouldn't make it that useful.. It would however be a good Anti satelite launch platform.

So speed versus range.. the F-22 is right up there.


On another note the search volume of Russian IRST devices is questionable. I remember hearing a 12 degree field of view.. and detection range is reduced when it has to search. When radar aimed the IRST will detect aircraft a long distance away, however it cannot be radar aimed as the stealth aircraft will not be detected.

This puts the ball back into the F-22 and F-35's court. With Awac's and their own advanced radars they could approach the suhkois from the side.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Oh my god! JORN? You better do a bit more research. It does not in any way defeat stealth. You cannot track with it, you cannot target with it. You get luck with it because of the frequency it works at. The information you get at great distances from it from LO AC is that ther may be an object out there and a vague heading. Once the AC gets closer JORN is useless. Thjis is real old stuff and went over years ago.

Oh almost forgot. Its a land based array that so far no one else but the Australians have produced. Its a great radar for its purpose but it in no way defeats stealth.

Ozzie if I no longer reply to you don't take it personal, but after the JORN statement you have lost all credibility.


Reread the post we where talking about the raptor.

You keep missing the point i have been making. You do have a tendancy to do that. I never said it could actually be used to target an aircraft, but it does have a stealth detection capability and the guys who designed it may not have known how stealth aircraft achiev low RCS. So just because the way LPI is achieved is classified does not mean that an RWR can be designed to counter it. That is the point i was making but again you dance around the argument.

Look we started off having a good debate you and me. We were arguing the merits of the F/A18E/F. It was fun and informative, i always enjoy a good debate, even with someone as exitable as yourself. But now it seems your just trying to find reasons to diagree with me. What exactly are you arguing? Or are you just attempting to pick wholes in anything i say?

 

[gf0012-aust]

With the range given on the Wedgetail at what altitude is that? The lower the target flyes the lower the detection radius is due to the radar horizon. Although the lower the altiutde of launch the lower the missile range too. But if the equasions added up ( like below the radar horizon but within NEZ or range of the missile) then the lauch platform would not be detected.

I'm not sure why you think a look down system geared to deal with 350+ concurrent targets cannot see assets at lower altitude. Gods eye view on lookdown systems means that you have an advantage - thats why E2C's etc are able to be used as cruise missile sniffers.

However if the equasion did not add up (below the radar horizon was beyond the range of the missile) then the launch platform could make a high speed and high altitude pass into the lauch reange, fire and bug out. It wouldn't really matter if it was detected. Also this tactic would not be used on its own, it would not inted to use a sneaky shot to down the Wedgetail.

You're talking about an asset being able to get within firing range of a wedgetail which has in excess of 400km detection range? They have to fire outside of the envelope and the further out they are, the better the chance the wedgetail has of E&E by turning away. Long range missiles have a weakness at max range - they run out of energy. Again, if the wedgetail is already (and AWACs has for years) been able to detect cruise missiles inbound - then I'm unsure why you don't think that they're going to be able to detect a hot and fast incoming.

Its best use would be just as your fighters are about to angage the enemy. The R172's would probably not down the wedgetail, although they might, but they would force it to shut down, and the RAAF would then loose its AWE&C right as battle commenced.

Part of the job achieved is exposure of the attacking assets, the wedgetail doesn't have to leave the room. She can change rooms or get (any) escorts to deal with the hackers.

It may be up and running in a few minnets if it got a soft kill on the missiles but if you have a few platforms hurling R172's they would practically negate your AWE&C capability because it would not be observing and directing the battle but dodgeing missiles.

Thats certainly not what the USAF thinks. There are more ways to deal with a missile launch than doing a U turn.

Thats not what i was arguing at all. Advances in Radar, avionics, missiles and software will no doubt continue in the F35 just as fast as other advances will continue on the Flanker. However the fundimental advantages the F35 has that it will rely on to counter its dissadvantages are being erroded by advances in sensors and networking in the flanker. These errosians can not be recovered by the F35 as they are fundimental to the design. The F35 will continue to increase its radar lead but this will not be decisive because it allready has an advantage in this respect. The crutial argument is systems and technices that will be employed in the Flanker are all intended to counter the LO on the F35 and its the nature of the beast that the F35 ca not just make the aircraft more stealthy like they can install new sensors or avionics.

so a fundamentally LO specific designed platform has less potential for growth than a flying barn door with more external rail points?

The point i'm making is the critical advantage that the F35 holds, which is intrenched in its design, is being erroded advances in sensor technology. Without that advantage i dont believe it gives the RAAF the regional air superiority we need.

How is it entrenched in its design? At the point where a 4th gen LO aircraft becomes more visible to other sensors, then all those 4th gen CO aircraft are even bigger targets. If the JSF has future proofing problems then the F-22 is in a worse position as its already been stated that there are design impediments as far as maint etc are concerned.

Its the system that counts.

"Pilots from the 65th and 64th AS, including exchange pilots from the Royal Australian Air Force and Royal Air Force, of Australia and England respectfully, expressed their frustration related to flying against the stealthy F-22.

"The thing denies your ability to put a weapons system on it, even when I can see it through the canopy," said RAAF Squadron Leader Stephen Chappell, F-15 exchange pilot in the 65th AS. "It's the most frustrated I've ever been."

According to Lt. Col. Larry Bruce, 65th AS commander, aggressor pilots turned up the heat on the F-22 using tactics they believe to be modern threats. For security purposes these tactics weren't released; nonetheless, they said their efforts against the Raptors were fruitless."

The sensor systems on the JSF are stated to be at a more advanced stage of development that on the F-22.

Ironically, I find the slagging of the JSF the same kind of exercise that we've witnessed with the Collins and F-111. Having been involved with the Collins, I can tell you that I have no faith at all in publicly pronounced data used to argue against a platform. It was (and still is) abject nonsense some of the rubbish thats promoted as fact in decrying capability.

 

[gf0012-aust]

How capable is it in reality? I'm not asking for specifics but will it deliver what is promised???

JORN and its less well known little sister are extremely competent. Its a blessing and an indication of system competence that the US DoD and DARPA want to integrate it into larger sensor systems.

we could never have afforded to develop it to the next stage - and the flexibility and different redundancy achieved through other systems integration will make it world class. The only other comparative system is Nostradamus. The much touted Vera doesn't even come close.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Alot of good info is being posted here


An F-22 sized aircraft designed for mach 3 performance would be lucky to travel 2000kms at that speed. The F-22 airframe is designed to have optimal drag at Mach 1.5 the fixed inlets prevent it from travelling much quicker than this. Most aircraft rarely travel supersonic for its entire mission, having an aircraft that can cruise at Mach 1.5 is sensational. Its all about compromise there is no point having the fixed inlets designed for Mach 2.5 if you have to use full afterburner to reach that speed. Having inlets designed for that high speed would then reduce the supercruising speed. Considering the F-22 doesn't have the fuel capacity to use its afterburners constantly then its much smarter to have fixed inlets for Mach 1.5

If the Mission profile called for a high speed stealth recon aircraft that required Mach 3 performance im sure that the F-22 could easily be adapted to have offer Mach 2.8+ performance with full afterburner. Though its short range wouldn't make it that useful.. It would however be a good Anti satelite launch platform.

So speed versus range.. the F-22 is right up there.

Spot on!

On another note the search volume of Russian IRST devices is questionable. I remember hearing a 12 degree field of view.. and detection range is reduced when it has to search. When radar aimed the IRST will detect aircraft a long distance away, however it cannot be radar aimed as the stealth aircraft will not be detected.

Is that info on current or obsolete models? Also with the introduction of advanced ESM and RWR that could be able to at least speradically detect LPI emissions, all it needs is a bearing. And i'm pretty sure that these are very sensitive to all emissions, including datalink signals. Again all it needs is a bearing.

This puts the ball back into the F-22 and F-35's court. With Awac's and their own advanced radars they could approach the suhkois from the side.

Thats assuming that the flanker plays along and does what it supose to. The F22 allways has the ball in its court. It ouclases the Flanker in every respect, and its got the advanteges of networking and AWE&C's. Its not worth mentioning in this comparisen. F35 is a whole other kettle of fish.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

I'm not sure why you think a look down system geared to deal with 350+ concurrent targets cannot see assets at lower altitude. Gods eye view on lookdown systems means that you have an advantage - thats why E2C's etc are able to be used as cruise missile sniffers.

it still has a radar horizon doesent it?

You're talking about an asset being able to get within firing range of a wedgetail which has in excess of 400km detection range? They have to fire outside of the envelope and the further out they are, the better the chance the wedgetail has of E&E by turning away. Long range missiles have a weakness at max range - they run out of energy. Again, if the wedgetail is already (and AWACs has for years) been able to detect cruise missiles inbound - then I'm unsure why you don't think that they're going to be able to detect a hot and fast incoming.

When the missile the launch platform is carrying has a stated range in exess of 200NM? I'm not saying they wont detect it. I'm saying that they will have to react to it. And why per say would the launch platform have to lauch outside the detection range of the Wedegtail, when all that going to be coming after them are F35's at M1.5? They can launch at a much lower range and still bug out before they are in the F35's missile envilope.

Part of the job achieved is exposure of the attacking assets, the wedgetail doesn't have to leave the room. She can change rooms or get (any) escorts to deal with the hackers.

Your missing my point. This wouldn't be a one off, the only targets being the launch platforms for the R172. The way to use it would be when your either sending in strike packages or attempting to defeat a CAP. So when yor Flankers go in to engage the F35's, that would be the best time launch. The chances of achieveing a kill are probably pretty small, but just geting the wedgetail to react to the missile rather than controll the battle is a sucsess.

Thats certainly not what the USAF thinks. There are more ways to deal with a missile launch than doing a U turn.

I heard some of this stuff too. Like using the full power of the array as a DEW to fry the missiles seeker in flight. Thats pretty impressive if it is indeed true. But again the AWE&Cs is still reacting to the missile, and if there are a few of them on different vectors then it starts to get interesting.

so a fundamentally LO specific designed platform has less potential for growth than a flying barn door with more external rail points?

No. I never said that. Simply that the stealth was intreanched in the design and could not be upgraded in the same way as sensors or avionis, which are two major areas that the SU XX family is advancing in.

How is it entrenched in its design? At the point where a 4th gen LO aircraft becomes more visible to other sensors, then all those 4th gen CO aircraft are even bigger targets. If the JSF has future proofing problems then the F-22 is in a worse position as its already been stated that there are design impediments as far as maint etc are concerned.

Unless i've got the whole thing wrong, or you know something i dont (which is entirely possible ) low RCS is due to a large extent the materials the platform is built out of and shaping. These things can not just be upgraded.

Its the system that counts.

And nothing else does?

"Pilots from the 65th and 64th AS, including exchange pilots from the Royal Australian Air Force and Royal Air Force, of Australia and England respectfully, expressed their frustration related to flying against the stealthy F-22.

"The thing denies your ability to put a weapons system on it, even when I can see it through the canopy," said RAAF Squadron Leader Stephen Chappell, F-15 exchange pilot in the 65th AS. "It's the most frustrated I've ever been."

According to Lt. Col. Larry Bruce, 65th AS commander, aggressor pilots turned up the heat on the F-22 using tactics they believe to be modern threats. For security purposes these tactics weren't released; nonetheless, they said their efforts against the Raptors were fruitless."

I agree the Raptor is a fearsome werpons system. However this does not change the fact that the F35's stealth is not as comprehensive as the F22, in RCS and IR. And, given the public IR signature info on the F35, there will be deployed weapons that can target it at BVR ranges.

The sensor systems on the JSF are stated to be at a more advanced stage of development that on the F-22.

Does that mean that these sensors are more capable in A2A combat? I had the impression the APG 77 was much more capable in this respect. And most of the sensors on the F35, such as the 360 degree optica/IR sensor, are geared toward CAS and interdiction, not air to air combat.

Ironically, I find the slagging of the JSF the same kind of exercise that we've witnessed with the Collins and F-111. Having been involved with the Collins, I can tell you that I have no faith at all in publicly pronounced data used to argue against a platform. It was (and still is) abject nonsense some of the rubbish thats promoted as fact in decrying capability.

I'm not sure if this is directed at me or the media/public in general, but i'll asume tha latter. I'm not sledgeing the F35, It will be the most capable strike fighter anywhere and will be a verry survivable and lethal CAS platform. I'm not against the Australian purchise either. However i'm not sure that this automaticaly equates to it being the second best air superiority fighter, when it was not designed for that function.

 

[gf0012-aust]

it still has a radar horizon doesent it?

yes, and the higher the AWACs, the broader the look down capability

When the missile the launch platform is carrying has a stated range in exess of 200NM? I'm not saying they wont detect it. I'm saying that they will have to react to it. And why per say would the launch platform have to lauch outside the detection range of the Wedegtail, when all that going to be coming after them are F35's at M1.5? They can launch at a much lower range and still bug out before they are in the F35's missile envilope.

If the missile range is 200km and the AWACs sniffing range is (conservatively) 400km range - then the aggressor has to have some significant advantage to close the gap. All the other awareness data is available to the AWACs before it even gets into the interrogation zone. One assumes that they already know who and what is in their general vicinity.

Lets use the Indon example (and not wanting to irritate any Indonesian posters in here as the relationship has certainly changed between the 2 countries in the last 3 years, this example is for the xenophobic mentality).

We already know where their Su's are, we know where everyone of their F-16's are. We know that some of their commanders used to take their F-16's "home" as personal aircraft, so we knew that they didn't get much squadron time flying as a unit. We know and knew exactly where they were every day as a DIGO satellite could confirm it if friendly locals couldn't. Part of the intel is not just in the air.

Your missing my point. This wouldn't be a one off, the only targets being the launch platforms for the R172. The way to use it would be when your either sending in strike packages or attempting to defeat a CAP. So when yor Flankers go in to engage the F35's, that would be the best time launch. The chances of achieveing a kill are probably pretty small, but just geting the wedgetail to react to the missile rather than controll the battle is a sucsess.

The Flanker has to close the sea air gap first. In 1999 we had some roaming Collins in the vicinity to keep the rogue indon commanders awake at night - none of their major vessels deployed as a result. In 2007 we could actually bust up their airfields and physically take out weapons revetments and aircraft if so motivated.

I heard some of this stuff too. Like using the full power of the array as a DEW to fry the missiles seeker in flight. Thats pretty impressive if it is indeed true. But again the AWE&Cs is still reacting to the missile, and if there are a few of them on different vectors then it starts to get interesting.

We don't have to react via AWACs. Since Stirling was given a free hand the attitude is to kill aircraft on the ground wherever possible. whether you do that with warm and verticals, subs with happy packages, or other means, but you will make an effort to decapitate their air before it gets off the ground. In the case of Indonesia, their flexibility options are limited, and ipso facto their deployment points.

No. I never said that. Simply that the stealth was intreanched in the design and could not be upgraded in the same way as sensors or avionis, which are two major areas that the SU XX family is advancing in.

Of course it can. Its like the argument about armour. Armour is no longer an issue of just having "nn" rockwell rated metal acting as a buffer - in real terms, armour is also now the layer of electronic defence packages used to sniff and deflect an incoming ugly.

Unless i've got the whole thing wrong, or you know something i dont (which is entirely possible ) low RCS is due to a large extent the materials the platform is built out of and shaping. These things can not just be upgraded.

They can, because even in the last 2 years they've worked out that panels can be reshaped or rematerialed to change their reflection status. RCS modification is also electronic. The plane with the embedded sensors is far easier to software manage than the plane that is geometrically a chevy suburban with wings

And nothing else does?

Its part of the system

I agree the Raptor is a fearsome werpons system. However this does not change the fact that the F35's stealth is not as comprehensive as the F22, in RCS and IR. And, given the public IR signature info on the F35, there will be deployed weapons that can target it at BVR ranges.

it also doesn't change the fact that the premier system is unavailable to us anyway....

 

[Tasman]

Re gf0012-aust's Post 200

I found this a very interesting post gf. A lot of claims and counter claims have been thrown around and debated at length in this thread. I thought your comments in this post put things nicely into perspective with a particularly realistic appraisal of the capability of the ADF to respond to the 'air threat' actually posed by our near neighbour.

Cheers

 

[Big-E]

You're talking about an asset being able to get within firing range of a wedgetail which has in excess of 400km detection range? They have to fire outside of the envelope and the further out they are, the better the chance the wedgetail has of E&E by turning away. Long range missiles have a weakness at max range - they run out of energy. Again, if the wedgetail is already (and AWACs has for years) been able to detect cruise missiles inbound - then I'm unsure why you don't think that they're going to be able to detect a hot and fast incoming.

This missle system is really lame to begin with. It is like taking a shot in the dark and hoping you hit something. It's envelope to travel ratio gives it the lowest kill probabilty of any system currently in service. The Wedgetail's MESA gives it a great passive mode if advanced capability mid-course guided missiles (R-77M1) ever do come onto the stage. If any aircraft tries to do a very long BVR launch the Wedgetail will know the second it launches and the interceptor will have to have radar comperable to the Zaslon S-800 to give it good updates to have a high probability of keeping it in the envelope. I hope RAAF doctrine would be able to make the interceptor turn tail making their data-linked missile worthless. Either way RAAFs AWACS should be pretty safe from attack given it's capabilities and an assigned HAVCAP of JSF or Super Bugs. Combining Wedgetails and F-35s will give RAAF some awesome capabilities when it comes to air combat maneuvers. The F-35s will have to take the lead in ACM due to their stealth abilities and the rhinos will be relagated to being the bomb truck of the future RAAF.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

yes, and the higher the AWACs, the broader the look down capability

True, but it still has one.

If the missile range is 200km and the AWACs sniffing range is (conservatively) 400km range - then the aggressor has to have some significant advantage to close the gap. All the other awareness data is available to the AWACs before it even gets into the interrogation zone. One assumes that they already know who and what is in their general vicinity.

The missile has a 200NM range, 210 IIRC thats 380~400KM. Of cource all that depens on altitude and the speed of the platform. The agressor could probably close 50 to 100km of that range without being intercepted at high speed.

Lets use the Indon example (and not wanting to irritate any Indonesian posters in here as the relationship has certainly changed between the 2 countries in the last 3 years, this example is for the xenophobic mentality).

We already know where their Su's are, we know where everyone of their F-16's are. We know that some of their commanders used to take their F-16's "home" as personal aircraft, so we knew that they didn't get much squadron time flying as a unit. We know and knew exactly where they were every day as a DIGO satellite could confirm it if friendly locals couldn't. Part of the intel is not just in the air.

Why is Indonesia allways the only threat nation discussed? What about a regional conflict with PROC or India, its probably more likely than a shooting war with indonesia. And i was outlining a purely tactical scenario, if you want to widen it a bit and make it specific i'm up for it, its always more fun!

The Flanker has to close the sea air gap first. In 1999 we had some roaming Collins in the vicinity to keep the rogue indon commanders awake at night - none of their major vessels deployed as a result. In 2007 we could actually bust up their airfields and physically take out weapons revetments and aircraft if so motivated.

We don't have to react via AWACs. Since Stirling was given a free hand the attitude is to kill aircraft on the ground wherever possible. whether you do that with warm and verticals, subs with happy packages, or other means, but you will make an effort to decapitate their air before it gets off the ground. In the case of Indonesia, their flexibility options are limited, and ipso facto their deployment points.

I dont consider Indonesia a threat at all. But how about a regional conflict with china, were they have made a push to the malaka streigt? They have taken airfields in malaysia. Lets not bring the yanks in to it too much. Lets just say most of the PLAAF & USAF are dukeing it out over Taiwan (which is irrelevent to what i want to discuss anyway). The RAAF has defend our airspace against PLAAF strike packages equiped with stand off weapons such as club cruse missile. With the range of the flanker, a growing tanker fleet, Badger cruse missile platforms and a soon to be aquired AWE&C's capability i think they could project a fair bit of power into the Sea-Air gap. How would suqaron sized deployments of F35's on CAP over say RAAF Darwin, backed up with Wedgetails fair at trying to intercept Flankers before they reach launch points???? A more challanging scenario. In this case launches of the R127 from 300~350km range at the Wedgetail would be a real pain in the ass even if they didn't shoot it down. This is the tactical situation i was trying to outline before.

Of course it can. Its like the argument about armour. Armour is no longer an issue of just having "nn" rockwell rated metal acting as a buffer - in real terms, armour is also now the layer of electronic defence packages used to sniff and deflect an incoming ugly.

They can, because even in the last 2 years they've worked out that panels can be reshaped or rematerialed to change their reflection status. RCS modification is also electronic. The plane with the embedded sensors is far easier to software manage than the plane that is geometrically a chevy suburban with wings

If incremental RCS improvements are imployed whats the real improvement? 5%, 10%, .0005%? This needs to be weighed against the growing capabilities of sensors in opponant aircraft.

it also doesn't change the fact that the premier system is unavailable to us anyway....

At the moment.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

This missle system is really lame to begin with. It is like taking a shot in the dark and hoping you hit something. It's envelope to travel ratio gives it the lowest kill probabilty of any system currently in service. The Wedgetail's MESA gives it a great passive mode if advanced capability mid-course guided missiles (R-77M1) ever do come onto the stage. If any aircraft tries to do a very long BVR launch the Wedgetail will know the second it launches and the interceptor will have to have radar comperable to the Zaslon S-800 to give it good updates to have a high probability of keeping it in the envelope. I hope RAAF doctrine would be able to make the interceptor turn tail making their data-linked missile worthless. Either way RAAFs AWACS should be pretty safe from attack given it's capabilities and an assigned HAVCAP of JSF or Super Bugs. Combining Wedgetails and F-35s will give RAAF some awesome capabilities when it comes to air combat maneuvers. The F-35s will have to take the lead in ACM due to their stealth abilities and the rhinos will be relagated to being the bomb truck of the future RAAF.

You dont have to hit it to have a major effect on the battle. That is the point i was trying to make. Even if the missile has a verry low probability of a kill, the Wedetail is still going to hav to take evasive action, and if theres a few incoming on different trajectories its not going to be directing the battle but dodgeing missiles.

 

[Big-E]

True, but it still has one.



The missile has a 200NM range, 210 IIRC thats 380~400KM. Of cource all that depens on altitude and the speed of the platform. The agressor could probably close 50 to 100km of that range without being intercepted at high speed.

If you are in a hot zone the Wedgetail with a JSF HAVCAP will toast that bogey at range before he knew what hit em.

Why is Indonesia allways the only threat nation discussed? What about a regional conflict with PROC or India, its probably more likely than a shooting war with indonesia. And i was outlining a purely tactical scenario, if you want to widen it a bit and make it spcific i'm uyp for it, its always more fun!

I made the same argument over India awhile ago and they razzed me over Christmas Island Scenerios!

I dont consider Indonesia a threat at all. But how about a regional conflict with china, were they have made a push to the malaka streigt? They have taken airfields in malaysia. Lets not bring the yanks in to it too much. Lets just say most of the PLAAF & USAF are dukeing it out over Taiwan (which is irrelevent to what i want to discuss anyway). The RAAF has defend our airspace against PLAAF strike packages equiped with stand off weapons such as club cruse missile. With the range of the flanker, a growing tanker fleet, Bear cruse missile platforms and a soon to be aquired AWE&C's capability i think they could project a fair bit of power into the Sea-Air gap. How would suqaron sized deployments of F35's on CAP over say RAAF Darwin, backed up with Wedgetails fair at trying to intercept Flankers before they reach launch points???? A more challanging scenario. In this case launches of the R127 from 300~350km range at the Wedgetail would be a real pain in the ass even if they didn't shoot it down. This is the tactical situation i was trying to outline before.

I know you haven't read my previous post before you wrote this but let me paint the JSF/Wedgetail combat scenerio irregardless the adversary. JSF stealth combined with the AN/APG-81 AESA allows them to sneak into PLAAF aircoverage without being seen and in passive mode will give them a good radar picture. The Wedgetail can sit safely outside the hotzone while the JSF picks up good intel on aerial/ground activity and the Wedgetail can stay passive as well. When an overall plan of attack has been devised RAAF will have the initiative. PLAAF will not know what hit them when JSFs launch AIM-120Ds and they can't figure out WTFO is going on. By the time the intial salvo has been leashed the Wedgetails will light up the battlespace allowing the JSF to go back to passive and they can mop up what's left with AIM-9Xs at close range. It will truly be a lopsided event.:nutkick