USA Armed Forces

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 37 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by SW1 »

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3 ... revolution


When it comes to phantom aircraft that are the product of 'bleeding-edge' technologies and supposedly exist only in the shadows, the so-called RQ-180 is unrivaled in our time. The existence of this high-altitude, long-endurance (HALE) stealth drone has all but been officially disclosed. Specters of its existence and growing maturity seem to materialize around every turn, and as of November 2020, the public may have gotten its first glimpse of this aircraft that has existed behind a veil of secrecy and innuendo for over a decade. This is the first in a three-part series—the product of a ghost hunt of sorts that has lasted well over two years—that tells the story—as best as we can piece it together—of what is likely the most important military aircraft of a generation.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

SW1 wrote:This is the first in a three-part series—the product of a ghost hunt of sorts that has lasted well over two years—that tells the story—as best as we can piece it together—of what is likely the most important military aircraft of a generation.
Well, yes
We certainly need journalists like Tyler:
"we need to start at the basics—what is this aircraft supposed to do and why does it exist?"

... some bits of the long story that caught my eye:

This is an impossible question for us to answer definitively at this time, and details are bound to change, in some cases possibly significantly, but drawing on a large number of clues, open-source information, historical precedent, capability gaps, emerging technologies, ongoing procurement and development initiatives, the picture, at least as we see it, becomes "somewhat clear."

Unsurvivable platforms with capabilities that need to survive...


Let's break these two mission sets down in regards to what this platform could bring to the table and why its capabilities would be so critically important.
- A high-flying, long-endurance, and survivable information gateway

Just because you can build and deploy aircraft like B-21 Raiders, F-22 Raptors, F-35 Lightnings, and advanced unmanned combat air vehicles—low-observable (stealthy) combat aircraft that can work to knock down the enemy's air defenses or sneak past them entirely to deliver devastating blows to critical targets—it doesn't mean you can leverage these forces to their maximum potential.

[Moving on to the poor man's implemantation... that is us, btw]

Another existing datalink fusion capability is the Roll-On Beyond line-of-sight Enhancement system, or ROBE, which can be installed on some KC-135 tankers and enables an 'active net' for Link 16 and Situational Awareness Data Link (SADL) used by legacy non-stealthy assets. It can fuse information from aircraft with those disparate datalinks together and rebroadcast a common picture back on their individual waveforms. Once again, this drastically enhances the situational awareness and cooperative potential of aircraft flying in the battlespace.

The bottom line is that the writing is already on the wall for this technology, the DoD knows it, and it is already being adapted for unmanned aircraft in the unclassified realm. So, considering how well suited this communications application is for an RQ-180 information gateway aircraft, we would expect it to exist, at least eventually, alongside established and emerging secure RF satcom capabilities. This would give the aircraft multiple ways of communicating beyond line-of-sight, which would be key for resiliency, survivability, redundancy, and for overall flexibility of the system.

But no matter what, the aircraft needs secure satcom capabilities to do its basic reconnaissance mission regardless of its configuration, at least in most scenarios we see it being used. So, evolving a reconnaissance-centric RQ-180 into a flying information gateway variant, or to do at least some of that job while also performing its organic reconnaissance functions, isn't just an extremely logical evolution, it seems to satisfy what is becoming among the Air Force's most urgent priorities."
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 37 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by SW1 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:[Moving on to the poor man's implemantation... that is us, btw]
Was thinking of Zephyr and potential roles when I read the article

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Sure, but the payloads restrict the function more to a relay, whereas in this we come close(?) to flying Command Post on out tankers:
ArmChairCivvy wrote: existing datalink fusion capability is the Roll-On Beyond line-of-sight Enhancement system, or ROBE, which can be installed on some KC-135 tankers and enables an 'active net' for Link 16 and Situational Awareness Data Link (SADL) used by legacy non-stealthy assets. It can fuse information from aircraft with those disparate datalinks together and rebroadcast a common picture back on their individual waveforms.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 37 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by SW1 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Sure, but the payloads restrict the function more to a relay, whereas in this we come close(?) to flying Command Post on out tankers:
ArmChairCivvy wrote: existing datalink fusion capability is the Roll-On Beyond line-of-sight Enhancement system, or ROBE, which can be installed on some KC-135 tankers and enables an 'active net' for Link 16 and Situational Awareness Data Link (SADL) used by legacy non-stealthy assets. It can fuse information from aircraft with those disparate datalinks together and rebroadcast a common picture back on their individual waveforms.
Bit like this you mean

https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/articles/ra ... -partners/

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Yes, and surely the demo is on the back of something that already exists.

Still good, BG Galactica, commanded from the upper bridge of the tanker-transport
- on a 747, the Grand Piano would have to make way 8-)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Too many 'twos' around:
The U.S. Air Force’s newest F-15EX variant will be called the Eagle II, the service announced Wednesday.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3196
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 25 times
France

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Tempest414 »

yep you can imagine the time and money it took to come up with that name and have it agreed

Little J
Member
Posts: 680
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Little J »

Why the hell does it need to be called Eagle 2? Its the same design, updated admittedly, but other than the change to F110's nothing is that major... F-15 F (or G) would have done it surely!?! :wtf:

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7231
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Has liked: 4 times
Been liked: 9 times
England

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by SKB »

Eagle 2 sounds like a 'Space: 1999' lunar transporter spacecraft.... :mrgreen:

Jdam
Member
Posts: 497
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 2 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Jdam »

Little J wrote:Why the hell does it need to be called Eagle 2? Its the same design, updated admittedly, but other than the change to F110's nothing is that major... F-15 F (or G) would have done it surely!?! :wtf:
Super Eagle?

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Has liked: 16 times
Been liked: 20 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Scimitar54 »

What I would like to know is:-
Will the Thunderbolt II be known as Thunderbird Two? :lol:

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 819
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 25 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Defiance »

Scimitar54 wrote:What I would like to know is:-
Will the Thunderbolt II be known as Thunderbird Two? :lol:
Horse has bolted - A-10 is Thunderbolt II isn't it?

Little J
Member
Posts: 680
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Little J »

Jdam wrote:
Little J wrote:Why the hell does it need to be called Eagle 2? Its the same design, updated admittedly, but other than the change to F110's nothing is that major... F-15 F (or G) would have done it surely!?! :wtf:
Super Eagle?
See I don't think it even qualifies as a "Super". The Hornet had a lot of structural/dimensional changes to become the SH...

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
Tuvalu

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Pseudo »

Why not make the EX designation mean something and call it the Eagle Xtreme!

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 37 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by SW1 »

It may look similar but the F15ex has significant structural and system changes.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3 ... agle-sales

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Lord Jim »

Interesting video on by the US Army on its ew-organised Infantry Brigade Combat Teams, how they will be equipped and how they will operate. To be honest I am not convinced to there effectiveness, nor how they would stand up the concentrated artillery fire, given the idea is to fight dismounted. WE may restrict how artillery is used in urban areas but the enemy might not have the same view. Anyway what do people think?

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3196
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 25 times
France

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Tempest414 »

First thing that struck me was the use of light tanks with 105 to 120 mm in support plus the use of something like a JLTV with 30mm mounted RWS for the recce teams . It seems to me that the need for these within the US thinking is key as they are in both the Infantry and Stryker BCT's.

When it comes to the UK maybe we should be looking at making 120mm Nemo our standard indirect / direct fire support system backed up by 60mm mortars at dismounted level

Edit ; Japan's rapid deployment force also has wheeled 120mm guns as well in direct fire support

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 37 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by SW1 »

Oops were do we send the bill :crazy:


abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2795
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by abc123 »

SW1 wrote:Oops were do we send the bill :crazy:

:o

That V-22 don't needs weapons, it's enough to land where the enemy is. :lol:
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 506
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Halidon »

The drive to arm DDG-1000s with hypersonic weapons is gaining steam.
https://news.usni.org/2021/04/28/cno-hy ... w7unfyiA20

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

well, they (the MACs) are big so where else - in the surface fleet - to put them?
- San Antonio Two -class?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Blackstone
Member
Posts: 89
Joined: 13 Aug 2019, 05:00
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United States of America

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Blackstone »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:well, they (the MACs) are big so where else - in the surface fleet - to put them?
- San Antonio Two -class?
Purely for testing, you could use an amphib. Operationally I don't think they actually have the room to host one or two without sacrificing more than the Gator Navy would like. But demands on them are so high that it's a big loss to the fleet cutting one out for years of modifications and testing, so I don't see it even on a temporary basis.

The Zumwalt class not only has the size, their assignment to a testing and development Mission means they're already separate from the regular fleet rotations and thus more available to tinker with. As a side: I wouldn't be surprised if the Zs end up the only surface hulls to use a variant of the MACs, with the next combatant class going to a solution more akin to an enlarged conventional VLS.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Among nominations still to be confirmed, The Pentagon Research&Engineering office is likely to get a fairly outspoken person to heat it (DefenceNews has had a look into each of the nominee and their past statements):
"

Shyu often equated defense acquisition to a bus where every passenger, or stakeholder, has a brake and a steering wheel. Her point was to stress that each has an agenda, and they might not align with program goals. With everyone on the bus trying to drive, inevitably the bus “flips over” and the program is derailed, she once said at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.

Similarly, she was a vocal proponent of allowing program managers more autonomy, both with budgets and requirements, saying: “We were just beating the crap out of the [program manager] while everybody else has the steering wheel and a brake. … You can spend your time managing the program or can spend your time filling out the documents.”["]
- applies on this side of the Pond, too, I would say
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: USA Armed Forces

Post by Lord Jim »

Nice to know other have issues like we do even with their greater resources.

Post Reply