It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

F-35s hone dog fighting skills at Top Gun for 1st time

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

When UAVs can do air to air with AI's ... it'l basically be a war of technology. My robot plane can kick your robot plane's butt. We will basically have Battle Bots in the sky.




posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Zaphod58

When UAVs can do air to air with AI's ... it'l basically be a war of technology. My robot plane can kick your robot plane's butt. We will basically have Battle Bots in the sky.


My robot and your robot sitting by the fire.... My robot says to your robot im gonna set your chips on fire...talking bout hey na...hey na.. ico ico wa nei....jacomo fever ai na nei.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:49 PM
link   
All I can think about in regards to robots fighting is that 80's movie "Robot Jox". Oh, and Gundam Wing...

Where are our Gundams?! Flying, transforming robot planes anyone? Come on Skunkworks, give us our Gundams!



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Patience, our robot overlords will be upon us soon enough.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sammamishman
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Patience, our robot overlords will be upon us soon enough.


Waves hand...Theses are not the gundams you are looking for.....



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

Well I get to have the Green Ranger's Zord then. I call that one right now. I want to be the one to play that little ditty on the flute and make him appear. Im secure enough in my masculinity to play a flute.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 06:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Sammamishman

Well I get to have the Green Ranger's Zord then. I call that one right now. I want to be the one to play that little ditty on the flute and make him appear. Im secure enough in my masculinity to play a flute.


what about a robot ocelot?



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: JimTSpock
F-35 is good for strike and as an interceptor but as a fighter it has weaknesses. The stealth is good the sensors are good but flight performance and cockpit visibility are a step backwards. WVR vs Su-35 or Su-27 or Mig-29 it won't be very good. And BVR if it gets spotted on IRST it won't be very good.


Most radars(even air to air) wont detect the f-35 until it gets within 25 miles in a active ECM environment. well withing range of the newer long range amraams who get up to 90 nm or so and can hunt their targets a bit.


Probability of kill at absolute maximum range is very low. When the target enters the no escape zone range will be much less. Typhoon pilots say they can see the F-22 head on with IRST at 50km, more from side on or rear or if afterburner is used. Stealth is an advantage BVR but newer IRST systems and the latest AESA and IR missiles are narrowing the advantage.


Missile range


Missiles are often cited with their maximum engagement range, which is very misleading. A missile's effective range is dependent on factors such as altitude, speed, position, and direction of the target aircraft as well as those of the attacking aircraft. For example the Vympel R-77 has stated range of 100 km. That is only true for a head-on, non-evading target at high altitude. At low altitude, the effective range is reduced by as much as 75%–80% to 20–25 km. If the target is taking evasive action, or in stern-chase position, the effective range is further reduced. See Air-to-Air missile non-comparison table for more information. The effective range of an air-to-air missile is known as the "no-escape zone", noting the range at which the target can not outrun the missile once launched.

Poorly-trained pilots are known to fire their missiles at maximum-range engagement with poor results. In the 1998–2000 Eritrean-Ethiopian War, fighters from both sides shot over a dozen medium-range R-27 (AA-10 Alamo) missiles at distance with little effect. But when better-trained Ethiopian Su-27 pilots gave chase and attacked with short-range R-73 (AA-11 Archer) missiles, the results were often deadly to the Eritrean aircraft. [1]

A missile is also subject to a minimum range, before which it cannot maneuver effectively. In order to maneuver sufficiently from a poor launch angle at short ranges to hit its target, some missiles use thrust vectoring, which allow the missile to start turning "off the rail", before its motor has accelerated it up to high enough speeds for its small aerodynamic surfaces to be useful.

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 12-9-2015 by JimTSpock because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:08 PM
link   
a reply to: JimTSpock

An f-22 being spotted at 50km closing at ~2000km/h is not a winning scenario. That means if the euro fighter wanted to engage the f-22 he or she would probably already be dead.

All of this blabbing about the typhoon and x aircraft detecting stealth aircraft is really just nonsense. Sure a ground station "might" detect the 22/35 but by that time a firing solution would have to be made, missiles armed, launched, and pray. In reality the 22/35 has already engaged its target and is on an observation or escape vector. That's the game plan. Fast and silent is the new model. Go in and engage the enemy and come home with as little mess or collateral damage as possible.

Look at both times we fought Iraq. We defeated the enemy in their mind before we had to on the ground. A war that would have taken half a decade in the 60s was over in months(not counting nonconventional insertion warfare). U.S. doctrine is shock and awe. Shock them with you're overwhelming ability to do what you want in their yard and awe them with the lethality and accuracy of your strikes.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:30 PM
link   
Maybe maybe not. The Typhoon might be able to get a shot off and then they kill each other. Or one is killed or neither and they go WVR or turn around and do it again.
As Zaphod has said stealth is an advantage but it doesn't make a fighter invincible, which I agree with. The F-22 is the top of the line jet and would probably get a positive kill ratio vs Typhoon but that doesn't mean it is invincible and would never get hit.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 11:59 PM
link   
a reply to: JimTSpock

In all likelihood the typhoon wouldn't get a shot off. The 22/35 would have launched amraam almost 2 minutes before the typhoon picked the 22/35 up. There's no reasonable comparison for how this would go down because there are no technologically comparable aircraft to the 22/35. Stealth is only one of their toys. We're talking about aircraft that can cause numerous amounts of electronic chaos on legacy fleets.

Recognizing a target at 50 km will never happen for an adversary of the f-22/35. The gameplan is launch, maybe giving away your location for a nanosecond if the small cone of awareness your adversary is looking at happens to be your general direction, and disappear to await the outcome of your first strike attempt at which point the enemy is making evasive maneuvers. By the time the enemy clears one threat your aircraft has regained tactical advantage and is in maybe a more favorable position to dispense another shot. You can't fight a ghost. In all f the little games we play with our allies with these aircraft we give them a numerical advantage, don't use a fraction of the technology available, and always play by 4th gen rules and norms of engagement.

Zaphod is right, stealth isn't invincible, but it's as close as we will ever see and by the time our 5th gen stealth become vulnerable our 6th gen will be fielded. The stuff we won't see might as well be Angels; living in the glory of untouchability.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Caughtlurking
No it's more complicated than that. Read the section above on effective missile range. Firstly a smart F-22 pilot wouldn't charge in head on at 2,000km/h. An attack from the side or rear would be preferable. The Typhoon has MAWS so it would detect the missile being shot at it.
Launch range for the F-22 depends on the no escape zone for the AIM-120C or D and that is classified. It would probably be less than 50km. The Typhoon would be able to shoot back but be at a disadvantage. And then the typhoon could even sneak up on the F-22 from the side or rear with IRST. There are different scenarios and it's more complex than just saying this kills that every time.
Having said that I think the F-22 is the best fighter and would win most of the time but if outnumbered it may suffer a higher loss rate.
edit on 13-9-2015 by JimTSpock because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 12:39 AM
link   


Having said that I think the F-22 is the best fighter and would win most of the time but if outnumbered it may suffer a higher loss rate.


It might depend on how those "many" pilots train against an airforce that has been flying and evolving stealth for over 20 years.

The US can simulate massive outnumbering and come up with a fighting strategy to improve its chances, can a nation without knowing the stealth capabilities train to overcome it? What if they got it wrong?

I used to work on Typhoon and a very little bit on F-35, but I wouldn't know enough to compare the two except to say they were developed in different millennia! Typhoon DASS is bloody awesome and bleeding edge (albeit untested in combat) buts its not a Stealth Aircraft, its design and mode of operation is high thrust to weight, get up there quick and slow/stop the bombers in defense.

F-35 is 1st day first strike and F-22 is Air Supremacy over contested airspace on the offensive. Typhoon would be mincemeat against the -22 for the same reason I say above, we wouldnt know how to fight it on our terms.
edit on 13 9 2015 by Forensick because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 01:11 AM
link   
a reply to: JimTSpock

To the contrary I think you may be oversimplifying the way the aim-120 would work in this environment. The aim-120 now has two way data linking, meaning it is essentially fused to the aircraft it's launched from making its kill probability likely higher than 59% that you'd expect on a typical 4th gen asset. The missile is going to actively be receiving as well as providing updated targeting data in near real time. Not only will it receive this data from one aircraft however; it will receive a combined matrix from all the aircraft and other assets fused at that time. The f-22/35 are never supposed to allow an enemy to get that close. Most of the data is classified but it's range is probably greater than 200km with an acceptable kill probability(assuming a head on engagement with the missile intersecting the other aircraft at a calculated point).

Now as for the maws systems, these are also fused systems. Maws isn't going to be as effective detecting an anomaly out of thin air when the defending aircrafts sensors don't perceive a threat to begin with. The computers are also going to be under the influence of active jamming by the 5th gen aircraft. Sensor chaos. Not a good place to be.

In the end I understand the value of a day one 5th gen aircraft to be in its overlord status. If the sensors are half as good as I believe they are there will be almost nothing happening in the theatre of operations that isn't under its "control." It will be like Floyd Mayweather fighting an ametuer, every move will be accounted for and every strike in return controlled and deadly. Military aviation is more about controlling the fight then flashy dogfighting and aerobatic flying in the 21st century.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 01:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Caughtlurking

You actually think an AIM-120D can hit a fighter at 200km. Good luck to you. Even the biggest SAMs don't have that kind of range.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 01:30 AM
link   
a reply to: JimTSpock

Yes I believe an aircraft cruising at 2000km/hr could launch a missile reaching twice that speed at a target moving at 1500km/hr from 200km away and expect a high probability of interdiction and kill especially utilizing modern algorithms and realtime love data. We are talking seconds here. I'm Irish I don't need any more luck.

You do realize at those speeds the missile won't have to move 200km to intercept its target?
edit on 13-9-2015 by Caughtlurking because: Afterthoughts



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 01:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Caughtlurking

Just an example the naval SAM SM-2ER of the US Navy has a max range of 185Km and weighs in at 1,350kg. The AIM-120 is much smaller with less fuel and weighs 152kg. And I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt using the AIM-120D which isn't even in service yet. AIM-120C has even less range and flight time.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 01:51 AM
link   
a reply to: JimTSpock

Surface launched SAMs have less range because they are fighting air and gravity to get to altitude. All aim-120 ranges are classified but the mean average is around 180 and the range of guesses is anywhere from 110km-200+ air launched.

I guess I should clarify that I'm assuming that the 22/35 are going to fire from above as well because they're stealth and I wouldn't expect them to fire from anything but a favorable position. That being the point of stealth and all.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 02:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Caughtlurking

All been covered in the missile range section mentioned above. Max range for AAMs is for head to head at high altitude. Low altitude rear shot is much less.

USAF says max effective range for AMRAAM is 20-30nm.



maximum range of between 20 to 30 nautical miles


www.airforce-technology.com...



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 02:05 AM
link   
One thing worthy of note, is the radar jamming capabilities of other nations. One thing I like about the A-10 is that it has 3 types of flight controls in case one or the other is knocked out. The new technologies, are too reliant on technology. A single SU-24 knocked out the entire Aegis capabilities of the USS Donald Cook. How does that translate to the overly reliant technology of the F-35-F-22? I don't know the answer to that, but there should be a grass roots look at basic redneck technology unless all the squadrons are rendered useless by electronic warfare.

All aircraft should be built with the assumption there will not be any satellite link, no radio communication, and no kind of ability to communicate, assuming the other parties can take these things out in an instance of war.

www.liveleak.com...
edit on 13-9-2015 by TheChrome because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join