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.

 

Has the U.S. virtually wiped out all competition in the military fighter/bomber field?

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 09:10 AM
link   
Much vitriol on fast tracked 6th gen fighter development or upgraded 5.5 gen F-22s. From an overview it looks academic. In either scenario, or perhaps both, depending on the political decisions, no nation in the current 'competition' is able to match or even stay close.

The U.K. is likely 'all in' on the EF which was waxed by much improved pilots in SUs by India. The U.K. indirectly acknowledges this by purchasing F-35 thereby covering the technological gaps in the EF. Those same SU were soundly defeated by F-15s in Malaysia not two years back by NJ ANG at a 2-1 ratio.

The EF hasn't achieved the foreign sales that was needed financially, nor has the Rafale met export expectations. Russian falls further behind in fighter development and seems relegated to tech demonstrator platforms that go nowhere further.

Apparently, the U.K. has followed suit with Russia and concentrated on missiles systems. Far cheaper than aircraft, at a guess. On the surface of it, the U.S. has 'lagged' in missile development?? OR is the U.S. concentrating on directed energy development which could make the missile technology a thing of the past?

If the directed energy weapon systems run into delays, one could suppose the U.S. could purchase U.K. missiles systems for the short term, perhaps offering directed energy technology in exchange.

With massive sales to Saudi Arabia and now a major sale announced to Taiwan, not only does the MIC have humongous internal funding, it's sucking up a huge amount of international monies which drains development from the French, Brits and Russians.

The only competition down the road seems to be China. The U.K., France and the Russians on the surface of it, don't have the monies to take it to the next level.

This thought is more intuitive than anything else. Obviously there's those that have a better insight than me on this.

It looks reasonable on the surface of it. Thoughts?




posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 09:12 AM
link   
No, the US is just a little ahead in some technology at this time. Not that much that it would make a great difference. We might have some top secret stuff that is way advanced, but then so again does Russia.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
No, the US is just a little ahead in some technology at this time. Not that much that it would make a great difference. We might have some top secret stuff that is way advanced, but then so again does Russia.


Perhaps Russia does. All I see is Russian hype. Their revenues seem hinged on the SUs and the PAK-FA draining it as fast as it comes in.

Actual development takes money, boat loads of it. As does further development and advance technologies. I have to think that the lack of the income gives the U.S. a dominant position, again and still.

Seems everyone is a full generation behind in both engines and avionics, as well as directed energy weapons. That doesn't seem 'a little ahead'. I could be wrong on it, though.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker


Much vitriol on fast tracked 6th gen fighter development or upgraded 5.5 gen F-22s. From an overview it looks academic. In either scenario, or perhaps both, depending on the political decisions, no nation in the current 'competition' is able to match or even stay close.

The invisible enemy you mean? The one that we don't face, but must best with our theoretically superior technology?

'Wundewaffe' was the answer in its day, too. Ultimately it failed, because back then too, the Russians overcame Nazi hi tech with sheer numbers. And stealth is only stealthy on radar, not to mark one eyeballs and guns, once the missiles run out.

I thought the Russian newest fighter was now able to detect even our stealthiest stealth?

Seems there was a thread about it , intercepting russian bombers over the Pacific or some such?
edit on 1-7-2017 by intrptr because: spelling



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 09:33 AM
link   
Blame it on Drone technology but all forms of air combat are now 2nd rate to Drone Swarms and abilitys.

Drones can travel on land air water and in space or any and all of these combonations.

F-35A @ 100 Million per.

www.popularmechanics.com...

DJI Phantom4 @ 1000 per......... x .......100 000 militarised drones for every F35A in the air.

store.dji.com...

Imagine puddle-jumping drones and underwater highspeed drones and aerial drones all SWARMING in concert on a Carrier...attacking in every way with cyber-attacks...chemical attacks...bio-attacks.....bomb attacks....ect ect ect.


Maybe it would take 10 F-35As to down a Carrier......but methinks the 1 MILLION drones I could enable for the same price would down 10 Carriers.

Imagine roving Drone "Mothership"incubators with 3-D printing capabilities grinding out a constant flow of attack drones.
edit on 1-7-2017 by one4all because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: nwtrucker


Much vitriol on fast tracked 6th gen fighter development or upgraded 5.5 gen F-22s. From an overview it looks academic. In either scenario, or perhaps both, depending on the political decisions, no nation in the current 'competition' is able to match or even stay close.

The invisible enemy you mean? The one that we don't face, but must best with our theoretically superior technology?

'Wundewaffe' was the answer in its day, too. Ultimately it failed, because back then too, the Russians overcame Nazi hi tech with sheer numbers. And stealth is only stealthy on radar, not to mark one eyeballs and guns, once the missiles run out.

I thought the Russian newest fighter was now able to detect even our stealthiest stealth?

Seems there was a thread about it , intercepting russian bombers over the Pacific or some such?


The enemy we don't face. Right. This planet is the Garden of Eden. Peaceful, fun loving and full of goodwill.

When we had multiple powers at a near par, right before WW1 and WW11, we ended up with both. A fact hard to dispute.

I would continue to have 'an enemy we don't face'. "Yea, though I walk through the valley of death, I shall fear no evil. For I'm the meanest SOB in the valley."

Works for me...


As far as stealth goes. If you track the subject a bit deeper, all it requires is breaking, even for a second, the tracking and transitioning from 'seeing' to tracking to locking. Break that sequence, even briefly, is the edge. It is huge. No one does it better than the U.S..

As far as WVR, eye ball to eye ball, I agree. Nothing does that better than the Raptor. Hence, 'packages' of different aircrafts and capabilities. No one matches the U.S. in that scenario, either.
edit on 1-7-2017 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: rickymouse
No, the US is just a little ahead in some technology at this time. Not that much that it would make a great difference. We might have some top secret stuff that is way advanced, but then so again does Russia.


Perhaps Russia does. All I see is Russian hype. Their revenues seem hinged on the SUs and the PAK-FA draining it as fast as it comes in.

Actual development takes money, boat loads of it. As does further development and advance technologies. I have to think that the lack of the income gives the U.S. a dominant position, again and still.

Seems everyone is a full generation behind in both engines and avionics, as well as directed energy weapons. That doesn't seem 'a little ahead'. I could be wrong on it, though.


You take Chinese engineers and companies that build weaponry. Because of the way their economy works, they can build these things way cheaper than we can. They do not have big corporations with their high salaried top big wiggs drawing off so much money. Even figuring the difference in money value, they can produce stuff at a fraction of the cost overall. Same with Russia, if they had our budget, they would accomplish way more than we do because of excessive profit taking here.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: one4all


Heck, I forgot to add that one to the list. The U.S. is likely in the lead in that one, as well. Although, I wouldn't doubt the rest aren't far behind.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: one4all
Imagine roving Drone "Mothership"incubators with 3-D printing capabilities grinding out a constant flow of attack drones.

Right now that is all we can do since it is fantasy for now.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr


There is a big difference between knowing something is there and actually shooting it down.
Not to mention the f15 and f16 still in use around the world that are still extremely capable of holding their own in combat.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse


Good point. Although I've never see
any figures for what high-end Chinese or Russian MIC execs are paid.

As far as the Chinese being able to produce better for cheaper, I see no actual evidence of that militarily. I sure as hell don't see it in their products they ship to the U.S.. ugh.

On the excessive profits of the U.S. MIC. I tend to agree. Hopefully Trump can and will improve that, somewhat. Overall, though, our MIC has given us, generally, the best military equipment in the world. Which IS their job. That earns a mulligan or two, in my books.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 10:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: one4all
Imagine roving Drone "Mothership"incubators with 3-D printing capabilities grinding out a constant flow of attack drones.

Right now that is all we can do since it is fantasy for now.


Not to mention strategies are being developed to counter that scenario as we speak.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: one4all
Imagine roving Drone "Mothership"incubators with 3-D printing capabilities grinding out a constant flow of attack drones.

Right now that is all we can do since it is fantasy for now.


Not to mention strategies are being developed to counter that scenario as we speak.



Mike Tyson said it best.
"Everyone has a plan till they punched in the face"



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

I imagine the new laser based defense weapons installed on the Nuclear ships/carriers will be perfect for shooting down 1000 drones a second. And what kind of radar signature would thousands of drones have?



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 10:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Bluntone22

I imagine the new laser based defense weapons installed on the Nuclear ships/carriers will be perfect for shooting down 1000 drones a second. And what kind of radar signature would thousands of drones have?


Lasers might not do so well against lightweight mirrored armor.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04


There are two ways to defeat radar, stealth and jamming.
A combination of both is be a nasty combination.
That would be like finding a specific grain of sand in a sandbox.
It would be truely fascinating to know what both sides are capable of doing.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 10:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: rickymouse


Good point. Although I've never see
any figures for what high-end Chinese or Russian MIC execs are paid.

As far as the Chinese being able to produce better for cheaper, I see no actual evidence of that militarily. I sure as hell don't see it in their products they ship to the U.S.. ugh.

On the excessive profits of the U.S. MIC. I tend to agree. Hopefully Trump can and will improve that, somewhat. Overall, though, our MIC has given us, generally, the best military equipment in the world. Which IS their job. That earns a mulligan or two, in my books.


I was going to sell some air tools from Taiwan, I had become a dealer for them. I only invested in maybe about three hundred bucks worth of the tools to become a dealer, I compared them to what others I had. From talking to the owner of the company's nephew many times, I found the answers to that. The American companies require death dating of the tools, the Chinese and people from Taiwan can make great quality stuff that would last for a long time. But they are required to make flaws in their design and also to change often to make parts obsolete after a while.

It is not the Chinese that are causing inferior products. b They are just building what they are told to build.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker


The enemy we don't face. Right. This planet is the Garden of Eden. Peaceful, fun loving and full of goodwill.

Peaceful right. What you call the US military, invading and occupying multiple nations with impunity?


Peace of the grave.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22


There is a big difference between knowing something is there and actually shooting it down.

if you see it you can kill it.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 10:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Bluntone22


There is a big difference between knowing something is there and actually shooting it down.

if you see it you can kill it.


Very true.
That's the whole point of stealth. You see them before they see you.
The longer you delay detection the better chance you have to win the battle.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join