Some Hints of AFRL Thinking of Air Combat Circa 2030

a reply to: tadaman

I imagine one day we will do areal refueling and rearming of drone armadas by near orbital "mother ships" capable of 24/7 patrols.

Look up the Gremlins Project by DARPA.

Carriers will be obsolete when we can do that easily.

For reliability reasons, that's not likely to be the case. Those drones will still have maintenance needs.

ATS double post gremlin got me.

a reply to: anzha

we got that covered too when it comes to disrupting Russia Iit anyone else's satellite usage for C3 functions. it's lights out when we choose.

a reply to: anzha

we got that covered too when it comes to disrupting Russia or anyone else's satellite usage for C3 functions. it's lights out when we choose.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

And vice versa. They have at least two asat weapons. The CHinese have at least two that I am aware of, too.

Anyone wonder why the USAF is supporting Musk's BFR?

a reply to: anzha

www.military.com...

More info.

a reply to: anzha

we got a way to do it without anti sat missiles

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Oh, I am aware. Very aware.

For LEO sats, a SM-3 Block 2A would work just fine.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: intrptr
amazing assumption there.
no, I've discussed it before in the years past. although, there's lots I know that exists I don't discuss until I see others bringing it out first.

Got a link to this item before Putins speech? Atypical 'damage control' otherwise.

I did mention the Song class sub surprising US aircraft carriers and our own research and exploration mini drone subs.

a reply to: intrptr
actually it's been mentioned here before on ats at least 7 years ago by a few members that were part of that community. but I knew about it back then too. you'd be surprised who posts on ats. some of them actually do know things. besides just cause you think its so doesnt make it the reality. and, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. like in my case I'm not about to go waste my time searching certain members posts going 7 years back to prove some point to you.

not sure why you're always jumping to ignorant, arrogant conclusions and assumptions all the time. you could do better for yourself here if you developed a little less of an abrasive conversational manner.

and also, play nicer with Anzha. he knows a lot more than you do on just about every subject you butt heads with him on. you're embarrassing yourself.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

you'd be surprised who posts on ats. some of them actually do know things. besides just cause you think its so doesnt make it the reality. and, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. like in my case I'm not about to go waste my time searching certain members posts going 7 years back to prove some point to you.

Not 'surprised' at all. Disinfo specialists abound. Nice spin though.

People who have expertise in defense surely post here. They likely do so for fun or because of their passion for the topic. Maybe they are biased from their own vested interests. However I think that people with expertise who are working as "disinfo specialists" are less likely to be here, instead they are likely at think-tanks, working in policy, or writing articles for websites that garner lots of views.

However, I do think disinfo agents are most definitely paid to troll forums such as this. They just don't have any real expertise. They don't need to be educated. They don't need to be paid much. All they need to do is disrupt the conversation, steering the conversation to their political goals, whataboutism, or maybe even post-BS occasionally. Very familiar and easy to spot, it's just difficult to tell if they're an actual disinfo agent or they actually believe it (and if they are engaging in these tactics - does it matter?). Very few of the regulars here engage in such patterns.

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: Arnie123

As hard as I am on intrptr, this is just a concept and hasn't been built yet.

It's actually more "artist's impression" of some technological concepts thrown about done by the very talented Rodrigo Avella.

Looks even better with the canards, imo. They asked him to take them off

a reply to: RadioRobert
Canards are cool They do fun stuff...

a reply to: Blackfinger

www.businessinsider.com...

Very fluffy. The expert they consult doesn't like pew pews.

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Anyone wonder why the USAF is supporting Musk's BFR?

Maybe they are finally at long last tired of LockBoing's Hollywood accounting and financial shakedowns?

Delta IV Heavy: 28 mt to LEO. $350 million.

BFR: 150 mt to LEO. $350 million.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: anzha

we got that covered too when it comes to disrupting Russia or anyone else's satellite usage for C3 functions. it's lights out when we choose.

a sat vs sat war is bad for USA, we're more dependent than any other party.

a reply to: anzha
Pew Pews would be a nice replacement for traditional guns..Especially if the target is off to the beam that missiles cant get.Be a great close in anti missile defence under or from the 6 Oclock position..Range will be dependant on air quality as usual..