F-22 Raptor Thread

[SteelBird]

Hi Jeff,

Love your articles about F-22, T-50 and J-20. However, I found that the articles are full of typos mistakes, what's wrong? Did you type them by yourself?

 

[SamuraiBlue]

The current production versions of the AMRAAM AIM-120D are deigned in their BVR engagement to be extremely network centric and avoid these difficulties and maintain the strong BVR advantage the US holds.

The AIM-120D uses a two-stage guidance when fired at long range. The aircraft passes data to the missile just before launch, giving it information about the location of the target aircraft from the launch point and its direction and speed. The missile uses this information to fly on an interception course to the target using its built in inertial navigation system (INS). But the targeting information can come from multiple source and not just the launching platforms radar. For example, it could come from an infrared search and tracking system (IRST), from a data link from another fighter aircraft, or from an AWACS aircraft.

After launch, the aircraft that launched the missile, or one of several other surrogates can intermittently, or constantly track the target, and transmit periodic updates—such as changes in the target's direction and speed—to the missile, allowing the missile to adjust its course so that it can close to a self-homing distance (whatever that may be) and acquire the target aircraft.

On top if a rear plane can receive telemetry via data link from a forward drone and fire missiles of yet another drone then you got a new ball game called swarm tactics where you can diversify and even switch roles of various planes/drones in which a lead drone does the active radar sweep relying the telemetry to the manned plane in rear to command yet another drone passing on the telemetries that is radar silent armed with missiles and shoot them based on the telemetry received. A manned plane in the rear can give all the command to these drones. With this tactic a wide range of new formation can be achieved like a American football game in which a manned plane acts as the quarterback.

 

[Jeff Head]

On top if a rear plane can receive telemetry via data link from a forward drone and fire missiles of yet another drone then you got a new ball game called swarm tactics where you can diversify and even switch roles of various planes/drones in which a lead drone does the active radar sweep relying the telemetry to the manned plane in rear to command yet another drone passing on the telemetries that is radar silent armed with missiles and shoot them based on the telemetry received. A manned plane in the rear can give all the command to these drones. With this tactic a wide range of new formation can be achieved like a American football game in which a manned plane acts as the quarterback.

Those types of tactics are being developed now.

F/A-18E/F Super Hornets will be able to control 2-3 UCAVs each when they are produced...I imagine the F-35s will be able to do the same.

Similar tactics can be employed between various manned aircraft as well, perhaps a stealthier F-35 forward, helping AWACS guide electronically quiet Hornets who are missile platforms. Lots of opportunity to set up ambushes with such capabilities. Or F-35s and F-22s working an all stealth gambit in a similar fashion. Awesome stuff.

 

[SamuraiBlue]

With these new tactics in place I have a feeling that there will be a revival of two seater fighters since I believe it will become an information overload for just one person to manage.

 

[thunderchief]

The current production versions of the AMRAAM AIM-120D are deigned in their BVR engagement to be extremely network centric and avoid these difficulties and maintain the strong BVR advantage the US holds.

The AIM-120D uses a two-stage guidance when fired at long range. The aircraft passes data to the missile just before launch, giving it information about the location of the target aircraft from the launch point and its direction and speed. The missile uses this information to fly on an interception course to the target using its built in inertial navigation system (INS). But the targeting information can come from multiple source and not just the launching platforms radar. For example, it could come from an infrared search and tracking system (IRST), from a data link from another fighter aircraft, or from an AWACS aircraft.

After launch, the aircraft that launched the missile, or one of several other surrogates can intermittently, or constantly track the target, and transmit periodic updates—such as changes in the target's direction and speed—to the missile, allowing the missile to adjust its course so that it can close to a self-homing distance (whatever that may be) and acquire the target aircraft.

Network centric warfare , data link etc ... are just new takes on plain old command guidance with EM waves , well known from 50fifties and even before . As such , it has 2 weak points , commonly exploited :

1. Command guidance can be jammed or spoofed . It happened before , and will certainly happen again in conflict between two relatively advanced adversaries .

2. For command guidance to work , you need to keep track of the target and upload data to missile . In air combat this practically means that some has to point their radar towards target . Theoretically it could be AWACS , but they stay hundreds of km from combat and it is doubtful they would have proper firing solution on fifth gen stealth fighter . It could be other fighter or UCAV , but they too would have to get close to obtain firing solution - chances are they too would be engaged and would have to maneuver and break lock .

On the other hand , in most cases , IR missiles are truly fire&forget , and fighter using them could rapidly change course & heading . Also , IR sensors are getting better and newest generation actually has better range then active radar sensors on ARH AAMs . Best of all , they are passive , so chances of detecting attack are smaller .

 

[SamuraiBlue]

Network centric warfare , data link etc ... are just new takes on plain old command guidance with EM waves , well known from 50fifties and even before . As such , it has 2 weak points , commonly exploited :

1. Command guidance can be jammed or spoofed . It happened before , and will certainly happen again in conflict between two relatively advanced adversaries .

2. For command guidance to work , you need to keep track of the target and upload data to missile . In air combat this practically means that some has to point their radar towards target . Theoretically it could be AWACS , but they stay hundreds of km from combat and it is doubtful they would have proper firing solution on fifth gen stealth fighter . It could be other fighter or UCAV , but they too would have to get close to obtain firing solution - chances are they too would be engaged and would have to maneuver and break lock .

On the other hand , in most cases , IR missiles are truly fire&forget , and fighter using them could rapidly change course & heading . Also , IR sensors are getting better and newest generation actually has better range then active radar sensors on ARH AAMs . Best of all , they are passive , so chances of detecting attack are smaller .

EM Jamming has various flaws in itself. One being the jammer becomes prime target and the data transmission frequency band can be wide making jamming power hungry requiring a large plane to generate the amount of power. Frequency hoping, burst transmission, narrow beam transmission are all methods in getting around jamming technology.
Unlike current satellite links it's going to be very difficult in jamming a local transmission source close or within the battle field especially if the jammer is going to be further away then the transmitter.
As for IR sensors becoming better then radar goes beyond the realm of physics. To my knowledge IR targeting is only used during terminal homing not for mid-way guidance. The reason is that infrared energy dissipates into the atmosphere relatively quickly.

 

[Jeff Head]

Network centric warfare , data link etc ... are just new takes on plain old command guidance with EM waves , well known from 50fifties and even before . As such , it has 2 weak points , commonly exploited :

1. Command guidance can be jammed or spoofed . It happened before , and will certainly happen again in conflict between two relatively advanced adversaries .

2. For command guidance to work , you need to keep track of the target and upload data to missile . In air combat this practically means that some has to point their radar towards target . Theoretically it could be AWACS , but they stay hundreds of km from combat and it is doubtful they would have proper firing solution on fifth gen stealth fighter .

On the other hand , in most cases , IR missiles are truly fire&forget , and fighter using them could rapidly change course & heading . Also , IR sensors are getting better and newest generation actually has better range then active radar sensors on ARH AAMs . Best of all , they are passive , so chances of detecting attack are smaller .

The technologies being applied have all gotten more advanced nd there are several methodologies for getting around jamming.

5th gen stealth fighter, or stealthy UCAVs or UAVs can get much closer and transmit targeting data without being locked up. Micro bursts of data, very short in duration is all that is needed for the update...and can occur on more than one occasion to keep the launched missile(s) coming.

As I said, these are methodologies that are currently being developed to leverage the better stealth, better señor, better communications and overall better electronic advantage enjoyed by te west in general and the US specifically. But nothing (on either side) is bullet-proof.

 

[SinoSoldier]

On top if a rear plane can receive telemetry via data link from a forward drone and fire missiles of yet another drone then you got a new ball game called swarm tactics where you can diversify and even switch roles of various planes/drones in which a lead drone does the active radar sweep relying the telemetry to the manned plane in rear to command yet another drone passing on the telemetries that is radar silent armed with missiles and shoot them based on the telemetry received. A manned plane in the rear can give all the command to these drones. With this tactic a wide range of new formation can be achieved like a American football game in which a manned plane acts as the quarterback.

This sort of network-centric warfare has already been exploited by various fast attack boats of many navies, but it requires a very high degree of sophistication in the communication system as well as a strong ECCM capability.

But the thing is, aren't AWACS built for that purpose? It can pretty much take all the incoming information and interpret them into a live image of the battlefield and allow its crewmembers to essentially direct each aerial asset to a specific task. A similar thing is also being modified into Apache helicopters in which a scout helicopter or UAV would feed data into the further-back helicopter to achieve a form of BVR warfare for the first time in helicopter history.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

A valid point Sino but, first look at the age of the mainline AEW platforms of the world most are pushing beyond thirty. They all are totally defenseless other then escorts, against a total integrated air denial system they would rapidly find themselves as targets for every missile and interceptor if they tried a penetration mission. The mini awacs capability was developed because of that. And is integral in true Gen five fighters. However as drones became more a asset the technology evolved to match.

 

[SamuraiBlue]

But the thing is, aren't AWACS built for that purpose? It can pretty much take all the incoming information and interpret them into a live image of the battlefield and allow its crewmembers to essentially direct each aerial asset to a specific task. A similar thing is also being modified into Apache helicopters in which a scout helicopter or UAV would feed data into the further-back helicopter to achieve a form of BVR warfare for the first time in helicopter history.

Think of it this way, a system evolving around an AWACS plane is like a computer system evolving around a main frame and client computers while a swarm is like cloud computing. When the AWACS goes out the entire system goes down similar to a mainframe going down while in swarm even if a single server goes down there is only minor effect to the entire system.