US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Viktor Jav said:

What is perhaps more surprising is how long it took for the USAF to finally take the decision to upgrade it's existing fighters with technologies that have existed for nearly a decade. Prior to this I thought that the newest of the F-16s came with AESA radar and that the F-15 to have comprehensive ECM installed already.

Click to expand...

Actually AN/APG-80 was the first AESA radar built for the F-16 and equipped the UAE Block 60 F-16s. The USAF F-16C/D have the AN/APG-68 and 72 units are funded to receive the AN/APG-83.

The AN/APG-83 radar was first tested on an F-16 at Edwards AFB in 2010. This radar upgrade was meant as part of the planned Combat Avionics Programmed Extension Suite (CAPES) program in 2013. It was however cancelled the following year in order to fund the SLEP. The CAPES program included not only the radar, but high-resolution, multifunction color displays, an upgraded AN/ALQ-213 electronic warfare suite and an integrated broadcast system (IBS). The latter piece of equipment was designed to collect, correlate and display data from off-board data links and the aircraft’s own sensors.

Plans for a replacement radar system were resurrected in March 2015. The resurrected program will initially replace the AN/APG-68 mechanically scanned radar on ANG F-16Cs that make up 56% of the nation’s aerospace control alert (ACA) fighter force with the Northrop Grumman AN/APG-83. Contract of $244m was awarded to Northrop Grumman to provide 72 systems in June 2017. Another 300 F-16Cs remains under consideration.

Further electronic upgrades will equip the Pre-Block fleet with a new communications suite, a Hybrid Flight Control Computer (HFLCC), AGCAS and replacement of the MIDSLow Volume Terminal (MIDS-LVT) with the MIDS-Joint Tactical Radio System (MIDSJTRS). Additionally, ANG and AFRC F-16s will be the first to get Rockwell Collins Digital GPS Anti-Jam Receivers (DIGAR) that will provide reliable navigation in contested electromagnetic environments.

The main reason for the seemly slow and ambivalent interest in upgrading the F-16 is because priority was to equip the USAF with F-35As rather than to upgrade the F-16. Unfortunately because of slippage with the JSF program some upgrade is deemed necessary to bridge the transition to a 5th generation force structure.

The "Golden Eagle" upgrade path was to keep around 179 frontline F-15Cs tactically relevant with the new AN/APG-63(V)3 AESA radar, Link 16 data-link connectivity, Sniper targeting pod, Advance Display Core Processor (ADCP) II, and IRST.

Cockpit display upgrade include a 9X11 inch night vision compatible, colour multi-function display screen with a resolution of 1024X768. It can show multiple video channels and instrumentation feeds, including a number of them at one time, via multiple windows. It also can overlay instrumentation or tactical data on a video feed.

EPAWSS was meant to replace the F-15C's RWR and obsolete AN/ALQ-135 Tactical Electronic Warfare System (TEWS) and would be a quantum leap in combat capability and survivability. The Eagle Passive/Active Warning Survivability System (EPAWSS) is able to geolocate threat emitters and use various electronic warfare tactics to counter them, allowing the F-15 to penetrate through contested airspace. The system would need to display this info in a situational manner and would fit well with the new cockpit display.

The current TEWS is made up of :
AN/ALQ-128 (EWWS)
An/ALQ-56 (RWR)
AN/ALQ-135 (ECM)
AN/ALQ-45 (Flare/Chaff)

These systems while very capable are progressively outdated because they are analog and to my knowledge not fully integrated. Modern threats like AESA radar with LPI features will seriously challenge them. EPAWSS is all digital, integrated, full spectrum channelised to operate in a dense electronic environment against all known and future threats.

The problem with having a conversation on ECM is the general public has very limited understanding of the subject. Not all ECMs are the same or have similar capabilities. It is like placing a Toyota and a Ferrari in the same group as “cars”.

Just on the subject of RWR the difference in tech level can be between:

- Analog
- Analog digital
- All digital
- Digital channelised
- Digital channelised (integrated)

For example, an analog system actually have to scan for threat emissions. A digital system doesn’t have to operate in a scan mode. Up to until AN/ALR-67(V)3 came along, RWR typically did not have ranging capability. It means it can only detect bearing but not distance and so the threat nature cannot be established. The angular inaccuracy was as much as 30 degrees. The ALR-67 brings with it down to 1 degree. This has a significant bearing on geolocation to determine CEP accuracy especially in stand-off ranges.

Viktor Jav said:

And that is perhaps the biggest problem the US military procurement is facing, an inability to reasonably predict and schedule development and deployment of new military equipment. And to be frank it is not if they are lacking on damage control here.
This was and still is my main beef with the F-35, not because it is a potato/turkey, if you throw enough money at it any problem can be fix, it is the fact certain expenditures could and can be prevented and the money funneled into better stopgap measures. LM should be held criminally liable for this, but they are getting away scott free and laughing to the bank whereas other companies like Boeing gets the proverbial axe for even lesser sins. But I guess this is what a pork barrel project gets you.

Click to expand...

There are a lot of things you have said which in my opinion are grounded on your personal views of the program. The JSF program is massive in scope and funding and has no equal in history. Are there things the program could have done differently that would be more productive and effective? Without doubt - in hindsight. Program of this nature because of its size has a lot of different stake holders and they are not necessarily on the same page because of individual vested interest. I was initially very sceptical and critical of the program from the perspective of project management and the failure to meet timelines and on budget. Over time I focussed more on the technology and the capabilities that come with the technology rather than get side tracked by the politics. I became to appreciate the incredible capabilities that the platform delivers with stealth and more importantly what sensor fusion brings to the battlespace. The jewel of the F-35 is the "God's eye view" and not the stealth. I think there is a general lack of appreciation of what the F-35 brings in a high end fight and how it is changing the battlespace. There is a big difference between 4th gen and 5th gen capabilities and Jura would often mocked the Reg Flag exchanges of 20:1 or 30:1 .

It is a game change because it actually elevates the performances of 4th gen fighters that are mated to it in a force structure. The Dutch airforce in one of their exercise reported that when their F-16's when paired with F-35s provided them with a completely different situational awareness of the battlespace and consequently a very different set of outcome against a red force of F-16s. This is also one of the reason why I believe the USAF is slow in upgrading the sensors of its force of F-16s because the USAF's tactical deployment of its force structure is based on a networked centric approach. This mean that the F-35 with its capable senor fusion is able to feed situational awareness (through data links) to all accompanying forces and this lessen the need for the 4th gen fighters to have state of the art sensors.

I will finish off with one more example to highlight the difference that the F-35 brings to the battlespace and why 4th gen adversaries are seriously disadvantaged in any high end fight The sensors of the F-35 include passive sensors which are capable of offering targeting solutions. Unlike radar, they do not emit and so 4th gen platforms can be targeted without them knowing. A 150 kms launch of a AIM-120D against such targets are well within the F-35 sensor range and the AIM-120D. In contrast at this distance and with its VLO features, the F-35 presence cannot be picked up either by radar or by the RWR because the targeting is through passive sensors. The AIM-120D has a dual thrust motor i.e.it has a booster and sustainer motor to loft the missile to its target. The missile launch cannot be picked up because of the distance from the launch. The latter part of the missile journey is from kinetic energy after the motor burnt-out. This mean the UV missile warning system that are typical with Chinese and Russian planes cannot pick up an incoming missile because there is no IR signature and don't know it is being targeted because the missile guidance is via passive sensors. There is no evasive maneuvering or counter measures under such a scenario. The only time the adversaries are aware that something is amiss is when the missile goes pit bull in the terminal stage when the adversaries onboard RWR sensors are activated because of the locked on. There are only seconds to react and difficult to evade against a dual mode seeker at terminal stage. This is the reason why at Red Flags the kill ratio is so high. . . .

Brumby said:

... This is the reason why at Red Flags the kill ratio is so high. . . .

Click to expand...

pew! pew! pew! fairy tale of F-35 Red Flag kill ratio told here now? I'm going to comment later today, stay tuned LOL

... so, at the beginning of his presidency, Trump made some comments about the F-35,

and, as a coincidence hahaha, first Feb 15, 2017 they said

"Although they don’t have an updated figure, the pilots told us that the F-35 kill ratio was higher than the 15-1 figure they initially reported."

so I asked "will they make it 20 and revoke one "loss"?"

and Feb 28, 2017 it was "Indeed, while early reports suggested a recent Air Force testimony by Lt. Gen. Jerry D. Harris, Vice Commander of Air Combat Command characterized the kill ratio as “20-1” meaning that, for one F-35A “lost” in simulated combat in a high threat environment that the aircraft destroyed 20 simulated enemy aircraft."

then Mar 5, 2017 to become “In our own analysis we're seeing a consistent ratio more like 24:0 – we're not losing aircraft at all in our scenarios, and we set the conditions for other legacy fighters to be successful where we can.”

as of now, links to all those statements work

here's what Rogoway had to say at that time: Let’s Talk About Those F-35 Kill Ratio Reports From Red Flag

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

February 8, 2017

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I haven't seen any F-35 kill ratios announced since then

Jura said:

... so, at the beginning of his presidency, Trump made some comments about the F-35,

and, as a coincidence hahaha, first Feb 15, 2017 they said

"Although they don’t have an updated figure, the pilots told us that the F-35 kill ratio was higher than the 15-1 figure they initially reported."

so I asked "will they make it 20 and revoke one "loss"?"

and Feb 28, 2017 it was "Indeed, while early reports suggested a

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

recent Air Force testimony by Lt. Gen. Jerry D. Harris, Vice Commander of Air Combat Command characterized the kill ratio as “20-1” meaning that, for one F-35A “lost” in simulated combat in a high threat environment that the aircraft destroyed 20 simulated enemy aircraft."

then Mar 5, 2017 to become “In our own analysis we're seeing a consistent ratio more like 24:0 – we're not losing aircraft at all in our scenarios, and we set the conditions for other legacy fighters to be successful where we can.”

as of now, links to all those statements work

here's what Rogoway had to say at that time: Let’s Talk About Those F-35 Kill Ratio Reports From Red Flag

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

February 8, 2017

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I haven't seen any F-35 kill ratios announced since then

Click to expand...

So Tyler Rogoway is a "Fighter Pilots, Fighter Pilot" is that your line?? who is Tyler Rogoway? internet bloggers, twitter feeders?? Sino Defense Forum experts?? and the Russian Internet! oh and of course the Washington Post and New York Times?? you have any other sources??

Yes, no doubt you and Tyler know far more about actual kill ratios than USAF or even all those International Partners, no doubt.. So we should just tell USAF just to ask whatever they need to know, just give you and Tyler a call, and you will fill them in, and Don't whatever they do, post any more kill ratios!

yeah, they are running scared now, the internet experts have "called their hand!", they are no doubt shaking right now!

I think they have revised the ratio up to 24 to 1, LOL!

Air Force Brat said:

So Tyler Rogoway is a "Fighter Pilots, Fighter Pilot" is that your line?? who is Tyler Rogoway? internet bloggers, twitter feeders?? Sino Defense Forum experts?? and the Russian Internet! oh and of course the Washington Post and New York Times?? you have any other sources??

Yes, no doubt you and Tyler know far more about actual kill ratios than USAF or even all those International Partners, no doubt.. So we should just tell USAF just to ask whatever they need to know, just give you and Tyler a call, and you will fill them in, and Don't whatever they do, post any more kill ratios!

yeah, they are running scared now, the internet experts have "called their hand!", they are no doubt shaking right now!

I think they have revised the ratio up to 24 to 1, LOL!

Click to expand...

I think Rogoway is pro-F-35, just the Pentagon PR team overdid it back then (F-35s presumably didn't even have even Block 3F software since it was introduced in 2018, so the expression 'willing suspension of disbelief' comes to mind)

Jura said:

I think Rogoway is pro-F-35, just the Pentagon PR team overdid it back then (F-35s presumably didn't even have even Block 3F software since it was introduced in 2018, so the expression 'willing suspension of disbelief' comes to mind)

Click to expand...

Actually early on he was as critical as you are. I remember interviews on the John Batchelor show where he blasted it as unnecessary and Underperforming. The poster child of the MIC, However as time as progressed he has softened on it as it’s improved.
Most ‘Pro-F35’ have been critical at points along the program, with a moment some time along where we had a “Come to Lightning II moment”

Jura said:

I think Rogoway is pro-F-35, just the Pentagon PR team overdid it back then (F-35s presumably didn't even have even Block 3F software since it was introduced in 2018, so the expression 'willing suspension of disbelief' comes to mind)

Click to expand...

Tyler Rogoway is a "BLOGGER", he's a nice guy, I'm sure I'd love hanging out with Tyler and "shooting the shit" with him! Same for you my friend, I'm happy to have somebody to "sharpen my steel on", that's gonna be my friend no matter what, we are both "Dad's of Daughters" we need all the help we can get...

I HATED the F-35, HATED that little piece of KRAP! all that PORK Barrel killed the most beautiful, highest performance fighter aircraft that will likely ever exist, the F-22 Raptor, and I lay awake at night, dreaming of Raptor 2.0 Ressurected, all gorgeous and dreamy in that gorgeous "green primer"!

Having said that, the Raptor is dead, long live the Queen, we my friend have been fortunate to be left with the "Princess, root rib cracking, aluminum bulkhead cracking, two birds that had anomalous tail feather singeing, engine fire, wires chaffing, blah, blah, blah...

So you know all about the Su-57 issues, mostly same O, same O, nobody knows anything about the J-20, but this much I will guarantee, there are issues, likely cracking, no doubt issues with the FCS just to start..

When you launch a "clean sheet" design there are issues, it really doesn't matter how smart you think you are!

So yes, after AF-02 began to fly the high AOA series of tests and departures from every attitude, I'm a believer, its a awesome flying machine with gorgeous, Raptor like aerodynamics, and more, all without OVT, I'm very impressed. In all fairness the Su-57 also has amazing aerodynamics, and I would imagine the J-20 flies very nicely as well from the limited maneuvering that we have seen.

About the US submarines how far do they go into the sea

Jordan robert said:

About the US submarines how far do they go into the sea

Click to expand...

to the extent I understand your question, you asked about classified information

(currently all USN subs are nuclear-powered, so they may "go into the sea" as far as they want, for example they might circumnavigate the globe during deployments, but details are not announced at for example if you know what I'm saying)