AIRPOWER/Cold War - Its literally the first two lines of their hymn

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > AIRPOWER/Cold War - Its literally the first two lines of their hymn

«‹›1991 »

aphid_licker: Jan 7, 2009

mlmp08 posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBDsmpxwYsA

Remember the Russian counterpart? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEaw6ktxg-8

It beautifully translates the narcissistic sullen rage of a spree killer's manifesto video into the national scale. It creeped me right the gently caress out when it came out.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 12:16

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 27, 2024 13:11

Xerxes17: Feb 17, 2011

I think he is wondering more about the white-washing implications.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 12:22

stealie72: Jan 10, 2007

New page, but. . . . Mind blown that there's anyone in this thread that doesn't know about The Final Countdown. Goddamn kids these days. :bahgawd:

# ? Jul 13, 2016 12:35

hobbesmaster: Jan 28, 2008

I think I watched it on loop from ages 4-8.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 12:53

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

hobbesmaster posted:

I think I watched it on loop from ages 4-8.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 13:01

hogmartin: Mar 27, 2007

I saw it in the theater, on a Navy base in Athens Georgia that doesn't exist anymore. I was not quite a year old but was apparently very well-behaved :kiddo:

# ? Jul 13, 2016 13:16

bewbies: Sep 23, 2003; Fun Shoe

xthetenth posted:

Yeah, virtual attrition is a real and effective thing, and I'm thinking it's the backstop of what bewbies is saying, and he's got a different picture of what's causing how much of it, and how much certain forces are suffering.

I'm not really surprised that random guy on the internet #10 is asking questions that have been answered, I'm more curious about what those answers are because some are changed basic assumptions even from pretty recently that probably seem pretty obvious to dudes who do it professionally but haven't really percolated out.

I'm guessing that carriers would have to operate spread enough that they wouldn't see much economy of scale defending against threats, and that resupply for those land based vstol planes would be reasonably safe or at least safe enough to be feasible despite proximity, likely through use of prepositioned and heavily protected stores? So while carriers are trying to kill everything getting eyes on them and protect from every angle and having their actual sorties working towards the actual objective reduced to nothing by all the overhead friction of staying alive, the F-35s are maybe not generating a huge number of sorties, maybe not the most heavily laden ones, but they're reliable and all going towards the objective?

The issues started to emerge when the strike groups had to push back past 1000km or so due to the very robust missile and subsurface threat. That is a long drat way to fly for any plane, especially one carrying a lot of ordnance through contested airspace. The other issue is that huge area requires DCA across a lot of it; that is what really eats up the Navy's fixed wing sorties.

There's also another consideration that is a bit more self inflicted....this stuff all happens during "phase 2" which in DoD-speak means broadly all of the offensive crap that happens prior to major land operations. The USAF and USN bear the brunt of the strike/SEAD/OCA mission because they're the ones with the fancy LO standoff munitions. USMC air doesn't participate a whole lot in this, which frees up their aircraft for CAS-type things (note: I am NOT suggesting that the USAF/USN aren't dedicated to CAS). In any case, a lot depends on how effectively you're able to sustain and protect the planes on the ground, but the USMC actually does a pretty excellent job of this (theoretically at least). As I said above it is very difficult even for specialized munitions and high-end ISR to reduce small aircraft support facilities (ammo/fuel bunkers, etc) as these are very easy to conceal, harden, and move, but this just doesn't apply to runways...and our peer opponents have some extremely effective runway-destroying gadgetry.

So, the scenario we've seen multiple times: bad guys beat the hell out of Patriot/THAAD and crater every major airbase runway in a ~1000km radius around their objective, and the carriers are similarly pushed out to roughly that range. Rotary wing of all types is virtually useless due to the ridiculous number of MANPADS and guns and other nasty things, and legacy airframes can't operate because of an assortment of nasty missiles, particularly the lower level mobile stuff like the Buk and Pantsir. At the same time, friendly ground forces are getting the hell beat out of them by artillery, which outranges and outbangs ours, not to mention there's a whole lot more of it. So, your problem is: you need a platform to conduct a CAS and counterfire mission, in an environment contested by lots of quality medium range radar missiles, you don't have access to runways within a huge radius of the battle, but you have land based sustainment lines that can get gear to the planes so long as the planes can take off (thank the US army for this service).

# ? Jul 13, 2016 15:06

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Mortabis posted:

I just watched The Caine Mutiny tonight and I'm kind of amazed that it was the second-highest grossing film of 1954. The book was excellent but, uh, movies have improved. I mean it wasn't bad, but wow that's a lot of stock footage, and I wasn't super impressed with the acting either.

I will not let this stand, Humphery Bogart was excellent :mad:

Like a bunch of other things, acting has changed a fair bit over the past 60 years.

Also, stock footage is what you had in a war movie in the days before CGI unless you were Cecil B. DeMille. I mean there was a fair bit of model shots in slow motion, too

# ? Jul 13, 2016 15:22

hobbesmaster: Jan 28, 2008

bewbies posted:

The issues started to emerge when the strike groups had to push back past 1000km or so due to the very robust missile and subsurface threat. That is a long drat way to fly for any plane, especially one carrying a lot of ordnance through contested airspace. The other issue is that huge area requires DCA across a lot of it; that is what really eats up the Navy's fixed wing sorties.

There's also another consideration that is a bit more self inflicted....this stuff all happens during "phase 2" which in DoD-speak means broadly all of the offensive crap that happens prior to major land operations. The USAF and USN bear the brunt of the strike/SEAD/OCA mission because they're the ones with the fancy LO standoff munitions. USMC air doesn't participate a whole lot in this, which frees up their aircraft for CAS-type things (note: I am NOT suggesting that the USAF/USN aren't dedicated to CAS). In any case, a lot depends on how effectively you're able to sustain and protect the planes on the ground, but the USMC actually does a pretty excellent job of this (theoretically at least). As I said above it is very difficult even for specialized munitions and high-end ISR to reduce small aircraft support facilities (ammo/fuel bunkers, etc) as these are very easy to conceal, harden, and move, but this just doesn't apply to runways...and our peer opponents have some extremely effective runway-destroying gadgetry.

So, the scenario we've seen multiple times: bad guys beat the hell out of Patriot/THAAD and crater every major airbase runway in a ~1000km radius around their objective, and the carriers are similarly pushed out to roughly that range. Rotary wing of all types is virtually useless due to the ridiculous number of MANPADS and guns and other nasty things, and legacy airframes can't operate because of an assortment of nasty missiles, particularly the lower level mobile stuff like the Buk and Pantsir. At the same time, friendly ground forces are getting the hell beat out of them by artillery, which outranges and outbangs ours, not to mention there's a whole lot more of it. So, your problem is: you need a platform to conduct a CAS and counterfire mission, in an environment contested by lots of quality medium range radar missiles, you don't have access to runways within a huge radius of the battle, but you have land based sustainment lines that can get gear to the planes so long as the planes can take off (thank the US army for this service).

This sounds like a scenario for all of the tomahawks.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 15:34

Godholio: Aug 28, 2002; Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

Bulgaroctonus posted:

Wait, hold up, whoah buddy. This thing was made in 1980? Also, would someone please take an interest in the loving Europe tapes? They're getting thrown away if not.

I can find room in a storage box to save something this random. You don't seem to have PM.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 15:35

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

hobbesmaster posted:

This sounds like a scenario for all of the tomahawks.

Yes, literally all of them. Then we've run out and still missed a bunch of mobile targets, hardened targets, recoverable targets, and targets defended by badass SAMs.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 15:40

FrozenVent: May 1, 2009; The Boeing 737-200QC is the undisputed workhorse of the skies.

bewbies posted:

So, the scenario we've seen multiple times: bad guys beat the hell out of Patriot/THAAD and crater every major airbase runway in a ~1000km radius around their objective, and the carriers are similarly pushed out to roughly that range. Rotary wing of all types is virtually useless due to the ridiculous number of MANPADS and guns and other nasty things, and legacy airframes can't operate because of an assortment of nasty missiles, particularly the lower level mobile stuff like the Buk and Pantsir. At the same time, friendly ground forces are getting the hell beat out of them by artillery, which outranges and outbangs ours, not to mention there's a whole lot more of it. So, your problem is: you need a platform to conduct a CAS and counterfire mission, in an environment contested by lots of quality medium range radar missiles, you don't have access to runways within a huge radius of the battle, but you have land based sustainment lines that can get gear to the planes so long as the planes can take off (thank the US army for this service).

So in this scenario, the enemy can stop a carrier group, but not truck convoys?

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:08

hobbesmaster: Jan 28, 2008

mlmp08 posted:

Yes, literally all of them. Then we've run out and still missed a bunch of mobile targets, hardened targets, recoverable targets, and targets defended by badass SAMs.

And then since it's a near peer they launch nukes and then we do and problem solved!

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:15

bewbies: Sep 23, 2003; Fun Shoe

FrozenVent posted:

So in this scenario, the enemy can stop a carrier group, but not truck convoys?

It is a lot harder to detect and then engage something like a convoy in a timely manner, especially at long ranges, but the real issue is one of risk: we're a lot more willing to risk a convoy getting blowed up than we are a carrier.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:19

Mortabis: Jul 8, 2010; I am stupid

Do we have any system in service or in development for mobile air defense of convoys?

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:21

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

In the most technical of senses the avenger can provide shoot on the move mobile air defense of convoys.

In reality it is horribly out of date and short range air defense in general is a massive hole in our capabilities right now, and everyone knows it. It's not just ADA folk saying that anymore.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:23

Saint Celestine: Dec 17, 2008; Lay a fire within your soul and another between your hands, and let both be your weapons.
For one is faith and the other is victory and neither may ever be put out.
- Saint Sabbat, Lessons; Grimey Drawer

Mortabis posted:

Tbh I bet a single nuclear attack sub sent back in time would have made a much bigger difference in World War II than a CVN.

Why not a SSBN? 550kts of difference, over and over!

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:25

Cyrano4747: Sep 25, 2006; Yes, I know I'm old, get off my fucking lawn so I can yell at these clouds.

Bulgaroctonus posted:

Also, at least one of y'all has to have really lovely taste in music.does no one want the literal tapes from Europes' The Final Countdown? The gently caress is wrong with y'all? As I stated earlier, not bullshitting, came from the dude who recorded the demos. Not wilining to get rid of the machine yet, don't care about the tapes.

If you're serious about this I will happily take them. Love that song.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:27

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

mlmp08 posted:

In the most technical of senses the avenger can provide shoot on the move mobile air defense of convoys.

In reality it is horribly out of date and short range air defense in general is a massive hole in our capabilities right now, and everyone knows it. It's not just ADA folk saying that anymore.

So you're saying theres not a whole lot going on right now in air defense artillery?

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:28

bewbies: Sep 23, 2003; Fun Shoe

Mortabis posted:

Do we have any system in service or in development for mobile air defense of convoys?

Does pointing your M2 up in the air count?

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:28

Bulgaroctonus: Dec 31, 2008

Godholio posted:

I can find room in a storage box to save something this random. You don't seem to have PM.

Nope, no PM, but email is bruitcurieux at the one with the y at the beginning. Ideally this should go to the guy down the street constantly working on his Trans-Am (it's a bright yellow '86, natch), but when trying to explain what a reel-to-reel tape was he accused me of "human being poo poo." So it's yours for the taking. Enjoy! Just shoot me an email, we'll work out postage.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:29

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

That Works posted:

So you're saying theres not a whole lot going on right now in air defense artillery?

Why do you think that video is from the olden days?

There is a lot, but it's still way behind in the mobile shorad business.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:30

Bulgaroctonus: Dec 31, 2008

Also, to the guy responding to the Lando question, gently caress no I ain't even considering black face. I am curious, however, if white Lando is offensive. Kinda think it would be, not sure.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:34

Smiling Jack: Dec 2, 2001; I sucked a dick for bus fare and then I walked home.

Traditionally US army air defense has been handled by the Air Force :downs:

In all seriousness we fielded the Vulcan and the Chaparral is mobile air defense for the majority of the Cold War and they both sucked enormous amounts of donkey dick.

We managed to slap some Stingers on Bradleys and Humvees right around the same time the Warsaw Pact folded.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:34

Mortabis: Jul 8, 2010; I am stupid

bewbies posted:

Does pointing your M2 up in the air count?

I vaguely remember FM 7-8 explaining how to shoot at airplanes with a rifle: "aim two football fields in front."

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:37

Saint Celestine: Dec 17, 2008; Lay a fire within your soul and another between your hands, and let both be your weapons.
For one is faith and the other is victory and neither may ever be put out.
- Saint Sabbat, Lessons; Grimey Drawer

What about that mobile AMRAAM system Raytheon was supposed to be working on?

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:40

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

Tell that to the VC and NVA cut down by Vulcans and dusters and quad-50s.

I'm sure some VC and NVA went into the air after getting hit by twin bofors.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:40

bewbies: Sep 23, 2003; Fun Shoe

Saint Celestine posted:

What about that mobile AMRAAM system Raytheon was supposed to be working on?

The air force and navy priced the missiles out of the army's pitiful air defense budget.

So we rent it from the norways instead.

Seriously though if anyone has any bright ideas about a mobile, tactical air defense system let me know

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:43

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

Saint Celestine posted:

What about that mobile AMRAAM system Raytheon was supposed to be working on?

Shelved. It worked well enough, but cost was excessive for what it offered. SHORAD in the Marines and Army have been perpetually in the "well, if we wait, we can get even better poo poo for cheaper later!" For like 2+ decades. We're like the dude with a potato for a computer salivating over what next year's anandtech price:performance chart might look like.

Last I checked Marines still make their low altitude AD guys shoot M240s and M2s at aerial targets. Picture ten HMMWVs on line with everyone emptying their box mags to maybe damage half the handful of targets lazily crossing back and forth 800 meters out.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:45

Armyman25: Sep 6, 2005

bewbies posted:

The issues started to emerge when the strike groups had to push back past 1000km or so due to the very robust missile and subsurface threat. That is a long drat way to fly for any plane, especially one carrying a lot of ordnance through contested airspace. The other issue is that huge area requires DCA across a lot of it; that is what really eats up the Navy's fixed wing sorties.

There's also another consideration that is a bit more self inflicted....this stuff all happens during "phase 2" which in DoD-speak means broadly all of the offensive crap that happens prior to major land operations. The USAF and USN bear the brunt of the strike/SEAD/OCA mission because they're the ones with the fancy LO standoff munitions. USMC air doesn't participate a whole lot in this, which frees up their aircraft for CAS-type things (note: I am NOT suggesting that the USAF/USN aren't dedicated to CAS). In any case, a lot depends on how effectively you're able to sustain and protect the planes on the ground, but the USMC actually does a pretty excellent job of this (theoretically at least). As I said above it is very difficult even for specialized munitions and high-end ISR to reduce small aircraft support facilities (ammo/fuel bunkers, etc) as these are very easy to conceal, harden, and move, but this just doesn't apply to runways...and our peer opponents have some extremely effective runway-destroying gadgetry.

So, the scenario we've seen multiple times: bad guys beat the hell out of Patriot/THAAD and crater every major airbase runway in a ~1000km radius around their objective, and the carriers are similarly pushed out to roughly that range. Rotary wing of all types is virtually useless due to the ridiculous number of MANPADS and guns and other nasty things, and legacy airframes can't operate because of an assortment of nasty missiles, particularly the lower level mobile stuff like the Buk and Pantsir. At the same time, friendly ground forces are getting the hell beat out of them by artillery, which outranges and outbangs ours, not to mention there's a whole lot more of it. So, your problem is: you need a platform to conduct a CAS and counterfire mission, in an environment contested by lots of quality medium range radar missiles, you don't have access to runways within a huge radius of the battle, but you have land based sustainment lines that can get gear to the planes so long as the planes can take off (thank the US army for this service).

The Marines do such a good job at base security that the Taliban can infiltrate and blow up 8 Harriers on the ground.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_2012_Camp_Bastion_raid

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:46

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

Also lol at LHA air defense: dudes standing on the deck with stingers.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:47

Cat Mattress: Jul 14, 2012; by Cyrano4747

Bulgaroctonus posted:

Wait, hold up, whoah buddy. This thing was made in 1980? Also, would someone please take an interest in the loving Europe tapes? They're getting thrown away if not.

Maybe try a forum about music and collectable instead of one about planes that go pew pew brrrt boom?

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:52

Bulgaroctonus: Dec 31, 2008

Cyrano4747 posted:

If you're serious about this I will happily take them. Love that song.

Have to qualify this, it's the album, not the song, song was evidently a bit of an afterthought (even though it's the only poo poo they ever did that's worthwhile. Also, I just found out that loving Kraftwerk is coming to San Antonio in September. I know there's a few SA folk out there, probably have a gay-rear end date lined up, but gently caress it (butt gently caress it?), let's roll up like gay pimps, you know you're into it.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 16:57

hogmartin: Mar 27, 2007

What the gently caress is even happening in the AIRPOWER/Cold War thread right now.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 17:01

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

bewbies posted:

The issues started to emerge when the strike groups had to push back past 1000km or so due to the very robust missile and subsurface threat. That is a long drat way to fly for any plane, especially one carrying a lot of ordnance through contested airspace. The other issue is that huge area requires DCA across a lot of it; that is what really eats up the Navy's fixed wing sorties.

There's also another consideration that is a bit more self inflicted....this stuff all happens during "phase 2" which in DoD-speak means broadly all of the offensive crap that happens prior to major land operations. The USAF and USN bear the brunt of the strike/SEAD/OCA mission because they're the ones with the fancy LO standoff munitions. USMC air doesn't participate a whole lot in this, which frees up their aircraft for CAS-type things (note: I am NOT suggesting that the USAF/USN aren't dedicated to CAS). In any case, a lot depends on how effectively you're able to sustain and protect the planes on the ground, but the USMC actually does a pretty excellent job of this (theoretically at least). As I said above it is very difficult even for specialized munitions and high-end ISR to reduce small aircraft support facilities (ammo/fuel bunkers, etc) as these are very easy to conceal, harden, and move, but this just doesn't apply to runways...and our peer opponents have some extremely effective runway-destroying gadgetry.

So, the scenario we've seen multiple times: bad guys beat the hell out of Patriot/THAAD and crater every major airbase runway in a ~1000km radius around their objective, and the carriers are similarly pushed out to roughly that range. Rotary wing of all types is virtually useless due to the ridiculous number of MANPADS and guns and other nasty things, and legacy airframes can't operate because of an assortment of nasty missiles, particularly the lower level mobile stuff like the Buk and Pantsir. At the same time, friendly ground forces are getting the hell beat out of them by artillery, which outranges and outbangs ours, not to mention there's a whole lot more of it. So, your problem is: you need a platform to conduct a CAS and counterfire mission, in an environment contested by lots of quality medium range radar missiles, you don't have access to runways within a huge radius of the battle, but you have land based sustainment lines that can get gear to the planes so long as the planes can take off (thank the US army for this service).

Are the Americans in this scenario not allowed to shoot back unless it's an F35? Why do they need to cower in their trenches and wait for the air force to go out and get at the enemy? The Americans have their own equivalents to Grad and Buk, even without the air force they are no less well armed than this notional enemy so why don't they get the Deep Battle going?

# ? Jul 13, 2016 17:03

Godholio: Aug 28, 2002; Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

Massively
Assured
Decibels

# ? Jul 13, 2016 17:08

xthetenth: Dec 30, 2012; Mario wasn't sure if this Jeb guy was a good influence on Yoshi.

bewbies posted:

The air force and navy priced the missiles out of the army's pitiful air defense budget.

So we rent it from the norways instead.

Seriously though if anyone has any bright ideas about a mobile, tactical air defense system let me know

Make it a rider to the F35 program, and sell it as part of a hardened forward base assurance program. Then upsell the buy to cover other units as having functionally no development costs, so it has a comparatively cheap per-unit cost.

hogmartin posted:

What the gently caress is even happening in the AIRPOWER/Cold War thread right now.

It's a representation of what's going on in ADA.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 17:08

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

Throatwarbler posted:

Are the Americans in this scenario not allowed to shoot back unless it's an F35? Why do they need to cower in their trenches and wait for the air force to go out and get at the enemy? The Americans have their own equivalents to Grad and Buk, even without the air force they are no less well armed than this notional enemy so why don't they get the Deep Battle going?

Buk: gently caress no we don't.
TBMs: gently caress no we don't.
Tube arty: not same numbers.
Ability to operate from within massive SAM envelopes: not if we're trying to go on the offensive at all.
Supply lines: Pacific Ocean vs in-country.

And probably much more from experienced people.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 17:09

Helter Skelter: Feb 10, 2004; BEARD OF HAVOC

Mortabis posted:

I vaguely remember FM 7-8 explaining how to shoot at airplanes with a rifle: "aim two football fields in front."

FM 7-8 posted:

2. ACTIVE AIR DEFENSE.
Once detected, the platoon leader decides, based on the weapons control status, if he uses active air defense. Active air defense is conducted in one of the following ways:

a. For a high-performance aircraft, soldiers aim at a point two football field lengths in front of the aircraft and fire on automatic. This makes the aircraft fly through a "wall" of bullets.
b. For a low-performance aircraft or a rotary aircraft, soldiers aim at a point half of a football field length in front of the aircraft and fire on automatic.
c. For any aircraft heading directly at the platoon, soldiers aim at a point directly above the nose of the aircraft and fire on automatic.

That sounds... optimistic.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 17:23

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 27, 2024 13:11

Smiling Jack: Dec 2, 2001; I sucked a dick for bus fare and then I walked home.

Mobile air defense really difficult and hard to do news at 11.

Extremely short timeframes for target acquisition, identification and engagement from a moving vehicle or from a vehicle not tied into a air defense net is gonna be really loving difficult.

Tying mobile / semi mobile ADA into a larger defense net of AWACS and ground based radar opens up a huge problem set related to electronic warfare and eating a anti-radiation missile.

I wasn't joking when I said air defense is best handled by the Air Force fighter wings but that obviously not always available.

# ? Jul 13, 2016 17:29

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > AIRPOWER/Cold War - Its literally the first two lines of their hymn

«‹›1991 »