|
Smiling Jack posted:I wasn't joking when I said air defense is best handled by the Air Force fighter wings but that obviously not always available. Sardonic joke about F-22 production goes here.
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 13:03 |
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Buk: gently caress no we don't. But PAC-3 is equivalent to Buk?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
Helter Skelter posted:That sounds... optimistic. At Red Flag we had a Blackhawk door gunner claim a kill on an F-16. Turns out it was a friendly F-16, but iirc they counted it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
bewbies posted:Seriously though if anyone has any bright ideas about a mobile, tactical air defense system let me know Lots of MANPADS and a bunch of hiluxes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 17:48
|
|
Helter Skelter posted:That sounds... optimistic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouA02ARIgFg&t=155s
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
Smiling Jack posted:Mobile air defense really difficult and hard to do news at 11. It's increasingly untenable to rely on USAF for air defense. For your strike fighters and bombers and big, high UAS they should be primary. But with proliferation of cruise missiles, long-range glide bombs, and UAS, the USAF just can't be everywhere hitting all those threats. They've already done tests with directed energy and directional jamming from platforms like MRAPs to disable or take over smaller COTS drones that the USAF can't deal with. Air defense is evolving to be a combo of bigass missile defense, EW counter-UAS, and kinetic or energy kill of tube and rocket artillery. Also, every air asset tied up doing air defense is an air asset NOT doing some other important job in support of the ground/surface fight.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
Helter Skelter posted:That sounds... optimistic. A pilot who hears "ting ting" against his jet might only make one attack run instead of several? That bore out for some of our fighter-bombers in Vietnam.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
So if I understand this conversation correctly, besides Stingers at the very short ranges, the US has no ground based mobile air defence system, unless you count Patriot as 'mobile' ?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:So if I understand this conversation correctly, besides Stingers at the very short ranges, the US has no ground based mobile air defence system, unless you count Patriot as 'mobile' ? Correct. For even shorter range, the Avenger has an M3P .50 cal. There are all sorts of mockups out there like one from Boeing with an auto-cannon and AIM-9X mounted on it. lol.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:So if I understand this conversation correctly, besides Stingers at the very short ranges, the US has no ground based mobile air defence system, unless you count Patriot as 'mobile' ? Turns out having total air superiority for the majority of time airplanes existed really changes procurement priorities.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
Are we trying to get parity with the other guys' capabilities that are a massive ballache or trying to get more than that? How would Russian iads deal with that type of saturation threat?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Tube arty: not same numbers. Why do the Russians have so much more artillery than everyone else?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
Naramyth posted:Turns out having total air superiority for the majority of time airplanes existed really changes procurement priorities. Is NATO thought to have had air superiority during the cold war? The Soviets had a shitload of planes. e: the German army apparently has 32 MLRS left. That doesn't seem like a lot. aphid_licker fucked around with this message at 18:37 on Jul 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Why do the Russians have so much more artillery than everyone else? They don't necessarily have more than everyone else, the US just has a whole lot less. During World War II and the Cold War the US had more than anyone and we've gradually divested it since GWOT the big issue is really the rocket artillery, and that is a hard problem to solve since their rockets don't have to be transported across oceans. Chinese rocket arty in particular has gotten just massive; they go a long drat way and carry a lot of bang
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
Ergo the recent emphasis being placed on getting back to basics like cammo, dispersion, defeating ISR, hardening sites, and mobility vs big obvious FOBs with dress right motor pools.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:But PAC-3 is equivalent to Buk? lol what
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
Smiling Jack posted:A STOVL stealth fighter is dope as hell, the question is were the compromises made for the AF/USN worth it. kill me now posted:- The USMC needed to replace the AV-8B as they will soon be too worn out to continue flying and they don't want to lose the fixed wing capability off their LHA/LHD's I just want to point out that the first quote is actually the correct POV. The JSF program evolved out of a joint USMC & AF program to develop a next-gen STOVL aircraft in the early to mid 90's. The A & C models are the compromise solution.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
From a military standpoint poo poo is about to get seriously weird. Since "The End of History" in 1989 the US hasn't had to deal with a peer competitor. Now, we have to deal with the idea of a peer competitor coupled with the massive changes in information technology and electronic warfare which will require extremely expensive equipment and highly trained personnel (yes, including the infantry) while still having to deal with manpower intensive poo poo like counterinsurgency. Your average Army combat arms E-3 in Cold War Europe was basically dealing with the same skill set as his WW2 equivalent plus the face-melting worry of NBC. Nowadays they have to know all that poo poo and worry about things like hiding from enemy drones, having the communication network hacked, IR signatures and so on. If you can see it you can hit it, and if you can hit it you can kill it has been a basic tenet of the US Military for a while but we are entering an age where everyone has access to some sort of PGM and can call in accurate fires... Or you did 30 seconds ago but now all you've got is a broken radio and a rifle because your comms are down or your arty just got smoked or the CAS just got re-tasked or shredded. poo poo we live in a world where people hack rifle scopes over wifi and there's been discussion of hacking enemy radar systems using the radar receiver itself as the entry point for the malware. The future is a strange place.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
The future is coming. It's coming and it's bringing with it armored Kodiak bears, attack blimps, and enough weaponized robots to turn 'hope' into a four-letter word.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
If you don't think uplifted armored Kodiak bears are awesome I don't want to know you
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Correct. For even shorter range, the Avenger has an M3P .50 cal. isn't that the system that has a couple auto-cannons, AIM-9Xs, and Javelins? It looks like something out of GI Joe lol Murgos posted:I just want to point out that the first quote is actually the correct POV. This is only partially true. ASTOVL/SSF/CALF was one part of what became the JSF. An equally big part was the A/F-X program, which was the Navy's Plan B after ATA (A-12) and NATF blew up and turned out to be vaporware, respectively. That got merged into the JAST effort (along with the USAF's requirement for a F-16 replacement after MRF got killed off), and then JAST got forcibly merged into ASTOVL as the technology demonstrator for ASTOVL, but saying the JSF solely evolved out of a STOVL program is a bit disingenuous. It's an undeniable fact that significant compromises had to be made to the overall design due to it being overweight for STOVL. The SWAT effort was driven solely by the -B and the STOVL requirement, and SWAT is where the majority of the compromises were introduced because LM was in hair on fire mode trying to avoid the -B being a complete flop due to being massively overweight. If that meant significant compromises were made in the other variants (which comprise the vast majority of the total buy) then so be it from their perspective because they could care less about overall effectiveness, they just didn't want to have the -B turn into the F-111B. I'd argue that an alternative COA at that point would've been to cut the losses with the -B and say that going forward the JSF would only be CTOL and CATOBAR because the compromises to the overall design weren't worth it. But that would require the DoD to give up on the fantasy of a Supersonic Stealthy STOVL fighter being a thing that we need, and good luck with that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:The future is coming. It's coming and it's bringing with it armored Kodiak bears, attack blimps, and enough weaponized robots to turn 'hope' into a four-letter word. What's your position on mind-controlled squid
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 20:44
|
|
Psion posted:What's your position on mind-controlled squid that story is loving hilarious
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Wait wait are you or are you not talking about red alert?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
http://www.drabblecast.org/2013/12/06/drabblecast-305-testimony-emergency-session-naval-cephalopod-command/
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 21:33
|
|
quote:Make no mistake, compadres: this is not a squid with which to gently caress.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:http://www.drabblecast.org/2013/12/06/drabblecast-305-testimony-emergency-session-naval-cephalopod-command/ Holy loving poo poo that was a pro-click. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
It's always a pro click.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
Murgos posted:The JSF program evolved out of a joint USMC & AF program to develop a next-gen STOVL aircraft in the early to mid 90's. The A & C models are the compromise solution. Sort of. It was a merger of the Common Affordable Lightweight Fighter (which was focused on a cheap AV-8 and F-16A replacement...remember how I mentioned how low the bar was?) and a number of limited tech programs that were trickling into the larger AF/X, NATF, and MRF programs. MRF was really the concept forebear of the JSF. Edit: As usual iyaayas beat me to it with greater detail.  But I do have a minor correction: iyaayas01 posted:
Godholio fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Jul 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:The future is coming. It's coming and it's bringing with it armored Kodiak bears, attack blimps, and enough weaponized robots to turn 'hope' into a four-letter word. God , I hope this is the future.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 02:53
|
|
|
This is speaking as a parent, I might add.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
Bulgaroctonus posted: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. It's not. However, you've got to find and BYOB some smooth Colt 45. If only to see who remembers that as well. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:So if I understand this conversation correctly, besides Stingers at the very short ranges, the US has no ground based mobile air defense system, unless you count Patriot as 'mobile' ? This is the answer to your question: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 03:16
|
|
|
Does a steady diet of Steel Reserve, OE if necessary, count ?
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
Wouldn't a white Lando Calrissian costume just be Han Solo? e: or, like, a white guy in a cape I guess?
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
Pretty much, but who cares?
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 03:21
|
|
|
And no offense, but if I'm going to rock a cape, I'm rocking a fuckin' cape. Ain't doing that poo poo otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 03:23
|
|
|
zzuupp posted:It's not. However, you've got to find and BYOB some smooth Colt 45. If only to see who remembers that as well. And Hell yeah, i remember that poo poo, think I may have to hit up the ice house.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 03:29
|
|
|
Oh, and watching Robotech in fuckin Portugese is a loving trip. Very entertaining, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 03:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 13:03 |
|
|
Wait, is it actually Robotech, or the original Macross? I'm curious if the Americanized version got translated.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 03:36
|
|
