USAF, What should the focus on?

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2002-09-23 06:16pm

Stay the fuck out of this threat, Azershit. We don't need your polluting garbage here.

And get the fuck off of your high horse of a personal agenda. Yes, we know you hate every other country, so just shut the fuck up.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2002-09-23 06:18pm

TrailerParkJawa wrote:What is a DEAD asset ? Do you mean SEAD ?

Dont forget that Stealth needs to operate at night, another limitation.

But, over all I think that stealth aircraft are invaluable in the opening stage of any conflict to hit high value, high threat targets. Then you bring in the B-52's.

I remember when testors released the F-19 model and there was such a hullabaloo about it. The real thing turned out to look very different. ( a little off topic )

The F-19's models, also used in a computer game which turn out accrate beyound the shape and lack of AAM's, where the product of a very good disinformation plan. The USAF had swarms of stuff made up in referance to the F-19 all as cover for the F-117.

SEAD= Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses. Stuff like firing HARM's mostly and jamming
DEAD= Destruction of Enemy Air Defenses. On such a mission, your goal is not to keep the defender busy while other aircraft pass, your goal is to kill it outright.

So rather then just firing a HARM, you would fire a HARM, then smother the site in cluster bomblets, or fire a maverick at something like a ZSU-23. Basically your out to kill the guns and missiles so you don’t have to fly SEAD against them the next day, and the next and the next.

The problume of course is you normally need an extra aircraft or two for every HARM carrier, unless you're just dealing with optical AAA. That can really eat into what you have left over for the actual strike.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2002-09-23 06:23pm

TrailerParkJawa wrote:
an F-117 was shot down in bosnia, whether a lucky shot or was seen by radar, we will never know
IIRC, it was not a lucky shot, but a combonation of knowing ahead of time the flight paths of Nato strikes. In other words, they knew where to look and when.

Yeah, it really was more skill then lucky, at least up to the moment of firing. The siteing of the battery and the tactic used where worked out in advance.

The Serbs repotly got a faint radar contact, SA-3 has a quite powerful set adn the range was short. The SA-3 guidance also allows for firing without a firm target, you can just fly the missiles into a given point of sky if you want.
They salvoed no less then twelve ready missiles and exploded them across what they thought was the F-117's path.

Basically barrage fire, with heavy SAM's, and it worked. Though had another target showed up, they would have be screwed with no ready missiles.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2002-09-23 06:24pm

I think I got that game someplace. It was made by Microprose if I recall correctly.

I never heard of DEAD, thanks.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-09-23 06:24pm

we are talking about beating the crap out of other nations, so how am I "polluting" the thread, when the purpose is to figure out the best way to smash other nations?

I just made a suggestion, if poeple think its a cool idea, whats the bg deal?

VF5SS · Post by **VF5SS** » 2002-09-23 06:27pm

Be sure to make it transform , NF_Utvol!

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2002-09-23 06:34pm

we are talking about beating the crap out of other nations, so how am I "polluting" the thread, when the purpose is to figure out the best way to smash other nations?

I just made a suggestion, if poeple think its a cool idea, whats the bg deal?

Hehe, it was spanky the one that said it. I would hope you are just kidding, as there would be no feasable way to do that. And we are not talking about ways to smash other nations, we are discussing the advantages and disadvatages of a stealth vs a standard aircraft.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2002-09-23 06:36pm

Oh, heres an absolutely GREAT website containing info on military weapons systems and such. Take a look, as it is incredibly comprehensive.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/index.html

Quite Possibly the Hottest vietnam era fighter-
http://fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/airdef/f-104.htm

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-09-23 06:36pm

Hey look we only need to set up one asteroid.......then watch them cry foul about militerizing space....LOL

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2002-09-23 06:37pm

We don't care, Azeron.

Besides, that's exactly what the Principality of Zeon did during the One Year War (Operation British).

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2002-09-23 06:40pm

The FAS website is a great place. Even if its more like an encyclodpedia than a place for analysis of what works and what does not.

I like that they also have a picture or diagram for almost everything they got.

Look up the daisy cutter. Check out the guys sitting on the bomb!

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2002-09-23 06:40pm

whats the principality of zeon?

Look up the daisy cutter. Check out the guys sitting on the bomb!

hehe, 15,000 pounds of pure destruction! muwahahahahahaha. Those were the perfect weapons to use in destroying the al quaida cave networks.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-09-23 06:41pm

You complain about my asterod vision, and you carry a quote from a show which advocates dropping huge space stations in a "colony drop" to smash entire planets. At least my method using asteroids which are naturally occuring, therefor are better for the enviroment.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2002-09-23 06:41pm

The Principality of Zeon was the fascist government from Side 3 that fought against the Earth Federation in the One Year War. From Mobile Suit Gundam.

Colony drops don't "smash planets", you retard. They just cause the same effect as asteroid impacts.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2002-09-23 06:42pm

azeron, calm down, lets get back on subject. We are talking real world weapons systems (specifically stealth vs standard). So stop getting off the subject.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-09-23 06:43pm

Might I also point out they tried it again in operation stardust a few laters in the '83 conflict.

salm · Post by **salm** » 2002-09-23 06:43pm

if the drones, the predators used in afghanistan would be further developed, they could be a pretty good addition to the air force. they´re a perfect tool to fight underdeveloped countries without the risk of lives of us sodiers. they´d probably be a minor threat to more devoped countries because they´ll be able to afford to research in jamming technologies to cut down the connection between drone and the guy who controles it.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-09-23 06:45pm

ohh yah I think we should start focusing on UCAV Stealth Bombers, and depleted uranium shells dropped from satalites. (Yes they are planning on building them)

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2002-09-23 06:46pm

Azeron wrote:ohh yah I think we should start focusing on UCAV Stealth Bombers, and depleted uranium shells dropped from satalites. (Yes they are planning on building them)

Make your own thread about them if you want to talk about them, otherwise, stick to the topic of this one.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-09-23 06:47pm

ohh did you see the new UCAV prototypes that were just unvieles a month or so ago. They are pretty sweet and ultra stealty. I can't wait to see us use those bad boys blowing up the enemy.

By the way the standard UCAV requires about 500mbs satalite bandwidth

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2002-09-23 06:47pm

Zeon remnants try it every few years, you tit. There was the Delaz Conflict, the Gryps War, Neo Zeon War I and Neo Zeon War II. The fact is that it is a huge operation to drop a colony/asteroid onto Earth.

Now stay on topic and do not bring this up again.

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2002-09-23 07:05pm

OK, it's about time I weigh in on this.

Air and Space Superiority
We need the best fighters in the world. We need them to ensure that we are free to do whatever in the air that we please. During the Gulf War, that wasn't a problem. However with other nations like North Korea, the air superiority role will not be so easy. The F-22 will put us way ahead of the race, and needs to be developed, even if only in small numbers. We also need to keep developing the airborne laser, so as to keep the sky clear of enemy missiles.

Global Attack
We need bombers able to reach out and touch somebody anywhere on earth. We also need the tankers necessary to support their mission. We need to keep developing stealth technology for use against modern air defences like those found in Iraq, North Korea, Iran, and a host of other nations that piss us off. Therefore it is important that we continue with B-2 production, B-52 upgrades, and introduce the KC-767.

Rapid Global Mobility
We need the ability to get ground troops and material across the globe with as much speed as possible. We need to maintain a fleet of large transports such as the C-5, and research larger transports that can land on shorter and unimproved fields.

Precision Engagement
Smart weapons, we use them alot. New GPS weapons are redefining are surgical strike capabilities. They also allow us to minimize the threat to ourselves. They are the perfect weapon of asymetrical warefare.

Information Superiority
The E-3 and E-8 proved their worth in the Gulf War. The Air Force currently needs more E-3s desperately. The AWACS fleet right now is being stretched to its limits. Also, communication, navigation, weather, and spy satellites are becoming more important. Not only is research into these of importance, but research into new and/or improved methods of putting them into orbit is critical.

Agile Combat Support
We need to be able to deploy anwhere, and still fight effeciently. We need the technology and equipment to deploy from deserts to tundras, and still maintain our fighting ability. We need support equipment that will work under the harshest environments. We also need keep developing the new V-22 Osprey. It is a great aircraft, and will increase the capabilities of our special forces. When it comes to airpower, our special operations units, wether pararescue, combat control or combat weather, are a force multiplier.

There, my rant on our mission, and the many things that we need.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2002-09-23 07:29pm

Heres my response to Wicked Pilots post.

You put some very good points in there. And i agree with most, although there are 1 or 2 that i dont completely agree with.

1. However with other nations like North Korea, the air superiority role will not be so easy.

Me - North Korea has nothing that Iraq didnt have in the Gulf War. Both of them have holdovers from the Soviet era with very few new aircraft.

2. and introduce the KC-767.

Me - To My knowledge, there is no plan to convert Boeing 767 aircraft to a tanker role. I see no reason to not keep using KC-135s and KC-10s personally.

3. Therefore it is important that we continue with B-2 production

Me - Why keep producing B-2s when it has been shown that stealth technology is currently being shown not to be foolproof. I think we ought to use the B-52s and B-1s, Actually start production back up on B-52s and B-1s, and upgrade the avionics of existing heavy bombers. B-52s are incredibly tough aircraft. All the ones still being used are holdovers from the Vietnam era and have just been upgraded through the years. Currently, their projected life is well into the middle of the 21st century.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-09-23 07:32pm

I aggree the Osprey is cool, but its on the chopping block

I talked to some marine pilots a little while back on it. The all say they know why its unstable, they are afraid of it, but with modern avionics and fligth control, it could work well. They all aggreed on it, the fligth instability is more welcom than getting shot down from moving to slow, as in a helicopter. they also like the increased range allot.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2002-09-23 07:45pm

The Osprey Im afraid is turning into a boondoggle. I think its a great idea but the recent coverups and crashes make me think it might be better to move on.

N. Korea is a boogey man. South Korea is capable of handling them on their own.

As for rapid mobility, the Air Force can do all it wants to develop new transports, it is pointless unless the Army breaks out of the tank heavy structure.

Information Superiority - No problems with this.

The F-22 probably should go too. I dont see a need anymore. And Im from a Lockheed family.

Dont forget all this stuff costs MONEY. Currently we dont have enough to pay for all of this. Hard choices need to be made.

Precision Engagement - No problems here either.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

USAF, What should the focus on?

What should the USAF concentrate on?