New F35 issue - no cannon pew pew until 2019 due to software glitch

[bozon]

That's strange since the Mirage 5 was a radarless ground attack version of the Mirage IIIE. It was designed specifically to meet an Israeli request for a ground attack jet.

Ground attack is not just CAS. The Mirage and Kfir line are terrible CAS planes. In 1973 war CAS duties were mostly done by A4 Skyhawks. Their survivability against ground fire was unsatisfactory and many were lost to old fashion AA fire over the front. The density of threats is simply too high and the intensity of the fighting makes the ground war too uncertain for classic CAS. Instead, the IAF is geared towards interdiction, that is to attack behind the line of battle to cut off the fighting enemy troops from all support and disrupt their HQs. CAS is is done by high speed attack planes that linger away from the line and is only possible because the IAF is fighting on its own border and thus is very familiar with the terrain, the order of battle, and is supported by very good and very fast intelligence. This is not the typical situation for an air force that is deployed thousands of kilometers from its home at short time scales.

[PR3D4TOR]

So if CAS is no longer a survivable mission in a modern threat environment the A-10 is pointless and should be retired. Its mission is better performed by other platforms like UAVs and helicopter gunships.

[bozon]

So if CAS is no longer a survivable mission in a modern threat environment the A-10 is pointless and should be retired. Its mission is better performed by other platforms like UAVs and helicopter gunships.

No. You asked about the IAF and why does it not use A10. I explained that the situation of the IAF is rather unique and not very relevant to US combat doctrine. The example of Iraq war shows how useful the A10 is to US troops and at the same time is about as different from the Israeli Syrian/Egyptian front as possible.

[PR3D4TOR]

Which Iraq war are you referring to? 1991 or 2003?

[MrRiplEy[H]]

I'm pretty sure that the F35s survivability against small arms fire and cannons is severely weaker to that of A10. Plus it will cost an arm and a leg more when it crashes. You really have to wonder what are they thinking - unless this line up is telling between the lines that the US plans to end its off-shore attacks.

[Nefarious]

You really have to wonder what are they thinking - unless this line up is telling between the lines that the US plans to end its off-shore attacks.

Orders for the aircraft development started last century. Things change, trends develop, new technology advances and conflicts arise. I think these are some of the issues behind the F-22 and F-35.

I feel that UAVs, Drones Etc will be the new military route, as seen with X-47B. Every aircraft role has the ability to be developed into a pilot-less aircraft.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

I feel that UAVs, Drones Etc will be the new military route, as seen with X-47B. Every aircraft role has the ability to be developed into a pilot-less aircraft.

I think drones would scare the bejeveled out of land troops. I know I would be cursing the 'video game dweebs' who hover above the troops and shoot blobs on video screens from total safety. Drone usage inhumanizes your targets so that (I think) friendly fire could happen much more easily.

On the other hand the drone operator would not be super stressed for his own life so he could possibly make more clear headed decisions - hard to say. But I think the main problem with any drone is that they only work for a technologically inferior opponent. Any opponent worth their salt will be able to interfere or jam the drone signals, making them very unreliable.

Think if you can mess with a drone and it starts shooting at wrong position i.e. friendlies? Not very nice scenario.

[PR3D4TOR]

You're talking about a future that is already here.





The British have started to use theirs operationally too.

http://www.janes.com/article/45581/uk-reaper-uav-conducts-first-iraqi-strike-mission

[MrRiplEy[H]]

You're talking about a future that is already here.

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

The British have started to use theirs operationally too.

http://www.janes.com/article/45581/uk-reaper-uav-conducts-first-iraqi-strike-mission

Oh, which active war fronts did you have again?

[PR3D4TOR]

But I think the main problem with any drone is that they only work for a technologically inferior opponent. Any opponent worth their salt will be able to interfere or jam the drone signals, making them very unreliable.

The future is autonomous killing machines with the authority to carry out missions on their own. Don't be naive and think it won't happen. Everyone who's anyone in the world are developing them right now. The British unveiled their Taranis autonomous UCAV as far back as four years ago.

http://www.defensereview.com/bae-systems-introduces-taranis-jet-powered-low-observable-unmanned-combat-air-vehicle-ucav-meet-the-new-god-of-thunder/


And there are many others.

[PR3D4TOR]

Oh, which active war fronts did you have again?

What?

[MrRiplEy[H]]

The future is autonomous killing machines with the authority to carry out missions on their own. Don't be naive and think it won't happen. Everyone who's anyone in the world are developing them right now. The British unveiled their Taranis autonomous UCAV as far back as four years ago.

Would you go on a front that has an autonomous robot killing stuff there? I wouldn't. Again, it's mostly practical for fighting against a low tech small enemy like terrorist training camps. Once you have to send your own troops to the mix, an autonomous killing machine becomes scary as hell. Not for the enemy but for your own troops.

And if there's some sort of friend or foe automated identification, the enemy will figure it out in no time if they have any technical capability. Again, good thing small terrorist camps lack electronic countermeasures divisions.

[Gman]

That bottom picture looks like a UCAV with a Sunburn or maybe a Chinese copy of that Mach 3 sea skimming anti ship missile they've made.  Talk about bad news for the CVN groups of the future - a bunch of super stealthy, small, numerous UCAVs with Mach 3 long range sea skimming missiles.  Good times, not so much.

[Oldman731]

The future is autonomous killing machines with the authority to carry out missions on their own.

Hmmmm.  Guess you didn't see what happened to the droid army in Phantom Menace.

- oldman

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Yep, she looks unmanned. I guess it would be against forum rules if she was manned at the time of photographing her.