Defense Issues

Military and general security

Archive for May, 2014

Light CAS fighter proposal revised

Posted by picard578 on May 31, 2014

Background

While I have proposed a CAS fighter aircraft and ideal composition of NATO air forces, neither of these proposals is very realistic. Western air forces, especially US ones (USAF, US Navy and USMC), tend to hate any simple, effective designs – especially if said designs are meant to support the ground troops. To this end, USAF and US Army have signed a Key West agreement, preventing the US Army from having fixed-wing aircraft heavier than 10.000 lbs.

While USAF says that precision munitions allow fast jets to carry out CAS, that is utterly in contradiction to battlefield realities. Infantry combat typically happens at ranges of less then 100 meters, and never at ranges above 500 meters; “danger close” limits (minimum distance one can employ a weapon at) are 500 meters for 500 lb bomb, 350 meters for 250 lb bomb and 50 meters for gun. But fast jets are too fast to use gun effectively, and even precision munitions loose precision with increasing speed and altitude. Helicopters meanwhile are at danger from small-arms fire – during the Gulf War, after 30 Apache helicopters were shot up (out of 33), they never flew in front of the ground troops again. Soviets lost hundreds of heavily-armed and heavily-armored Mi-24 helicopters during the Afghan war. Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 51 Comments »

NATO navies proposal

Posted by picard578 on May 24, 2014

Current state

 

Ship costs

 

CARRIERS / AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT SHIPS

Nimitz: 6,93 billion USD

Ford: 9 billion USD

Wasp: 750 million USD Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 23 Comments »

Aircraft carrier proposal revised

Posted by picard578 on May 17, 2014

Introduction

Large carriers are a foolhardy venture. US Admiral Hyman Rickover, when asked about how long the US carriers would survive in a confrontation with the Soviet Union, replied “About two days”. Carriers, in naval warfare, are little more than targets for submariners’ target practice. Instead, main use of aircraft carriers is to support the amphibious landings with their aircraft, and defend the surface assets from airborne attack by enemy land-based aircraft. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | 53 Comments »

NATO air forces proposal revised

Posted by picard578 on May 10, 2014

Current state

As of fall of 2013, NATO member states were Albania, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.

Air forces were as follows: Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 21 Comments »

Air superiority fighter proposal 5

Posted by picard578 on May 3, 2014

Requirements

 

Fighter will have to be stealthy and highly maneverable to surprise and outmaneuver the enemy, as well as to improve survivability against the missile fire. This requires small size, supercruise ability, good aerodynamic design, low wing loading and high thrust-to-weight ratio. Aircraft that uses the radar first will be quickly detected and targeted by passive sensors; as such, only minor RCS reduction measures are necessary, and no active sensors will be carried.

Stealth and sensor fusion are required to achive the advantage in an OODA loop, getting off first shot and possibly achieving a kill with little in way of reprisal. If that fails, breaking the enemy’s OODA loop by being impossible to predict is essential. Supercruise ability helps in both, as it shrinks enemy’s response time after the supercruiser is detected, reduces effectiveness of opponent’s weapons while increasing effectiveness of supercruiser’s weapons, allows the supercruiser to achieve surprise while preventing the enemy from surprising him, and to dictate terms of engagement.

Maneuverability is important in air combat for two reasons: to get the enemy inside one’s own engagement envelope, and to avoid getting hit. It should be understood that the maximum envelope is not the same as the useful envelope Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | 39 Comments »