Wednesday, December 17, 2014

F-35 News. Close air support will not improve with Sensor Fusion.


via DefenseNews.
Q: Are you seeing any concerns about using the F-35 for CAS?
A. [The F-35] is going to be able to do the CAS mission effectively. We’ve already executed on the ranges at night and at day, able to receive targets from terminal air controllers on the ground and able to attack and prosecute targets within timeframes that are well acceptable in a battlefield situation. So we’ve already seen that. Which means, if we’re already seeing it now, I know it’s going to get better.
The beauty of fusion is — it brings all the data together and it fuses it, but what that really does for you is time. I didn’t have to process it between my ears, but the airplane can now fuse it all together. And much [more quickly], the data fusion is available on a target, it can be targeted, a munition can delivered much, much quicker than in a 4th-gen where you would have to interpret the data, move it to another sensor, move it to a targeting system, then determine a target. The fusion makes it much quicker. So if we’re doing it now, the fusion is going to only make it much quicker.
Q: How much time do you gain from fusion?
A. That’s a harder question… Here’s a better way to describe it: in this airplane, in the F-35, I’ve done some CAS in the daytime with an A-10 weapons school instructor who is an F-35 instructor now. He gets me pointed in the general direction of a target on the ground and I use my helmet. I put my helmet over there, and with one-switch actualization all my sensors now look at that spot. Just like that, instantly.
Now, in a 4th-gen plane, I would have to get a sensor worked over to there. I would have to get information off of that sensor. I would have to move that information somewhere else in the airplane and then I would target it. So when I put my helmet over there and I went one-switch actualization, all of my sensors went to that spot and everything in the airplane said, “OK, we’re ready to go.” So all I had to do was get in a weapons solution and release on that spot I found on the ground.
Whereas if I was in an F-16, if I got a sensor on there, whether I got a targeting pod or something else, I would have to take that information and then turn it into a target in the system.
We’re talking about minutes. Which matters a lot. Seconds are going to count in a close air support situation, so it’s much faster.

Q: Is your assumption that most CAS will be done with an external weapons load?
A. We’re not necessarily making assumptions in the CAS on the weapons load. We are developing tactics on how best to prosecute a target on the ground. But clearly when we write those tactics, external payloads, we’ve had the tradeoff discussion here; external payloads come with a tradeoff of LO [low observability], of weight, etc.
It depends on the scenario. If you’re in a scenario, say early in a conflict where you expect air to air threat and surface to air threat, then you are going to use and rely on your internal carriage and your LO capabilities of the airplane. And the fact your weapons load is less because it doesn’t have external, you’re gaining that tin the early parts of a conflict. Then in the scenario I described the surface to air threats or air to air threats are held back and contained, so now an air component commander doesn’t necessarily need the LO capability of the airplane and then may decide to configure it differently in that situation. So I think what the airplane will do will then provide that LO when you need it and when you don’t obviously you can do something different.
We’re not there yet. We’re not developing [tactics] on the external load.
Just plain freaking wow.  You heard it at Defense News first but they buried the lead.

Sensor Fusion as described above will be meaningless in the one fight that Marine Air is supposed to be organized, equipped and required to fight...Close Air Support.  Sensor fusion will add very little to what we're already doing.

Considering what the Tactical Air Control Party Association has said, its time to fully work this problem.  Perhaps Marine Air should stop lining up to fight the deep battle and work out the problems that fellow Marines will face on the battlefield.  The ironic thing?  We might one day reach a time when Marine Infantry is begging for Navy Air in F/A-18E's to ride to the rescue instead of fellow Marines in F-35's.


23 comments :

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Danger close (inside the danger-close area of most explosive weapons) still off the table. So, unless there are any Yankees, Zulu's or USMC Harvest Hawk C-130Js with their gunship kit, the guy on the ground is screwed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. screwed? no. THEY"RE FUCKED! i'll say it again. i see a time in the not so distant future where Marine ground is begging for Navy Super Hornets to save the day. wouldn't that be a kick in the pants?

      Delete
    2. Danger close (inside the danger-close area of most explosive weapons)


      LOL Eric doesn't understand what Danger Close means.

      Delete
  3. im confused... this 'sensor fusion' also can be implemented in other platform, so is this the advantage of F35 close support ? or the advantage of sensor fusion in CAS ?

    let say putting sensor fusion on a bomb truck F15E or even SHornet, same advantage right ?

    ReplyDelete
  4. The benefit of Sensor Fusion is clearly stated... and it's TIME.

    What used to take "minutes" now takes "seconds".

    Ask any Marine on the ground, "Do you want to wait 'minutes' for some cannon fire (assuming that it's even appropriate for the target) or 'seconds' for a PGM that you might have to take some additional cover from"?

    btw, Why would they call in the Super Hornet when it holds no advantage over the F-35B?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. why would they call F35B when more numerous Super Hornets are available and with more weapon load compared to an F35B ? if this sensor fusion worked , then shouldnt the F35 be the CAS orchestra director organizing the whole scene instead of dropping a few small bomblet and then go away to rearm/refuel ?

      sensor fusion should also be extended to allow the F35 to use other plane's ordnance load and launched them remotely.. so other planes truly become bomb truck ,while all targeting is done by a single O35

      Delete
    2. @Spudman

      its gonna take minutes anyway. if you're on the ground and don't want some zoomie to drop ordnance on your position...which has happened more times than i can count. you need to talk the pilots onto the target and depending on munitions used you have to verify GPS coordinates. minutes are part of the game. nothing is pushbutton and boom goes the dynamite.

      you're talking about it being clearly stated? if you don't believe Marine Ground Combat Element then ask the USAF Tactical Air Control Boys. they'll set you straight in a heartbeat.

      Delete
    3. When your doing CAS, it takes time to do proper Air Space Management, get the Pilot Check in, give a situation update, and then pass Game Plan, 9-lines. this takes minutes, yes the F-35 has a few "seconds" advantage over say a F-18, but at the end of the day, we have to do the work to mark friendly's and get approval. Its not just a simple "Hey that looks like a target, lets hit that....point click" its alot of work that you do, as a JTAC and as a Pilot. Not seeing a advantage in this realm of cas (Dynamic).

      What the F-35 will have a slight advantage on is, the future "digital cas". A JTAC sends a digital 9-line and the a/c attack said target, only because its being created with this capability already there, unlike other platforms that we have to install it into. Again, this is a long ways away from being the standard, and good JTAC/FAC work means your doing Routing/Safety of Flight. You just skip or confirm some things like Pilot check in, Sit rep, and Read Backs from the 9-line.

      Delete
    4. there won't be a need to confirm "digits" in the future with the digital cas? will it be all automated?

      Delete
    5. You'll confirm the grids in "read backs" from the pilots, he repeats your line 4,6,8(not required but a good practice) and remarks restrictions (attack cone, stay above/below, sead)

      Delete
    6. you're talking about it being clearly stated? if you don't believe Marine Ground Combat Element then ask the USAF Tactical Air Control Boys. they'll set you straight in a heartbeat.

      uhh sol:

      http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/110742/reserve-a-10-pilots-debut-new-technology-at-rimpac.aspx

      Delete
  5. one more thing, without external weapons, the limited weapon load for internal carry will also limoit the usefullness of F35 as CAS , am i mistaken here ?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The F-35 may be ready for operational testing in three or four years, and then we'll know. Dr, Gilmore, DOT&E: "We continue to work on plans to do formal operational testing which probably won't occur until 2018." The dodo will be dead by then because foreign countries (Canada, Netherlands, Australia, etc.) aren't buying F-35 prototypes. Why should they?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you're not tracking with what i'm saying Don. the USMC is talking about an IOC next summer and they haven't even done the basic work of getting the damn thing ready to do its most basic and most IMPORTANT mission! additionally HQMC is talking about sending an airplane out to pasture that does the job and has plenty of parts thanks to the Brits before this clusterfuck has even done testing!

      we're actually putting people's lives on the line by this jacked up procurement schedule. it WAS fun and games but now this is getting beyond real and real live people will die because of some of the decisions being made. that little 1/4 million dollar payout when a loved one dies is nothing compared to having them with you. this is a danger to the pilots that will fly these planes initially (putting a plane in service before its finished flight testing...has that ever been done before?) and the ground force that will be depending on it to do ITS FREAKING JOB!!!!

      Delete
    2. You're right, I'm not tracking. Are you saying that "IOC" is "combat ready" as in these headlines? But that's not what it means. It can't.
      --Combat Ready Dates for F-35 Jets Set by U.S. Military -- May 2013
      --The Marine Corps said that it will achieve IOC, or initial combat readiness, of the F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (Stovl) variant by December 2015.--Jun 2013
      --Now, the Marines are expected to give the plane initial combat clearance in mid-2015.-- Feb 2014
      --Problems Completing Software Testing May Hinder Delivery of Expected Warfighting Capabilities -- Mar 2014
      --F-35 Stealth Joint Strike Fighter: Combat-Ready By 2015 -- Sep 2014
      --The massive strike fighter program is less than a year from initial combat readiness.-- Dec 2014

      Delete
    3. or you could kill the airplane, put the money into upgrading our F-18's, Av-8b's (We own our fw lets use them), and actually be fucking serious about the ACV! and maybe throw the infantry a bone and buy them some fucking decend NVG's, still running around with PVS-14's when PVS-15's have been around for almost a decade.

      Delete
    4. The F-35B next summer will be a faulty prototype not fully tested and evaluated, with both development and operational testing incomplete, just a potential electric airplane with a bum engine (no fix yet) and insufficient software. There's also this:

      DIRECTIVE 5030.61
      It is DoD policy that:
      a. All aircraft and air systems owned, leased, operated, used, designed, or modified by DoD must have completed an airworthiness assessment in accordance with Military Department policy.

      Airworthiness can't be certified until the end of SDD, scheduled for 2019 (It won't make it.).

      Delete
  7. There is some bombshell dropped today.

    The ROKAF announced they were going to Australia to have their F-35s maintained instead of Japan. This allowed Australia to invest in their own maintenance depots, with eyes on Singaporean F-35 maintenance work.

    Japan lost Korean, Australian, and potentially Singaporean F-35 maintenance work that they counted on when they decided to build the F-35 FACO, so it will hurt them.

    As to why Korea is not investing in the F-35 maintenance work unlike Australia and Japan, Korea is redirecting all available funding to the KFX program which enters its full scale development next year, and Korea's aerospace suppliers are fighting for a piece of the KFX program contracts which they consider to be much more lucrative than any F-35 work. Japan's spending heavily on the F-35 program because the F-3 program is delayed indefinitely.

    http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/australia-to-service-south-korean-f-35-strike-fighters-in-pentagon-deal_1516556.html

    ReplyDelete
  8. Shas Vader

    Good going on this new Polish-South Korean howitzer deal. That is one mean gun you are getting. Slowman can verify for that. They are also in contention in the Indian Self Propelled Howitzer program teaming up with Larsen & Toubro (one of the more respectable names in Indian defence) for this deal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sarabvir Singh

      Poland wants to put their own turrets on K-9 chassis.

      Delete
    2. Slowman and Shas

      Are the turrets going to be of a different configuration? If yes, can you post a link? And on a lighter note....what are the chances of Polish K-9's having a 152 soviet cannon instead of the 155nato?

      Delete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.