Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: The sixth gen

  1. #1
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,467

    The sixth gen

    Fantastic, deep, insightful articles from the guy tasked with the job. Surprised this isn't classified. Can't wait for the next in the series.

    https://warontherocks.com/2017/01/th...he-imperative/

    https://warontherocks.com/2017/01/th...-2030-problem/
    Last edited by citanon; 06 Jan 17, at 11:13.

  2. #2
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Mar 08
    Posts
    1,895
    I'll be happy long as the long range escort component is dropped (Breaking Defense wrote an article on how the Penetrating Counter Air was apparently supposed to escort the LRSB deep into the Chinese interior. I can only hope, that in the name of all sanity and good project management principles, that that was quickly dropped).

  3. #3
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,467
    I think that was just journalists trying to relate new air operation concepts to familiar concepts from the past.

  4. #4
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,467

  5. #5
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,195
    Thanks!

  6. #6
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,467
    Part 4 up:

    https://warontherocks.com/2017/01/th...tting-to-2030/

    Note the talk a 2030 in service date. What could be ready with longer range, better stealth, and sufficient networked capabilities in that time frame?

    It seems to me if this is followed, an Advent Engine powered FB-22 with F-35 tech is incoming.

  7. #7
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Mar 08
    Posts
    1,895
    Or an Advent powered FB-23.

    Though we probably should add several years onto the 2030 (in my experience, aerospace mega project almost always miss their pre-prototype flight projected service entry date).

  8. #8
    Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Oct 06
    Posts
    623
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post
    Part 4 up:

    https://warontherocks.com/2017/01/th...tting-to-2030/

    Note the talk a 2030 in service date. What could be ready with longer range, better stealth, and sufficient networked capabilities in that time frame?

    It seems to me if this is followed, an Advent Engine powered FB-22 with F-35 tech is incoming.
    or not....

    you also have to wonder what has been going on behind the scenes in the 'black world' as far as airframe design and testing since the F-22 and F-35....

    Using the B-21 as an example, its been speculated that alot of the 'stange' sightings of wing shaped aircraft the last year or so were test airframes for the program. And it seems to have a pretty accelerated schedule as well.

    But much like the super hornet was supposed to be just an 'upgrade' to the hornet, it still ended up going thru all the same testing (notably very smoothly with the base line they started from). an FB-22 would be in the same boat, the same but not

    at that point, why not leverage what has been learned air frame wise with what is being developed software wise?

    personally, and they (we) could be never afford it, but I'd also push for something along the lines of what the F-111 was, only a bit bigger with a loooong range, speed and stealth. I'd also make it primarily a strike aircraft with secondary air to air capabilities. Think F-15E replacement, but stealthy and on steroids.

    B-2 / B-21 (Large Bombers, limited numbers.)
    FB-xxx (midsize, in quantity)
    Sixth Gen air 'dominance' (in quantity)
    F-22 / F-35.

  9. #9
    Global Moderator Defense Professional
    Join Date
    30 May 06
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,267
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post
    Part 4 up:

    https://warontherocks.com/2017/01/th...tting-to-2030/

    Note the talk a 2030 in service date. What could be ready with longer range, better stealth, and sufficient networked capabilities in that time frame?

    It seems to me if this is followed, an Advent Engine powered FB-22 with F-35 tech is incoming.
    most significant military projects are geared out to 2030 (including mine). I'd argue that this was initially because the view 8-10 years ago was that the next major conflict was likely to kick off circa 2030

    I'd also argue that 2030 is now redundant and that its been bought forward significantly

    I'd also add that none of the actual 6th gen criteria that I've come across has not appeared in these articles.... and thats probably for a good reason

    unfort the focus (not in the articles) in here is still platform centric, whereas the ground had dramatically changed wrt to 6th gen developments

    in addition 5th gen is not some fixed construct - it is very very different today compared to 6-8 years ago. Similarly there seems to be a view that "stealth" is a defined construct - its not. hence the blending and necessary merge of 5th and 6th gen developments.

    for all the chatter about stealth and the periodic arguments that crop up arguing that it can be countered, people miss the fundamental premised that LO/VLO is very much a moving feast.

    the debate about future weapons systems even now (as opposed to the earlier 2030 visions) is about sympathetic and co-operative systems. there is no appetite for niche platforms because the concept of distributed lethality is front and centre in force planning. we don't talk about platforms responding, we talk about the broader capability response where every artifact that is bussed and comm'd can and will contribute to the fight

  10. #10
    Global Moderator Defense Professional
    Join Date
    30 May 06
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,267
    Last edited by gf0012-aust; 03 Mar 17, at 08:47.

  11. #11
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,195
    Quote Originally Posted by gf0012-aust View Post
    for all the chatter about stealth and the periodic arguments that crop up arguing that it can be countered, people miss the fundamental premised that LO/VLO is very much a moving feast.
    It's amazing how often people argue that stealth will be useless in X years so why invest in it. There seems to be a perception that stealth is a binary thing, that either grants perfect immunity, or is of no use whatsoever.

    I always present the analogy of armor on a tank. Tank armor makes the vehicle much more difficult to destroy and nearly immune to a whole host of small weapons. The fact that tanks can be destroyed at close range by large caliber guns hardly invalidates the usefulness of armor.

    Similarly, VLO properties in aircraft aren't a magic bullet, but there are very few scenarios in which it isn't helpful. As technology progresses, radar power and techniques will become better at identifying stealthy aircraft, and techniques to minimise aircraft signature will improve right along with them. Much as we see the constant evolution between tank armor and cannons. The pendulum will swing back and forth as to which one has the advantage at any given time, but in 20 years a fighter without stealth will be as naked as a tank without armor.

  12. #12
    Global Moderator Defense Professional
    Join Date
    30 May 06
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,267
    yep, you see the same disease when people argue around the issue of CAS - as though the end of the world is nigh because F-35 isn't able to go low slow and split someone, a thinskin or armoured vehicle in half with a phat GAU. ie gunnitis

    they are seemingly oblivious that for the last 15 years B1's, B52's, small fast movers, predators etc... with improved munitions have been able to deliver "danger close" and save people - and often in environments where an A-10 would not have survived in that contested space or even had the range ring to get in, fight and out.

    they are absolutely clueless to the fact that in a number of areas F35 is actually a battlespace manager in its own right and can assist in improving both the theatre combat operating picture, but also the common operating picture and get weapons on target and with precision to a level that has never been prev available

    unfort what happens still is that the naysayers are stuck on platform centric arguments and are completely switched off to the fact that the issues are about sharing the combat picture, sharing the COP, situational awareness, situational appreciation, the ability to share quickly and with accuracy as the kill confirmation, release/launch loop is in single digit seconds etc and we have never had that before.

    I despair when I see some of the usual guff about A-10's, JSF and even LCS as the posters are seemingly oblivious to whats now been bought to the combat bubble and more importantly to the purple combat bubble.
    Last edited by gf0012-aust; 03 Mar 17, at 23:16.

  13. #13
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,195
    Quote Originally Posted by gf0012-aust View Post
    yep, you see the same disease when people argue around the issue of CAS - as though the end of the world is nigh because F-35 isn't able to go low slow and split someone, a thinskin or armoured vehicle in half with a phat GAU. ie gunnitis
    How effective are A-10s at delivering CAS when even a couple of old MiGs come sniffing around?

    How cost effective is CAS conducted by A-10s when you need F-15s overhead to let them do their job?

    How about a comparison based on a fixed number of available aircraft? Can you tell me with a straight face that a mix of 4 A-10s and 4 air superiority fighters is going to be more effective than 8 F-35s that can focus all their numbers on whichever job is pressing at the moment?

    And as you alluded to, F-35s can drop ordnance in places our existing aircraft can't even venture without overwhelming force and expected losses.

  14. #14
    Global Moderator Defense Professional
    Join Date
    30 May 06
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,267
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    How effective are A-10s at delivering CAS when even a couple of old MiGs come sniffing around?

    How cost effective is CAS conducted by A-10s when you need F-15s overhead to let them do their job?

    How about a comparison based on a fixed number of available aircraft? Can you tell me with a straight face that a mix of 4 A-10s and 4 air superiority fighters is going to be more effective than 8 F-35s that can focus all their numbers on whichever job is pressing at the moment?

    And as you alluded to, F-35s can drop ordnance in places our existing aircraft can't even venture without overwhelming force and expected losses.
    thats the thing. nobody is trying to diminish the capability of the A-10 - but its survivability in even moderately contested battlespace means that its needs to be escorted in those environments. It means that you have to also delaminate ADS or GBAD threats prior to entry.

    Sure it can rip the guts out of a tank and terrify anyone in the area, but as soon as even hand held AD is in place then the risk works against it

    we've seen the same arguments for the F-111 fans in Oz who had this bizarre belief that just because it was superb on the deck it should be retained. the emergence of more sophisticated GBAD, and even shoulder launched anti-air meant even the F-111's would have needed to be escorted in and the ground and air threat delaminated and/or killed off. Thats an expensive solution to just getting a pair of precision weapons on target.

    losing UAS with precision munitions doing the same role is more palatable. having F-35 where it can talk to anything with Link16 (and that means more than air) means that they can battlespace manage the environment as well being a participant.

    in a number of areas they are actually an airborne JTAC as well as what else they can do. a lot of people seriously don't get how revolutionary they are and how much they have changed the way that we can fight.

    as soon as you see posts where they talk about dogfighting or how a russian (pick a platform) can fly faster or turn tighter you just know that they have missed the bigger picture.

    as soon as there are platform centric arguments the quality of debate has just been compromised.

    in absolute terms, the changes that have been developed for F-35 and are being transitioned to F-22, the nature of their design etc means that they will not be 5.5th Gen they can be migrated to 6th gen constructs very very quickly. Whereas with 4th gen, irrespective of whatever improvements you made to make it 4.5th gen, they were never going to achieve 5th gen competency at either the platform or systems level.

    thats the irony, for all the failings and criticism of F-35 project mgt (and there are with justification lots of valid complaints re that process) its the design and development constructs that were so heavily criticised which enable JSF to readily transition to 6th gen because they already have some of the fundamental 6th gen requirements built in

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 56
    Last Post: 02 Jul 14,, 22:02
  2. Boeing Updates Sixth-Generation Jet Concept
    By erik in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 18 May 13,, 16:46
  3. Sixth British soldier killed as Taleban lay siege to base
    By troung in forum Operation Enduring Freedom and Af-Pak
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 17 Jul 06,, 09:00

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •