Jump to content
Clark Griswold

Trends in Air to Air Combat

Recommended Posts

For the gun argument, I think it makes sense to hope for the best and train for the worst.  Ideally, I'll have wall to wall 120's with a Pk of 2.0 because I shoot them in fingertip from their formation takeoff.  But when I can never get a lock because he's jammed my radar so bad my MFD says "FCR OFF" and my 9x misses (0 for 1 right now), I'd like to have a weapon that won't decoy or get jammed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lawman said:

With all the new wizzbang actually usable tech from 1960s concepts like laser...

How good would these systems have to get before the emphasis on building block ways you guys train on the idea of being able to also reach for the contingent circumstances changed. Every time I see the conversation about the gun in ATA with 35 it’s never really about “when we run out of Missiles” that starts the argument but instead “we forgot it in Vietnam with the F4 and it was terrible.” Is anybody really gonna pretend that the tech of the 60s and the tech of today aren’t light years apart in expected performance? I see the possibility of some ideas like DE based defensive/offensive systems as very quite possibly being the magic auto-kill/auto-defeat god mode in the game we have always dreamed of. Like if tomorrow somebody put a forcefield on the jet that could just absorb a flying telephone pole of death that will absolutely kill you without it... how much time and money would you spend on the contingencies to that system.

I’m not gonna speak to the idea “you need to do____” for ATA, I’m just curious what point do you think the hold for old cultural norms would still be overriding reality of what you have.

Watching the tech fight the culture has been interesting the last couple years with the rotary wing world in the IR MANPADS game. I can only imagine the same fights are existing in other communities.

When it is more profitable to advocate buying / building for the future versus selling us the best technology to win yesterday's war.  We keep looking back and getting ready for round 2, equipping / training for previous wars so we can fight them even better.

Good idea except our adversaries watch and learn from our fights and will not fight us that way as they see what happens when you do that.

http://publications.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/2163.pdf 

My hope is that a generation used to technology shifting constantly and needing replacement / update every 3-5 years will shift away from huge, once in a generation procurements and organizational restructuring will be way less verboten when they come to leadership.

Edited by Clark Griswold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw a new Raytheon Trophy F-15 video. Question: what is the “real” criteria for winning the Trophy? Ie the metrics they use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which airframes are in the running? USAF only? Given a super hornet got the first “actual” a/a shot in about 20 years and 16/15e’s were actually tasked with DCA, genuinely curious the metrics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×