Military Thread: “An army of sheep led by a lion is better than an army of lions led by a sheep.”

[Gromnir]

4 hours ago, Gfted1 said:

Then how many F-16 were lost?

rand were mighty critical o' the kosovo air campaign, so is unlikely they deflated or purpose chose the most optimistic nato air combat loss estimates.

In all, more than 800 SAMs were reported to have been fired at NATO
aircraft, both manned and unmanned, over the course of the 78-day
air war, including 477 SA-6s and 124 confirmed man-portable infrared missiles (see Figure 6.1 for a depiction of reported enemy SAM
launches by type).19 A majority of the fixed SAMs were fired without
any radar guidance. Yet despite that expenditure of assets, only two
NATO aircraft, an F-117 and an F-16, were shot down by enemy fire,
although another F-117 sustained light damage from a nearby SA-3
detonation and two A-10s were hit by enemy AAA fire but not
downed. 20 There also were two reported cases of short-range
infrared (IR)-guided missiles hitting A-10s, one of which apparently
struck the bottom of the aircraft, defused itself, and bounced off

harmlessly.21 At least 743 HARMs were fired by U.S. and NATO aircraft against the radars supporting these enemy SAMs (Figure 6.2
provides a detailed breakout of HARM expenditure by target type).22
Yet enough of the Serb IADS remained intact to require NATO
fighters to operate above the 15,000-ft hard deck for most of the air
effort. The main reason for this requirement was the persistent AAA
and MANPADS threat. Although the older SA-7 could be effectively

countered by flares if it was seen in time, the SA-9/13, SA-14, SA-16,
and SA-18 presented a more formidable threat.
In the end, as noted above, only two aircraft (both American) were
brought down by enemy SAM fire, thanks to allied reliance on electronic jamming, the use of towed decoys, and countertactics to
negate enemy surface-to-air defenses.23 However, NATO never fully
succeeded in neutralizing the Serb IADS, and NATO aircraft operating over Serbia and Kosovo were always within the engagement envelopes of enemy SA-3 and SA-6 missiles—envelopes that extended

to as high as 50,000 ft. Because of that persistent threat, mission
planners were forced to place such high-value ISR platforms as the
U-2 and Joint STARS in less-than-ideal orbits to keep them outside
the lethal reach of enemy SAMs. Even during the operation’s final
week, NATO spokesmen conceded that only three of Serbia’s approximately 25 known mobile SA-6 batteries had been confirmed destroyed.24

...

as we said, rand were critical o' the air campaign efforts. doesn't seem to be much in the way o' controversy regarding combat air losses for nato. serbians, on the other hand, lost five o' their sixteen total mig-29s in the first three days... eventual lost one more mig-29. 

pp 108-11. feel free to check footnotes.

am not pretending expertise on this as am doing little more than reposting rand analysis and numbers from some rando fighter air craft site, but neither we do we see alternative reliable sources being provided.

HA! Good Fun!

ps is not a fighter aircraft, so is not gonna be included in the numbers from the initial linked source, but is easier to understand the mythology surrounding the warthog based on the following observation: 

"two A-10s were hit by enemy AAA fire but not
downed. There also were two reported cases of short-range
infrared (IR)-guided missiles hitting A-10s, one of which apparently
struck the bottom of the aircraft, defused itself, and bounced off harmlessly."

pps an apache helicopter were also lost in an "accident" in albania (friendly fire?) a harrier were lost at sea during training... maybe? (didn't bother to confirm these and am posting based on +20 year old recollection.) am 'membering an additional f-16 went down due to engine failure.  am also suspecting numerous uav were "lost." the linked rand article mentions how the kosovo air campaign were kinda the advent o' modern uav in combat and am recalling from other articles at least a few such aircraft were described as "lost," as there were no confirmation as to cause o' disappearances, but is indeed hard to imagine zero were shot down. 

[rjshae]

On 12/3/2022 at 8:26 AM, Gfted1 said:

Smaller (and smaller payload), higher flying and longer range than the B-2 but I really want to get a look at the tail end. The B-2 already has "an RCS of 0.0001m2, the same as the F-22, the size of a bumble bee" so Im more interested in what theyve done to further minimize the B-21 IR signature. Love that its designed with unmanned capacity too.

Do you suppose this one will have a bunkbed? 

[Gfted1]

@rjshae I dont get the reference can you fill me in?

I really dont understand the US military reluctance to go fully unmanned. What the difference between the pilot sitting in the ****pit, observing a bank of sensor displays and carrying out the mission, and a pilot doing the exact same thing in a room at some base? I suppose there could be a few milliseconds of "lag" between input and aircraft reaction? I mean, its not like theyre looking out the windows to see whats going on around them. It seems to me that the meat sack is just a liability in a bomber. IMO, we also need to stop clutching our pearls about "AI" and start making some serious gains.

[Gorth]

Waiting for the day where the unmanned planes controlled by Alexa decides to slug out with the unmanned planes controlled by Siri.... who needs Skynet?

[Gromnir]

2 minutes ago, Gorth said:

Waiting for the day where the unmanned planes controlled by Alexa decides to slug out with the unmanned planes controlled by Siri.... who needs Skynet?

am wondering if the frankenstein/skynet fears is slowing a transition to fully unmanned combat vehicles, not to mention the fact that such complex ai is likely still scifi fodder as 'posed to reality. 'tween active and passive jamming capabilities, which will no doubt only improve, am thinking ai is the obvious solution to a remote piloted vehicle being predictable rendered somewhere 'tween handicapped and impotent. is tough enough to maintain signal at even limited distances during bad weather, but add contested battlespace conditions and am not certain remote piloting is a real solution as o' today.

so, is it possible to install sufficient ai capacity into a 2022 fighter craft airframe?  f-22 capacity is so not the same as a predator drone. how smart does an unmanned combat vehicle need be? a modern uav may be programmed to take specified actions when signal is lost to prevent the loss o' the aircraft, but real combat is gonna be complex, yes? no doubt is more than a few nato generals and admirals who don't feel comfortable with anything more complex than siri and alexa driving a 40 million dollar aircraft, but am thinking you need something a heck o' a lot closer to skynet to get the job done.

but again, am kinda talking out our arse on this as am having zero expertise to draw 'pon.

HA! Good Fun!

[Malcador]

1 hour ago, Gfted1 said:

@rjshae I dont get the reference can you fill me in?

I really dont understand the US military reluctance to go fully unmanned. What the difference between the pilot sitting in the ****pit, observing a bank of sensor displays and carrying out the mission, and a pilot doing the exact same thing in a room at some base? I suppose there could be a few milliseconds of "lag" between input and aircraft reaction? I mean, its not like theyre looking out the windows to see whats going on around them. It seems to me that the meat sack is just a liability in a bomber. IMO, we also need to stop clutching our pearls about "AI" and start making some serious gains.

New form of the Fighter and Bomber Mafias ?

[Gfted1]

6 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

so, is it possible to install sufficient ai capacity into a 2022 fighter craft airframe?

I agree that this capability is probably still far away from current capabilities, but Im arse talking too.

I think a good first step in AI is in the "attributable" platforms such as the loyal wingman concept: Boeing MQ-28 Ghost Bat - Wikipedia. Start here and build upon the real world results.

[kanisatha]

2 hours ago, Gfted1 said:

@rjshae I dont get the reference can you fill me in?

I'm guessing it's a reference to the old bombers (B-52) having a bunkbed in it for the pilots to rotationally get some sleep on long patrols during the Cold War.

[kanisatha]

40 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

so, is it possible to install sufficient ai capacity into a 2022 fighter craft airframe?

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2448376/ai-copilot-air-force-achieves-first-military-flight-with-artificial-intelligence/

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/artificial-intelligence-easily-beats-human-fighter-pilot-in-darpa-trial/

[Gromnir]

36 minutes ago, kanisatha said:

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2448376/ai-copilot-air-force-achieves-first-military-flight-with-artificial-intelligence/

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/artificial-intelligence-easily-beats-human-fighter-pilot-in-darpa-trial/

“A fully autonomous Heron flying the entire airplane (system) is still quite a ways off,” he said, adding the goal is to see “if this is even feasible right now.”

so, the answer to the initial query regarding the capacity to implement the requisite ai capability into a 2022 fighter is, "no." 

am unsurprised, but am curious what is a reasonable timeline for "quite a ways off"? given the unanticipated manner in which tech advances, is quite possible that by the time the current obstacles is overcome, the solution is rendered moot by some other new tech. is equal possible advances on the combat fighter aircraft ai end up producing more meaningful results otherwise unrelated to the original design goals. regardless, am a staunch advocate o' support for daarpa,  jason, nasa and similar in spite o' recent administrations, democrat and republican, seeming dedicated to gutting such whenever possible. 

HA! Good Fun!

[rjshae]

On 12/13/2022 at 7:22 AM, kanisatha said:

I'm guessing it's a reference to the old bombers (B-52) having a bunkbed in it for the pilots to rotationally get some sleep on long patrols during the Cold War.

Yep. They didn't include a bed in the B-2 design so the crew had to lug along a lightweight deck chair for those long missions to Iraq.

[Sarex]

Why did he eject...

[Gorth]

1 hour ago, Sarex said:

Why did he eject...

Maybe he didn't feel comfortable sitting on top of a large fuel tank while things were not under his control and sparks and smoke was everywhere? I've done enough firefighting in the civil defense to have developed a deep seated aversion towards huge quantities of burning fuel near me

 

[Malcador]

3 hours ago, Sarex said:

Why did he eject...

F-35 has an automatic ejection system in that mode, I believe, maybe that triggered ?

[Sarex]

3 hours ago, Gorth said:

Maybe he didn't feel comfortable sitting on top of a large fuel tank while things were not under his control and sparks and smoke was everywhere? I've done enough firefighting in the civil defense to have developed a deep seated aversion towards huge quantities of burning fuel near me

He landed right next to it though. At that point shutting it off would have been safer.

1 hour ago, Malcador said:

F-35 has an automatic ejection system in that mode, I believe, maybe that triggered ?

Really? Do wonder what conditions need to be met.

edit: but looking at it again, as soon as the plane got horizontal again he was ejected, so maybe it is automated.

Edited December 16, 2022 by Sarex

[Gorth]

All those high flying subjects... something a bit closer to Earth again. German private companies offering up a new tank design, with the hope of selling it to the army. I'm still not sure how much of a place there is for tanks in the modern battlefield, but wiser heads on the subject than mine will probably have a better understanding there...

 

[Gfted1]

The US Army's laser weapon platoon will be ready next month (interestingengineering.com)

[Gromnir]

On 12/18/2022 at 3:15 PM, Gorth said:

I'm still not sure how much of a place there is for tanks in the modern battlefield, but wiser heads on the subject than mine will probably have a better understanding there...

tanks and stuff

"Three key issues explain Russia’s tank losses: lack of warning and preparation, poor strategy that exacerbated logistics issues, and insufficient infantry to protect them. Tanks are among the most logistics-intensive pieces of equipment. They require routine maintenance, spare parts, and substantial fuel to keep them operational. Because of these requirements, logistics planning is more important for tank battalions and regiments than nearly any other type of military unit, but Russia’s disorganized invasion exacerbated these logistical challenges."

...

"The wars in Ukraine and Nagorno-Karabakh both show that mobile armored platforms with firepower are still important. They also demonstrate that tanks need to be employed with adequate combined-arms support. Otherwise, tanks, like any armament, will be vulnerable. Russian tank units lacked sufficient infantry, which left them vulnerable to anti-tank teams, and Armenia’s aging air defenses failed to protect its tanks from Azerbaijan’s TB2s, which led to their high losses. Indeed, the war in Ukraine has disproven the arguments that drones rendered tanks obsolete in Nagorno-Karabakh. TB2s have been effective in Ukraine, but they have not seriously threatened Russia’s tank fleet. Furthermore, tank units require significant logistical support to operate effectively. These are well-known lessons that were understood by tank commanders as far back as World War II."

is only one opinion from one guy, but is a whole lotta big brains who see the announcement o' the main battle tank's demise as premature. 

then again, is a whole lotta folks who see the announcement o' the main battle tank's demise as overdue. 

as with the fighter jets, is not something we claim expertise. regardless, we found the article worthy o' a read.

aside, this guy also agrees the mbt obituary has been written premature.

you gonna argue with the guy who has a picard as napoleon portrait on his wall? 

HA! Good Fun!

 

[Zoraptor]

Tanks certainly still have a role to play. ATGMs were going to make the tank obsolete after Israel got most of their ones facing the Egyptians toasted by Saggers/ Malyutkas in 1973 as well.

OTOH Bayraktars... lol. Certainly the worst hype to achievement ratio in the war, quite possibly the worst performing system outright; though there's a lot of competition for that title. Perhaps the most damning indictment is that they've been outperformed massively by diy quadcopters costing at very most 1% of a TB2. Even in Artsakh they needed ~100 An-2s to run interference for them against 1990s systems.

[Malcador]

Quote

It is unknown when the investigation into drug and human trafficking in the Fort Bragg area began, but it is known that the FBI became involved in investigating the deaths of Timothy Dumas and Delta Force operator Billy Lavigne in 2020 when both were found shot to death at a training site on Bragg.

Last week's arrests began with investigators receiving more evidence after an undercover law enforcement officer posing as an underage girl helped arrest a member of 1st Battalion, 3rd Special Forces Group back in December. That individual was known to moonlight as a bouncer at a bar in Southern Pines frequented by the Special Forces community, a military source close to the situation explained to Connecting Vets. The Green Beret is alleged to have been pimping underaged girls to the Special Forces community at drug-fueled parties in Southern Pines.

https://www.audacy.com/connectingvets/news/fear-grips-special-ops-amidst-human-trafficking-drug-arrests

 

Edited January 10, 2023 by Malcador
God damn this forum software again

[Gfted1]

DARPA Selects Boeing’s Aurora for Potentially Game-Changing X-Plane - The Debrief

[Gorth]

52 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

DARPA Selects Boeing’s Aurora for Potentially Game-Changing X-Plane - The Debrief

Sounds like the 2023 version of the ME-163

[Gfted1]

Are you referring to this?:

The "X-Plane" wont have any moving surfaces such as ailerons or rudder.

[Gfted1]

US Army selects Epirus’ Leonidas for high-power microwave initiative - Breaking Defense

[Gfted1]

MQ-1C Has Air-Launched The Eaglet Drone On Its First Flight (thedrive.com)