The future of GiB's: The irrealistic shepherd view

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

12 years 3 months

Posts: 5,905

Introduction:

It is a kind of looks like a mix of F-22 Raptor, F-14 Tomcat, and F-15 Eagle. It's a nice looking jet. And won't be available for another 15 to 25 years. The FCAS will put two humans in the cockpit.

Airbus' future strike fighter will command and control drones

Enough is enough. I am fed up to read those nonsensical views of a double command stealth airplane configured as such to monitor at close range in enemy territory a fleet of UCAV with a dedicated backseater.

- Two pilots in a small stealth fighter imparts so much drawback and augment the level of complexities that none of the Stealth fighters produced so far by the only nation having a significant number and type of such fielded are not produced exclusively as SINGLE fighters.

I don't want to hear in 20 years Mr Enders' s successor apologizing every then and now for an ill-suited configuration and recurrent deficiencies that plague this program .I don't want to see anymore the forest of pointed fingers of others lead manager giving for excuses this subcontractor or this or that.

- Cyber intelligence is not a science born yesterday. It has ever been an attempt of computer technologies and is now to the stage of being fielded in various combat application. As an example, small counter UCAVs will field in priority this technology at the lowest level of computing power. There are no other solutions for this mission (you stat on a margin of occurring errors leveled with the acquisition cost and eventual property damages (yes, out of cities interceptor will be comparatively more clever (independent from humans) than their inner-city counter-parts, turning the famous red-necks cliché into a story of the past). Things will be moving at a fast pace given those mandatory conditions.

- Command and order expected communications volume and power through and agile band switching datalink needs will be in favor of space base relays, LDL (?) and ground stations.

Hence, THERE ARE NO SINGLE PARTICULAR REASON TO BUILD A TWIN SEATED FIGHTER AIRPLANE that will have its first operational flight in 20 years!!!!

Sorry for capitalizing the text etc... The leak of R&D money wasted in such a way is just breathtaking .

EoA.

Please comment and debate peacefully.

X shades of grey (absurdity):
[ATTACH=CONFIG]246880[/ATTACH]

Attachments
Original post

Member for

14 years 1 month

Posts: 8,850

Why so much negative excitation? It's not your problem, anyway, let them build what they want..

Member for

12 years 3 months

Posts: 5,905

Why?
Because because.
Can't we debate on sound grounds. It's very much your field also, no?

Member for

13 years 5 months

Posts: 3,381

No serious country would entrust a major weapons system to satellite links that it does not control and cannot independently reconstitute. Why bother developing an expensive stealth aircraft if all you can anticipate doing with it is earning participation trophies in other people's wars? There are much cheaper ways -- some nations get by sending three medics and a dog.

Member for

12 years 3 months

Posts: 5,905

(ldl stands for laser data link ;) )
In 20 years it is doubtful that the present mil view regarding space will prevail.
Think at potential.deal breaker like North Korea or to space terrorism. We will see Military enforcing their defense policy up there. There is also a possibility that this will be in a cross-border fashion with countries having similarly opposites strategic attitudes down there . Think at the Russian space program embedded with that of the west. A status quo on one front.
Agile band switching will be the panacea of large computers and powerful long range emitters. I conservatively choose to base future application on present usage in my reply above, but why not envisioning bounce back data links?

Member for

14 years 1 month

Posts: 8,850

Why?
Because because.
Can't we debate on sound grounds. It's very much your field also, no?

After you have called this thing nonsensical, ill-suited and an absurdity, you suddenly demand a debate on sound grounds?
I personally like it but you seem to already made up your mind on this, further debate is fruitless.

Member for

12 years 3 months

Posts: 5,905

After you have called this thing nonsensical, ill-suited and an absurdity, you suddenly demand a debate on sound grounds?
I personally like it but you seem to already made up your mind on this, further debate is fruitless.

C'mon, my own opinion is not a fait accomplis *. I did not write this from mount Olympus.

Member for

14 years 1 month

Posts: 8,850

OK.. I personally think it's utterly necessary for Europe to come up with a successor of the Typhoon/Rafale if we want to stay relevant in the fighter business.. We can't simply get satisfied with buying F-35s..

Is that it? Then it's good enough for me.. twinseater or singleseater doesn't play a role..

... looks quite cool, BTW, even if not much different from KAI KF-X or Turkish TF-X.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 5,396

A UAV, operating as a communication node at 35K feet, can establish a line-of-sight RF link to an airplane operating at 35K feet at a distance of over 400 miles.

The same UAV and airplane, both operating at 50K feet, can communicate by LOS RF over a distance of 500 miles.

Yes, the bandwidth would be limited and data compression would need to be used, but it is possible.

The point is a daisy chain of comm relays allows the pilot and GIB to sit in a comfy air conditioned shelter, sipping tea, while highly autonomous UAVs do the dirty work. The humans would only intervene to provide consent to release weapons and re-task sensors.

Member for

12 years 3 months

Posts: 5,905

OK.. I personally think it's utterly necessary for Europe to come up with a successor of the Typhoon/Rafale if we want to stay relevant in the fighter business.. We can't simply get satisfied with buying F-35s..

Is that it? Then it's good enough for me.. twinseater or singleseater doesn't play a role..

... looks quite cool, BTW, even if not much different from KAI KF-X or Turkish TF-X.


You are right but I am pointing at the twin seat arrangement chosen, I suspect, mainly to singular it on the market. If such, let's add a 3rd row, a baby seat a nursery kit and call it the Family (citizen) fighter.

(read djcross)

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 2,271

... looks quite cool, BTW, even if not much different from KAI KF-X or Turkish TF-X.

I think it looks quite different... seems to be tailless, possibly with LEVCONS. Lots of internal volume and two seats, in other words geared towards the A/G role. Not very surprising for a Tornado replacement.

Member for

14 years 1 month

Posts: 8,850

You are right but I am pointing at the twin seat arrangement chosen, I suspect, mainly to singular it on the market. If such, let's add a 3rd row, a baby seat a nursery kit and call it the Family (citizen) fighter.

(read djcross)

I'd be more than happy to get a ride in this :)

Member for

11 years 1 month

Posts: 253

I'm not sure on the value of fighters controlling drones versus a ground based operator doing it.

AH-64 will have ability to control grey eagles and smaller shadow UAV added very soon so well get some actual information on the value of the concept.