Your Nation's Air Force Mark II:

[Velkanika]

I hate to break it to you, but you've just fallen into the biggest pit when making an NS fighter. Don't go overboard with the payload, and remember that a loadout of 4 short-range missiles and 4 medium to long-range missiles is considered fantastic for the era this aircraft will enter service. If you completely fill the difference between the Loaded Weight and MTOW, the aircraft will require a ridiculous amount of runway to get airborne and will sacrifice its agility.

True, true. I'll remove one pylon per wing and reserve the space under the centerline for bombs and fuel. The twin-AAM modules were meant as an extra option introduced later on, I only included them here to see if they would fit in the first place. That brings it down to 10 AAM-capable hardpoints (when introduced), which would be a ~1500 kilogram payload for A2A missions. Better?

Also re: MTOW, when I get around to making a two-seater strike version of this in the same vein as the F-15E and Su-30 or Su-34, what changes would I need to make for a payload somewhere in the neighborhood of 8,000-12,000 kilograms? Or is this in itself an excessive goal?

An F-15C with a heavy air-to-air loadout of four AIM-9 Sidewinders and four AIM-120 AMRAAMs carries exactly 2,092 lbs/949 kg of munitions, plus the weight of at least one external fuel tank (4,154 lbs/1,884 kg ±100 lbs/45 kg for each 600 US gallon tank, assuming I did the math right for JP-4). Those numbers should give you a general idea of what to expect in terms of payload.

For a two-seat all-weather interdictor, you could easily get a usable payload in that range.

[Velkanika]

An F-15C with a heavy air-to-air loadout of four AIM-9 Sidewinders and four AIM-120 AMRAAMs carries exactly 2,092 lbs/949 kg of munitions, plus the weight of at least one external fuel tank (4,154 lbs/1,884 kg ±100 lbs/45 kg for each 600 US gallon tank, assuming I did the math right for JP-4). Those numbers should give you a general idea of what to expect in terms of payload.

For a two-seat all-weather interdictor, you could easily get a usable payload in that range.

So should I take this to mean that while i.e. an F-15E has an officially listed payload of 23,000lbs/10,433kg, its 'usable payload' while maintaining a short enough takeoff roll and a long enough combat radius is roughly half that? And that the same is true of e.g. the Su-30 and JH-7?

Unless you plan on using 8,000 feet of runway, yes.

[Velkanika]

I know how bomb pumped lasers work but the way it is described it seems indicate that the engine for this fires the weapon after the laser is fired. With the engine pushing the bomb into the wound from the laser prior to detonation.



Edit just realized I mistyped my prior post I meant to refer to the laser portion detonating and not the 100mt bomb.

It is perfectly plausible that as the blast wave propagates in both directions simultaneously his engine is still running at the moment the laser beings being emitted and that it might be powerful enough to ensure there is enough inertia to throw what ever is left of the weapon (a dust cloud at this point) into the wound.

A 100 Mt nuclear blast will convert the rocket engine into shrapnel traveling well over escape velocity in the opposite direction.

[Velkanika]

Anyone have any fighter tactics to share?

One common tactic used by the USAF is to break into elements, with one element going on-line at about 15,000 feet and the second element going up to 20,000 feet five nautical miles behind them. The lead element merges about 10 seconds before the trailing element, so the enemy will have already committed to a dogfight when the still energy-rich second element enters the fight with a height advantage.

Different pilots in the formation also visually scan the sky in different directions. Typically, they'll spend 75% of their time looking through the formation for enemies approaching from the far side and to keep track of where their squadronmates are.

Another tactic is for both elements to go on-line and volley fire AAMs. In popular culture, one variant of this is called the "Eagle Wall", which is literally a wall of F-15s lobbing AIM-7s at someone.

[Velkanika]

I'm thinking of procuring a handfull of Tupolev Tu-22M3 armed with Kh-22 standoff missiles to defend my island nation from my enemy's aircraft carrier battlegroups. I figure the standoff missiles give me the ability to defend my country's exclusive economic zone. I've heard that India may have received a few of them... would it be realistic for my country to have three or four?

You're a zero and some change short there buddy. The Aegis Combat System was designed to combat Soviet saturation missile attacks using the AS-4 Kitchen (AKA Kh-22), so three or four will just seriously piss off the battlegroup as they shoot them down about 80 nautical miles from the nearest ship. If you want to stage a successful Backfire raid on a CVBG you're gonna need at least one regiment of Backfires plus a squadron of surveillance aircraft to find the target for them. You'll probably need tankers as well, so round that up to around 90 aircraft for one strike. You'll probably want to double those numbers to account for all the aircraft that will be down for maintenance at any given time and give you some leeway for losses, which will ensure you can perform one such attack a week or so. Assuming you buy all those required aircraft and can get at least half of them ready to go for the strike, you might cripple or sink a carrier with some luck and good tactics.

Modern warfare is incredibly expensive, especially if you want to fight on equal footing with the most powerful naval formations to ever exist.

[Velkanika]

You're a zero and some change short there buddy. The Aegis Combat System was designed to combat Soviet saturation missile attacks using the AS-4 Kitchen (AKA Kh-22), so three or four will just seriously piss off the battlegroup as they shoot them down about 80 nautical miles from the nearest ship. If you want to stage a successful Backfire raid on a CVBG you're gonna need at least one regiment of Backfires plus a squadron of surveillance aircraft to find the target for them. You'll probably need tankers as well, so round that up to around 90 aircraft for one strike. You'll probably want to double those numbers to account for all the aircraft that will be down for maintenance at any given time and give you some leeway for losses, which will ensure you can perform one such attack a week or so. Assuming you buy all those required aircraft and can get at least half of them ready to go for the strike, you might cripple or sink a carrier with some luck and good tactics.

Modern warfare is incredibly expensive, especially if you want to fight on equal footing with the most powerful naval formations to ever exist.

Thanks for the feedback. Is there any alternative that I should think of buying?

Submarines are an option. They're cheaper and easier to organize but are not nearly as threatening as an air raid or another group of warships.

If you want to challenge a carrier group on the high seas you're going to need to spend a helluva lot of money on your military. The best way to kill a carrier is honestly some kind of missile attack that can over saturate the anti-air defenses of the group. This can be achieved by reducing the engagement time and numerically exceeding the maximum effective kill rate of the defenses. IRL it comes down to luck, but for the purposes of NS and videogames in general you can rely on probability and some algebra to get a general idea of what it'll take.

[Velkanika]

Yeah I think I'll leave it. It would be too much of a hassle to change.

I gave it beefier engines though, and extended the armour along the floor and the armour on the turret. It's literally a flying tank.

Is it supposed to be a ground attack aircraft? The cockpit has pretty good downward visibility.

[Velkanika]

What do you gents think about incorporating A-29 Super Tucanos into my Federal Guard (gendarme) forces? I'm torn between it and the OV-10D.

The Federal Guard's air units would be operating behind friendly lines in a COIN role; at home, these planes would likely be used for border monitoring as well as keeping watch over rural areas where fugitives and terrorists tend to hide out.

From what I understand, the A-29 is ridiculously easy to maintain and it has better performance, but the OV-10D can carry more munitions and seems to be more conducive to observation.

Go for the A-29. It is a current production plane that is entering service with many nations all over the world, and can work well as a trainer too.

The Bronco was a great plane and it would do fine in the COIN role if modernized, but they were passed over and are only in limited use. I can't confirm this for sure, but I believe SOCOM still has those two OV-10Gs they got through the Combat Dragon II program. Back in 2013 they said they were going to demilitarize them and give them back to NASA, but I don't see the aircraft on NASA's inventory page.

https://airbornescience.nasa.gov/aircraft_status

There's also this photo...

http://www.airliners.net/photo/USA---Na ... 2651703/L/

Remark: 155481 (cn 305-92) "Camelot 11" From Naval Air Systems Command, backing the SOCOM effort of the Combat Dragon II programme.

Taken at: More: Rota (LERT)
More: Spain, May 28, 2015

Just don't do what US DoD/Congress did (bog down a simple program and only get the planes in service once we're leaving the conflicts it was needed in), and you should be alright.

Boeing announced a while back that there was enough interest in an updated OV-10 that they're going ahead with independent development for the export market.

[Velkanika]

You mean the shape of the copckpit could add lift? That seems a bit far-fetched

Yes, if the bottom is narrower than the top, which I understand it is. If shaped properly, it could add lift the same way chines do.



They aren't exactly these, but they work in a similar way. Angled tails also provide lift.



I'm sure there is someone on this thread who knows more about it than me.

Chines and lifting bodies are 60s technology, they have absolutely no business being on Ford's aircraft.

[Velkanika]

Isn't the Me 262 like that?

Nope. This is an Me 262 B1-A. Take a good look at the nose, and please note the lack of chimes.

[Velkanika]

Nope. This is an Me 262 B1-A. Take a good look at the nose, and please note the lack of chimes.

I thought the broad, flat underside would create the same effect.

So does a brick thrown really fast with an inclination of 30­°. The shape of the nose is more down to how they built the thing.

[Velkanika]

So does a brick thrown really fast with an inclination of 30­°. The shape of the nose is more down to how they built the thing.

And he built it that way. Deal with it.

Speaking of flying bricks:



It can work. And be very successful too.

Chimes are a shape that you don't just build an aircraft's fuselage with. They were invented after a lot of computer and wind tunnel modeling that simply hadn't been done when Ford's aircraft was being developed.

Just buy F-35s.

Too expensive lmao

Yea, you're never getting all that for $20 million. More like $70 million.

[Velkanika]

Yes but the F-35 is in pretty much every single respect better than the F-16.

Also the operating cost of an F-35 isn't going to be much higher than the F-16s.

The USAF estimated that an F-16s CPFH is around 24,000 USD an hour, while the F-35 is going to be over 35,000 a flight hour.

You can get a 5th generation fighter that does everything the F-16s does +1, or you can use the F-16 and then deal with a massively widening gap later on.

I don't see the need for an F-35 as a small nation, especially when modern combat is often against terrorists and whatnot. Besides, if I live long enough I may get to see competitive UCAVs, and that would certainly be interesting. Also I'm not sure, can the F-35 out dogfight an F-16 (well it's not important anyways as it would just destroy the F-16 from afar and close up the off foresight AIM-9X would neutralize most maneuverability)?

Once they relax the Angle of Attack limiter, the F-35A will be extremely close to the F-16C kinematically.

[Velkanika]

Does mine even have chines though? The sides fo the canopy angle outwards a bit, like on the Me 410, just staight instead of rounded. It's not really comparable to things like the blackbird.

Nope, those won't do anything and don't come close to what chimes are. Sorry to rain on your parade Mik, but those really aren't chimes. They're not even a strake, which a chime by definition is.

[Velkanika]

Which is better medium range SAM system, Spyder MR, Type 03, or Vityaz?

The Japanese win this comparison. The SAM-4 has roughly the same range as the S-350, is a lot faster, but is slightly less accurate.

[Velkanika]

For a modern day fighter jet meant to protect a country say the size of Germany or France and be used in wars over a territory no more than twice that size, exclusively over land is in flight refueling a necessary feature?

It's worth it if only for topping their tanks off before escorting a strike package.

[Velkanika]

:(.

My Latest Facebook.
Current OOB is this: http://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Organization/FA_Fighter_Division.png


Any thoughts\critiques guys? I've been told my forces have an exceptionally larger amount of airframes.

That is an exceptional number of aircraft, especially if you have the military culture to keep them functional. You compare favorably to some RL regional powers.

I also am impressed by you not going overboard with the numbers, however you did neglect to purchase spare aircraft. I assume you plan on ordering replacements as you need them?

[Velkanika]

yes you could certainly get by without them.

but the question is why would you willingly give up such an effective tool?

Because I have a defense only policy. Sweden seems to get along well enough without any.

That's because they're integrated into the wider Scandinavian defensive agreements and work closely with NATO. The reason why European militaries are so small is because the United States guarantees international trade with our navy. The second half of the 20th Century is unique in human history in that you do not need a large navy to protect your trade, so long as you play nice with the US.

Unless you have a similar arrangement in your region, geopolitics insists that you build a large military capable of protecting your trade.

[Velkanika]

I think you mean SU-27. And it's more than just the landing gear. The entire forward fuselage and the tails are also taken direct from the SU-27 production lines to keep costs low.

He made a point of specifically saying "Su-37".

Never argue with an idiot on the internet unless you're going for the kill immediately. Bust out Google and Bing and find some academic sources, cite them, put up a post that explains your conclusions, and leave the debate until he can put up a proper counterargument. Then post what you've written over here because I'm not the only one who'll enjoy that conversation.

[Velkanika]

Look what I found on the Su-47 Wikipedia page: "Originally known as the S-37, Sukhoi redesignated its advanced test aircraft as the Su-47 in 2002."

I think I know where FAP's argumentative opponent got it from.

[Velkanika]

Has anyone made any research on the ELINT systems of later MiG-25 aircraft ? Particularly the Kub-3M. I've searched a lot but nothing specific came out as to what the capabilities of that hardware actually are.

Kub-3M is a side-looking airborne radar from the 70s that was found on MiG-25RBK Foxbat Bs. It's not found on the later models of Foxbats, but I haven't found anything on the specific capabilities.

[Velkanika]

What is the UAV supposed to do, and what sensors does it need to do it?

[Velkanika]

What is the UAV supposed to do, and what sensors does it need to do it?

The main thing I suppose it would do is short range tactical reconnaissance. It needs a gimbal stabilized camera, preferably with FLIR and optical zoom. The camera quality needs to be good enough to positively identify an armed person at appreciable distances. It should be simple to use and reliable enough to be used in a range of weather conditions. Endurance should be at least 30 minutes, though a little less is acceptable.

Example of use: Troops are in closed terrain, set up the UAV and bring it up to altitude to get a good field of view, and use the camera to reconnoiter an area.

The smallest UAV you could go with would be about the size of a RQ-11, but it won't have FLIR. The minimum size that could feasibly carry FLIR would be an RQ-7 or RQ-21, and those are well beyond the scope of man portability.

[Velkanika]

True but upgrades cost money as do mig 29s

I guarantee you, the cost of maintenance for 350 MiG-21s is way more than the cost of procuring and maintaining MiG-29s or a western equivalent.

Before Ujiea asks, it's due to old equipment not having a ready supply of spare parts, which requires the operator to pay for fabricating and manufacturing individual spares on an as-needed basis. New equipment that is still in production or shortly out of production is a lot cheaper to maintain because they're still making spares with mass production tooling and methods at that point.

[Velkanika]

You will spend money on basically sending your nation's most competent and expensive troops up into the sky to be killed. This isn't combat. This is a blood sacrifice.

Don't forget ujiea is a communist country stuck in the 70s with a poor economy and we have a secret fighter that we've purchased that we only reveal once or twice to the public

Just buy JF-17s from China or FA-50s from South Korea. Both are far more capable aircraft than a Fishbed, even if the JF-17 is more or less a Fishbed with side-mounted intakes.