It is now integrated for use by the F-15 Strike Eagle community.
For the Pacific--in the non-long-range bomber category--the F-15 Strike Eagle can at least carry JASSM some distance.
The B-1, B-2, B-52, F-15 Strike Eagle and F-22 are the aircraft with any real "anti-access" fire-power for the Pacific.
The Navy helps out with the Tomahawk: which would be nice to see cleared for the B-52.
Shoot first. Shoot enough.
With the coming budget woes, this situation is unlikely to improve much.
12 comments:
If JASSM gives F-15E "anti-access" (whatever that means) then so it does F/A-18 and F-35.
F-18 (short-legged, super tanker dependent)
F-35 (under-developed failure)
F-18 is longer ranged than the F-22. the B-52 is a flying billboard that says shoot me please, the B-1 is a maintenance hog, the B-2 is a hangar queen so where exactly is your anti-access at???
F-18 longer ranged than the F-22. You might want to have a pilot explain the relationship between indicated airspeed, altitude and effective ground speed. And certainly the legacy Hornet isn't even in the same category.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-irwcM2ov73s/Toru4NRprRI/AAAAAAAABm4/PBBm_UVa5Ng/s1600/F-22range.jpeg
All the long range bombers can carry stand-off weapons over great range.
the only way your argument makes sense is with the legacy hornet and that airplane is going away at a rapid rate. lets talk super hornet and it flies much further than the F-22 can. oh and don't hit me with indicated airspeed, altitude and effective ground speed. it has nothing to do with distance, it has everything to do with time. the old formula r*t=d does not apply in this and you know it. additionally you can put up all the charts on F-22 range that you want but the F-15 flies further too. much further! i don't know what kind of games LM played (well we can see one right off the bat...mission profile HLLH? are you kidding me??? while you have the F-22 flying a high profile all the way through??? bs and we all know it). but i digress. its all about reality. JSSM doesn't give standoff distance, if you're flying a B-52 to the launch point then you're going to be shot down before you get there either by ship or plane.
lets be honest. ok!
Honest. Based on your thoughts, the legacy Hornet would get killed before it dropped JASSM (after how many tanker refuels?)
LM playing games. Yet somehow according to the (previous?) anon, the F-35 is a winner. Show me (other than sales claims) how the F-35 flies "further". They keep clipping range off of it. Then there is the fact that drop tanks were removed in a 2006 contract because it was too much effort for SDD. Then there is the survivability issues of the Just So Failed. Obviously, KIAS vs effective ground speed at high altitude does mean something as that is part and parcel of the F-22 range chart.
Must be time to bring up the F111 surely?
Anon2...
Shouldn't that be 'dig up' the F111?
Curious if the F-15E was cleared for wing station load-out as well? Or just a single shot JASSM from the center?
Regardless, if one wants reliable stop-gap deterrence in the near-term... it would seem rationale to procure additional F-15E, F-16 and Super Hornet and supplement with maximal JASSM/ER class type stand-off capability.
I guess it just comes down to how much risk is worth taking and how much there actually is left to wiggle with??
Only JASSM-ER is interesting, as it has the range to put the launch point outside enemy aerial defence. JASSM without ER
xGM-109 would also have the necessary range, but I'm not sure if it's still survivable against Chinese air defense.
In the WestPac any complex that can't reach out over at least 1500nm is useless.
What's JASSMs range Distiller?
@ JP: Knowing planners' love for nice 'round' numbers I'd say it should come close to 250nm. Into how much that translates tactically (you would not want to have it fly a straight line to a target from a non-LO launch platform) obviously depends on the situation.
I don't think I'd be comfortable flying a non-LO launch platform anywhere closer than, say, 100nm to known opposition (either SAM or interceptor bases), which I'd say limits a JASSM pretty much to Chinese coastal regions (assuming there are no Chinese air defence ships in the more or less predictable launch areas).
Range is essential in a ChiCom scenario, since it opens up unexpected attack vectors, like from far behind WestPac islands, or from the Indian Ocean deep into the mainland. Also makes defence harder. Every couple of nm matters, that's why I say the -ER is the way to go.
Post a Comment