Why the Navy Misses the Old F-14 Tomcat, Despite All of the Problems

Re:Why the Navy Misses the Old F-14 Tomcat, Despite All of t... by kposehn on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @12:23AM (#17906629)

Can you please elaborate? Why is the JSF really the JST? Why and what are unmanned mussel trucks to you? Why should carriers be phased out?

I’m not saying you’re wrong - to the contrary, since you are a former pilot I’m actually quite interested in your opinion.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why the Navy Misses the Old F-14 Tomcat, Despite All of t... by poof131 on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @12:42AM (#17906707)

There’s a military quote that says, "Amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics."[1] I feel our current military leaders took this too far and forgot about the stupidity of putting all your eggs in one basket. The JSF is down to one engine, which if redlined, will down the whole fleet. If one of our adversaries finds a weakness, then the the whole fleet is vulnerable. Not to mention the crap with development: not getting the launch bar right [2], not getting the hook location right [3], the electronics being a mess. How do you screw up the launch bar, it’s not like carriers have changed. The JSF is going in the wrong direction. We should have aircraft focused on different roles: air-to-air, strike, close-air-support. We should be moving toward unmanned missile trucks for air-to-air and strike. We should focus on cheaper aircraft that can be updated with the latest tech.

Unmanned missile trucks are drones that carry missiles that can be guided by other platforms. After the drone launches its missiles, who cares if it blows up. Trying to make drones defensible like expensive fighters is just as stupid as the JSF. Some stealth and defense is good, but expendable and cheap is more important.

Carriers are too vulnerable to missiles. Missiles are the future. You can’t defeat something going mach 6 that pulls 25 g’s in the end game. 'The Future of War' does a great job describing the evolution of weapons platforms and how aging ones are depicted by ever increasing costs on defensive measures which are then defeated by new, cheaper weapons. [4] Carriers and fighter jets are becoming the modern battleships which is a bit ironic.

1. https://www.military-quotes.com/forum/logistics-quotes-t511....

2. https://news.usni.org/2017/03/23/f-35c-tests-offer-proposed-...

3. https://theaviationist.com/2012/01/09/f-35c-hook-problems/

4. https://www.amazon.com/Future-War-History-Lawrence-Freedman/...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why the Navy Misses the Old F-14 Tomcat, Despite All of t... by throwawayjava on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @01:13AM (#17906802)

Wouldn't those drones have to be completely autonomous -- not merely unmanned -- in any conflict with a real peer (e.g., Russia or China)?

And if so, are we there yet, technologically speaking? I.e., not just peacetime autonomy but actually dealing with a combat situation -- possibly with friendlies in the skies -- completely autonomously? My impression the last time I talked with a uniform about this was that the answer is still no.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why the Navy Misses the Old F-14 Tomcat, Despite All of t... by alins on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @01:20AM (#17906818)

The drones do not need to be fully autonomous. See https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2014/11/05/is_a_mi...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why the Navy Misses the Old F-14 Tomcat, Despite All of t... by burfog on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @02:38PM (#17911622)

I think that "the stupidity of putting all your eggs in one basket" applies well to "moving toward unmanned missile trucks for air-to-air and strike". In a serious war, there will be no radio communication and there will be no satellites. Each piece of equipment is on its own, and we aren't about to trust AI with that.

You can "defeat something going mach 6 that pulls 25 g’s in the end game", not that this exists. The easy answer is directed energy, such as lasers. Also, simply forcing it to maneuver at 25 g will quickly put an end to flying at mach 6. Each turn costs energy, and bypassing the laws of physics is not an option.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why the Navy Misses the Old F-14 Tomcat, Despite All of t... by gaius on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @06:18AM (#17907943)

The JSF is down to one engine, which if redlined, will down the whole fleet

Not to mention that for UK and Europe, pork-barrel politics means those engines can only be serviced by one country that is increasingly distancing itself from the rest of NATO. All F35s can be trivially rendered useless by denying them access to the single maintenance facility for their engine.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why the Navy Misses the Old F-14 Tomcat, Despite All of t... by tim333 on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @09:28AM (#17908859)

Guess you mean Turkey - had to google that. I think if we fell out they'd go to the US to be serviced currently.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why the Navy Misses the Old F-14 Tomcat, Despite All of t... by gaius on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @10:19AM (#17909203)

Yep, Turkey buying an S400 system from Russia.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-41237812

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why the Navy Misses the Old F-14 Tomcat, Despite All of t... by phnk on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @03:31PM (#17912076)

> Why and what are unmanned mussel trucks to you?

The autocorrect feature (on your mobile phone, I presume) made my day: I love the idea of an unmanned mussel truck.

[ Parent | on HN ]