by jamaal » Sun 24 Aug 2008, 07:09:58
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnConnor', 'Y')eah - I think they did some turboprop conversions in an attempt to get the USAF interested in COIN airplanes in the 70's and with the war in Iraq, the interest in something with a light foot print and logistical support network has renewed interest - but nothing so far...
If oil just keeps on climbing in price - this along with a UAV fleet - could be the only manned options for the USAF, I am thinking 15 - 20 years in the future if things get really bad, that is we undertake no effort at conservation coupled with a MASSIVE effort to find a real biofuel alternative (algae, cellulostic ethanol, etc..) - I think that SAM systems would also fill in some roles for Homeland Air Defense... basically anything but what we fly today, burning thru easily 12,000 llbs. for 2 hours (or less) of flight...
No, the US will adopt network centric warfare- swarms of 1 metre
wingspan UAVs with sensors. The "bomb trucks" will be way out of
range, the swarm of UAVs will be dirt cheap, mesh networked
so that the loss of a high % makes no difference.
They will IR detect, jam defences, relay video via other UAVS
to AWACs and will pass GPS coords and/or lase the targets
for the glide and rocket assisted bombs to hit. The terminal
phase of the bombs will be vertical i.e. too diificult to intercept
and any attempt to do so will reveal another target.
Using strike planes with pilots is old hat, inefficient, generates
prisoners and SAR problems. Network centric warfare is cheap and uses the US strong
suite- technology. The main need for pilots will be for fighters
protecting the bomb trucks and other assets. Even here,
big loitering "missile trucks" slaved to the AWACs can be used
to saturate incoming fighters with long range missiles.
Last ditch might be tiny, hovering nukes acting as aerial mines
to take out a wave of incoming fighters or missiles.
But the days of low level piloted strike aircraft are numbered.