Mod. Notice Technological advances in weaponry

[Werewolf]

I'm starting this thread because weaponry related topics seem to be rarely discussed across BigFooty from what I've seen and only in the context of geopolitics.

So we can talk about advances with tanks, planes, ships, submarines, missiles, radar, stealth, laser weapons, and even the "Space Force" without the politics.

Post articles & opinions, just like the random science news thread. We can also discuss the future of warfare and important questions such as: Is the F-35 worthwhile? Will main battle tanks become obsolete? Will hypersonic missiles make blue water fleets useless? And anything else you can think of!

 

[Werewolf]

It's troubling that the F-35 still has this many problems (however minor) after so much funding over nearly 20 years:

F-35 Flies With 871 Flaws, Only Two Fewer Than Year Earlier

Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35, the fighter jet already being flown by the U.S. and eight allies, remains marred by 871 software and hardware deficiencies that could undercut readiness, missions or maintenance, according to the Pentagon’s testing office.

www.bloomberg.com

I've always thought it would be better to have a simpler ground attack plane for low intensity conflicts against less capable opposition and an air superiority stealth fighter for advanced opposition. The F-35 is too high maintenance for the first role and may soon be outclassed in the second role, if the Russians succeed in developing the MiG-41 (although it too may fall short of expectations to be fair) with the stated specifications.

 

[CD Xbow]

It's troubling that the F-35 still has this many problems (however minor) after so much funding over nearly 20 years:

F-35 Flies With 871 Flaws, Only Two Fewer Than Year Earlier

Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35, the fighter jet already being flown by the U.S. and eight allies, remains marred by 871 software and hardware deficiencies that could undercut readiness, missions or maintenance, according to the Pentagon’s testing office.

www.bloomberg.com

I've always thought it would be better to have a simpler ground attack plane for low intensity conflicts against less capable opposition and an air superiority stealth fighter for advanced opposition. The F-35 is too high maintenance for the first role and may soon be outclassed in the second role, if the Russians succeed in developing the MiG-41 (although it too may fall short of expectations to be fair) with the stated specifications.

Not sure with the Russian economy we will have to worry about a MiG 41. More likely we will have to be concerned about a PLAAF J-20

Australian government has announced a significant upgrading of the ADF missile armoury. Australia to invest in long-range missile technology for naval fleet (smh.com.au) You get a lot more bang for buck with missiles albeit with a significant reduction of options. The article is confusing if we are purchasing or developing these capabilities. The article describes the missiles as:

"With ranges in excess of 370 kilometres for anti-ship and surface-to-air missiles, 1500 kilometres for maritime land strike missiles, the new weapons will enhance the protection of Australia’s maritime resources and border and put adversaries at risk at much greater distances. "

To me these describe acquisitions of current US weapons. The antiship missiles sound like LRASM, the surface to air missiles sound like SM6 and the maritime land strike missiles sound like the newer Tomahawk. It talks about 'hypersonics', however I believe this refers to a separate program between the ADF and US to develop a hypersonic air launched weapon. .

 

[Mofra]

That sounds like the next phase in our defence strategy. Australia has poor fuel reserves and little domestic refining capacity, hence our White Paper is normally centred on the capacity to defend sea lanes between Australia and Singapore.

Long range missiles plus subs give us that capacity.
The real question is how the hell we crew 12 small subs as since my time in the pus to the modern day we've struggled for submariners. Drone sub technology plus drones for long range sea patrols are where we are headed whether the boffins realise it or not.

 

[azlou]

That sounds like the next phase in our defence strategy. Australia has poor fuel reserves and little domestic refining capacity, hence our White Paper is normally centred on the capacity to defend sea lanes between Australia and Singapore.

Long range missiles plus subs give us that capacity.
The real question is how the hell we crew 12 small subs as since my time in the pus to the modern day we've struggled for submariners. Drone sub technology plus drones for long range sea patrols are where we are headed whether the boffins realise it or not.

Drones is the future the f35 will probably be the last manned aircraft without a pilot you get more weapons range and bang for buck drone swarms are being worked on
The Chinese are doing a lot of undersea mapping I’d say for there submarine drones

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

Drone sub technology plus drones for long range sea patrols are where we are headed whether the boffins realise it or not.

I doubt it. Barring a fully AI-controlled system, the fundamental problem with remote operation is maintaining a steady link between asset and control post which requires some form of constant transmission. Ultimately the transmission needs to work both ways, as the asset will need to provide constant diagnostic updates to the operator. This is problematic for submarines and stealth aircraft alike which will typically operate "silent" so they can't be detected via their own transmissions.

 

[CD Xbow]

I doubt it. Barring a fully AI-controlled system, the fundamental problem with remote operation is maintaining a steady link between asset and control post which requires some form of constant transmission. Ultimately the transmission needs to work both ways, as the asset will need to provide constant diagnostic updates to the operator. This is problematic for submarines and stealth aircraft alike which will typically operate "silent" so they can't be detected via their own transmissions.

One of the issues the ADF/Boeing "Loyal Wingman" will have to solve, which is a nice lead in to the article Australia’s Loyal Wingman Drone It’s Developing With Boeing Has Been Photographed In The Wild (thedrive.com) I believe it's due it's first flight soon. Hopefully it is a success, it's project that ticks a lot of the right boxes. I do find it alarming the USAF has called their autonomous AI controlled project Skyborg - The Fight For The Air Force's "Skyborg" Artificial Intelligence Equipped Drones Has Begun (thedrive.com).

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

One of the issues the ADF/Boeing "Loyal Wingman" will have to solve, which is a nice lead in to the article Australia’s Loyal Wingman Drone It’s Developing With Boeing Has Been Photographed In The Wild (thedrive.com) I believe it's due it's first flight soon. Hopefully it is a success, it's project that ticks a lot of the right boxes. I do find it alarming the USAF has called their autonomous AI controlled project Skyborg - The Fight For The Air Force's "Skyborg" Artificial Intelligence Equipped Drones Has Begun (thedrive.com).

I haven't really looked into how the ATS works but in concept the UAV will be controlled via another close-by aircraft requiring only a focussed, low power transmission that will largely go undetected by enemy receivers. Assuming this is the case, the signal strength of the transmission won't be strong enough for an enemy aircraft operating within range to detect the ATS or the controlling aircraft so this eliminates the problem entirely. Conversely, any signal strong and broad enough to be reliably detected by an aircraft or a submarine operating 1000+km away will also be able to be detected by other actors, as once radio waves are transmitted they become a public good that are very easy to trace if picked up.

This is a good indication of what drones will look like in the near future, not as fully independent aircraft in their own right but basically a lower-cost platform accompanying manned craft of which their highest risk roles will be out-sourced too. Radar cross-section of the airframe aside, some common ways for aircraft to be detected by an enemy is passive detection of radar emissions and via the infra-red signals that accompany missile launches and the like. A hypothetical F-35 operating with a pair of ATS UAVs would be able to continuously scan and track targets from radar arrays that are located 10km+ away from its actual airframe, and not risk compromising its location when engaging a target either.

 

[CD Xbow]

I haven't really looked into how the ATS works but in concept the UAV will be controlled via another close-by aircraft requiring only a focussed, low power transmission that will largely go undetected by enemy receivers. Assuming this is the case, the signal strength of the transmission won't be strong enough for an enemy aircraft operating within range to detect the ATS or the controlling aircraft so this eliminates the problem entirely. Conversely, any signal strong and broad enough to be reliably detected by an aircraft or a submarine operating 1000+km away will also be able to be detected by other actors, as once radio waves are transmitted they become a public good that are very easy to trace if picked up.

This is a good indication of what drones will look like in the near future, not as fully independent aircraft in their own right but basically a lower-cost platform accompanying manned craft of which their highest risk roles will be out-sourced too. Radar cross-section of the airframe aside, some common ways for aircraft to be detected by an enemy is passive detection of radar emissions and via the infra-red signals that accompany missile launches and the like. A hypothetical F-35 operating with a pair of ATS UAVs would be able to continuously scan and track targets from radar arrays that are located 10km+ away from its actual airframe, and not risk compromising its location when engaging a target either.

I believe the AI driven autonomy is part of the project. Crawl, walk, run as the military folks are fond of saying. I think the initial part is the 'teaming' approach as you describe using low power/directed control from a nearby aircraft counts as the crawl phase. There are many things that could be achieved with such a system, the scenario you describe is one of them. It also means they can call it a 'loyal wingman', a positive and non threatening name as opposed to say Robotic Killer Aircraft, which probably would frighten the folks a bit. It's a brilliant project and I hope they can pull it off for the $2-3 million per aircraft. Once it can be flown with autonomously it opens up a whole range of new missions. Want a cruise missile? Put a bomb in the nose and you have a stealthy cruise missile with 2000 nmi range.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

One of the issues the ADF/Boeing "Loyal Wingman" will have to solve, which is a nice lead in to the article Australia’s Loyal Wingman Drone It’s Developing With Boeing Has Been Photographed In The Wild (thedrive.com) I believe it's due it's first flight soon. Hopefully it is a success, it's project that ticks a lot of the right boxes. I do find it alarming the USAF has called their autonomous AI controlled project Skyborg - The Fight For The Air Force's "Skyborg" Artificial Intelligence Equipped Drones Has Begun (thedrive.com).

Making murder even easier? Call me a peace-loving leftie piece of s**t traitor, but I just can't wish stuff like this a success at all. Just like the Indiana Jones series of movies, Washington's wars have only brought misery when they weren't kicking the s**t out of Nazis. 'Defence' tech like this will only enable them to go on even more adventures, with us Deputy Dawgs bouncing alongside for the ride with our tongues lolling out in the dumbest derpy fashion.

I wonder what kind of person works for an outfit like DARPA, or its Russian or Chinese equivalent. All these minds working positively on projects FOR humanity rather than against it - we could have been terraforming Mars by now.

It disgusts me.

 

[CD Xbow]

Making murder even easier? Call me a peace-loving leftie piece of sh*t traitor, but I just can't wish stuff like this a success at all. Just like the Indiana Jones series of movies, Washington's wars have only brought misery when they weren't kicking the sh*t out of Nazis. 'Defence' tech like this will only enable them to go on even more adventures, with us Deputy Dawgs bouncing alongside for the ride with our tongues lolling out in the dumbest derpy fashion.

I wonder what kind of person works for an outfit like DARPA, or its Russian or Chinese equivalent. All these minds working positively on projects FOR humanity rather than against it - we could have been terraforming Mars by now.

It disgusts me.

Unfortunately that is the world we live in. I doubt we could be terrafoming Mars now, if ever. Yes I agree it would be a better world without a need for weapons and armies but I can't see it happening. The world we have is full of nation states, some of whom are very aggressive & belligerent. In our neighbourhood we face an assertive PRC which has already started economic warfare against us. Weakness encourages adventurism by the PLA, so I want Oz to be as well armed as possible, and yes, that includes robots. I don't think most Australians want to live in a 21st century version of the middle kingdom.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Visions of AMEE

 

[Mofra]

I doubt it. Barring a fully AI-controlled system, the fundamental problem with remote operation is maintaining a steady link between asset and control post which requires some form of constant transmission. Ultimately the transmission needs to work both ways, as the asset will need to provide constant diagnostic updates to the operator. This is problematic for submarines and stealth aircraft alike which will typically operate "silent" so they can't be detected via their own transmissions.

The Yanks have a semi-workable solution already for some theatres of operation (periodic updates) but I believe that's based on cold-war era underwater infrastructure that would cost $100s of billions to establish in today's dollars. Australia doesn't have that option.

 

[Mofra]

32 interesting and incredibly futuristic weapons and modern fighting vehicles

Join us on the battlefield as we take a trip across the globe to find the biggest, brightest and best weaponry.

www.pocket-lint.com

Warfare is already beginning to look drastically different

 

[azlou]

I doubt it. Barring a fully AI-controlled system, the fundamental problem with remote operation is maintaining a steady link between asset and control post which requires some form of constant transmission. Ultimately the transmission needs to work both ways, as the asset will need to provide constant diagnostic updates to the operator. This is problematic for submarines and stealth aircraft alike which will typically operate "silent" so they can't be detected via their own transmissions.

I’m pretty sure that was one plus for the diesel subs is they can turn everything of and go quiet.
Where as the nuclear can’t switch off as it will melt down
Apparently the Collins performed very well against the yanks in war games for that reason

 

[azlou]

I haven't really looked into how the ATS works but in concept the UAV will be controlled via another close-by aircraft requiring only a focussed, low power transmission that will largely go undetected by enemy receivers. Assuming this is the case, the signal strength of the transmission won't be strong enough for an enemy aircraft operating within range to detect the ATS or the controlling aircraft so this eliminates the problem entirely. Conversely, any signal strong and broad enough to be reliably detected by an aircraft or a submarine operating 1000+km away will also be able to be detected by other actors, as once radio waves are transmitted they become a public good that are very easy to trace if picked up.

This is a good indication of what drones will look like in the near future, not as fully independent aircraft in their own right but basically a lower-cost platform accompanying manned craft of which their highest risk roles will be out-sourced too. Radar cross-section of the airframe aside, some common ways for aircraft to be detected by an enemy is passive detection of radar emissions and via the infra-red signals that accompany missile launches and the like. A hypothetical F-35 operating with a pair of ATS UAVs would be able to continuously scan and track targets from radar arrays that are located 10km+ away from its actual airframe, and not risk compromising its location when engaging a target either.

This pretty much what the f-35 is designed for a command and control platform that expands radar
The f-22 is still the best fighter plane but the USA don’t sell those to any one

 

[Mofra]

I’m pretty sure that was one plus for the diesel subs is they can turn everything of and go quiet.
Where as the nuclear can’t switch off as it will melt down
Apparently the Collins performed very well against the yanks in war games for that reason

Yep - arguably, the O boats were even better. They could sit on the bottom and just listen for 36 hours.
According to a mate who was on the commissioning crew of Farncomb the Collins class hulls weren't rated for the same thing

 

[Werewolf]

That sounds like the next phase in our defence strategy. Australia has poor fuel reserves and little domestic refining capacity, hence our White Paper is normally centred on the capacity to defend sea lanes between Australia and Singapore.

Long range missiles plus subs give us that capacity.
The real question is how the hell we crew 12 small subs as since my time in the pus to the modern day we've struggled for submariners. Drone sub technology plus drones for long range sea patrols are where we are headed whether the boffins realise it or not.

I think our fuel reserves would be expended in a matter of weeks (?) if things went horribly awry. I'd love us to have a nuclear powered navy. Also have nuclear power stations and use excess power to convert coal into petroleum, but it's too late now

Agree on the submarine crewing. It's a job that appeals to very few people!

 

[Werewolf]

We're talking about guided missiles traveling at over 2km/s

 

[Mofra]

Interesting article on drones:

Everything you know about military drones is probably out of date. Here's what's happening now

Military drones are evolving quickly. What do they look like and what role will they play in conflict? Here's a short guide from an expert in the field.

www.abc.net.au

 

[CD Xbow]

First flight of the 'Loyal Wingman'. Loyal Wingman takes flight in landmark moment – Australian Aviation
Three years to get to this point, pretty impressive.

Added: The CoA has announced another $115 million to fund teaming activities, payloads and build another 3 drones, taking the total to 6, making it almost a fleet. The original plan is to have them costing about $3 million a drone, currently it's about $25 million per drone but this is predominately development costs. It will be interesting to see how close they can get to the original figure as production increases.

 

[Werewolf]

Interesting article on drones:

Everything you know about military drones is probably out of date. Here's what's happening now

Military drones are evolving quickly. What do they look like and what role will they play in conflict? Here's a short guide from an expert in the field.

www.abc.net.au

Humans will always be in the loop, but I wonder to what extent will robotics and drones take over the fighting by the end of this century. There's speculation that at least some of the 6th generation fighter planes will be unmanned, the possibility of an unmanned variant of Russia's T-14 tank (unlikely IMO), remote controlled bomb disposal vehicles, etc. I guess robots are taking more and more of our jobs everyday, so why not combat too?

 

[Snake_Baker]

I guess robots are taking more and more of our jobs everyday, so why not combat too?

The workplace shift is compartmentalized and incremental, so it's largely insulated from broad human awareness.

 

[CD Xbow]

It's not new technology, but this video describes the development of the ADF's amphibious capabilities, built around the Canberra class LHD's. It's really is a world class capability. The ships have already been very useful in civilian use for humanitarian and disaster relief. The last half of the vid discusses the Army aspects of it. It's been a huge change for the Army as they never really have had a large amphibious capability.

 

[CD Xbow]

We're talking about guided missiles traveling at over 2km/s

ASPI have a brief article hypersonics, at the end of first para there is a link to a pdf with a detailed report Hypersonic weapons are coming—whether we’re ready or not | The Strategist (aspistrategist.org.au) Worth a read if you are interested. The weapons require expensive materials and present significant engineering challenges. They may also muddy the waters between a nuclear and conventional attack, which increases the risk of triggering a nuclear war, generally regarded as a bad thing.

I still have significant doubts about how well these weapons will be able to hit moving targets. Firstly because the faster you go, the harder it is to manoeuvre (which is discussed in the article) and secondly there are difficulties with using sensors in the lower atmosphere at hypersonic speeds (heat/ionization/micro impact).