Bad To The Bone...

[ezlead 42]

A Great addition to WOE!!

 

Instead of a bunch of escorted Buff's going in at high altitude,just shoot in a couple of Bone's (low level and fast) and KABOOM,target eliminated.

 

Great Work,Dave!

[+Dave 2,322]

However, there are different reasons why low altitude penetration has fallen out of favor.

 

Do tell, you now have me curious.

 

Sparky and Streak, PM me too, I find that other part of this B-1B thread interesting and would like to see both your views on it.

[Stick 773]

As far as look down shoot down goes, setting up a radar shot is difficult...period...unless you have great intel-ground as well as in the sky; I'll lay my money down that a single B-1 operating out alone could pull the hood over a posse of Flankers and Foxhounds. And even if they get a shot-the envelope they'd have to take that shot would be very small...the window of opportunity would be a guillotine in disguise- ur looking for one enemy in a sky swarming with friendlies. And young pilots-most of the experience in opposing air-forces must be pushing paper.

The only threat I perceive are shoulder-launched SAM's. Everything else is just out there.

But maybe strategies are changing-maybe using something so expensive so recklessly is now frowned upon.

[+Dave 2,322]

Good point Stick. I mean if its in the weeds and its terrain masking. It will be hard to kill.

[+streakeagle 871]

So, you think a lone B-1 could penetrate against AWACS with pulse doppler radar?

The RCS of a B-1 is much lower than a B-52, but it is not a B-2... it can be detected and tracked on radar at respectable ranges.

Beaming a radar to reduce doppler only works well if there is a single radar... a few well-placed AWACS make that tactic useless.

Su-27 flights with active radars would further reinforce that.

 

You don't need a look-down shoot-down missile to beat the B-1... you just need to know where he is.

An interceptor like the Su-27 would have no problem catching up with the B-1 and closing to gun range, or even a WW2 style ramming attack if need be.

A B-1 would be hard pressed to drop a nuclear bomb, or even a nuclear stand-off missile without being detected and shot down first.

 

The goal of low-level penetration was to get in undetected.

Low-level penetration was the stop-gap measure to penetrate until stealth technology could be developed.

As stealth technology is defeated by new sensor technology (no doubt in my mind that it will be if it hasn't been already), we will be back to square one:

How to penetrate defenses without taking high losses.

In the mean time, the F-117 approach of flying high in the dark undectected by radar is the only safe approach against well-defended targets.

 

Any bomb-truck with ECM and decoys available will do against undefended targets.

 

In my opinion, the way to penetrate low level would be with very slow flying aircraft/missiles...

Low doppler no matter where the radar is.

So maybe something like a stealth blimp moving at 50 mph?

Virtually undectable by doppler radar (if you turn the doppler filter down to that low of a speed, you get a lot of clutter).

[+Dave 2,322]

So, you think a lone B-1 could penetrate against AWACS with pulse doppler radar?

 

Yes. And if it did, whose is going to catch it? Red Flag and proven over and over and over again that a B-1 in the weeds running like a raped ape is damn near impossible to defend against. Remember Red Flag is set up do be worse case scenarios.

[column5 63]

I have no desire to hijack this thread in to a political debate...carried to PM...

 

Thanks. The last thing we need is an argument about Jimmah Carter.

[+streakeagle 871]

I don't have access to Red Flag excercise results, nor do I have access to the simulation rules...

So I have no leg to stand on to dispute your Red Flag claim.

 

What I can say is that in high threat environments against enemies that did not have any pulse doppler radar, low-flying, high speed aircraft still took unacceptable loss rates.

Strategic bombers always flew high to avoid losses, ever improving SAMs forced them down low since it was presumed losses at lower alt, but stealth wasn't developed because the USAF just wanted to spend a lot of money...

They didn't want to face the kind of losses encountered in Vietnam and 1973 Yom Kippur due to intense flak/SAMs/fighters.

Pulse doppler radar and AWACS technology have only made the situation worse.

Current Soviet radars were developed to try to detect, track, and kill Tomahawk missiles.

I am sure they were successful to some degree and a B-1 is a whole lot bigger in size and RCS than a Tomahawk.

[Jeremiah Weed 0]

I don't care either way and will be happy with anything (forgive me if this has been brought up) but will be there be "early" IE: Pre START Treaty external weapons but no conventional capability. And "Late" No more external weapons but the capability to drop non nuclear weapons.

 

Also around 91-92 I had this shirt while living at Loring AFB

 

[DWCAce 19]

Loring huh? that's wayyyyyyyy up there. I think from here it's still a 5hr flight :)

[Jeremiah Weed 0]

Loring huh? that's wayyyyyyyy up there. I think from here it's still a 5hr flight :)

 

When Loring closed I moved to Minot. I'm not sure which place was better (worse.) Both were better than Ellsworth though.

[+Dave 2,322]

Both were better than Ellsworth though.

 

I was born on Ellsworth AFB and you know how long my parents stayed around after that.....6 weeks. Only been back once and that passing was through. I don't even claim that state as my legal residence. So my dad would agree with you there.

[+Jug 99]

I don't care either way and will be happy with anything (forgive me if this has been brought up) but will be there be "early" IE: Pre START Treaty external weapons but no conventional capability. And "Late" No more external weapons but the capability to drop non nuclear weapons.

 

Also around 91-92 I had this shirt while living at Loring AFB

 

Sat nuke alert in Buffs at Loring for 4.5 years during the Cold War. Only place I know of where you can hit a golf ball out of the country from the golf course (of course it is only open 2 weeks per year and, yes, being the great golfer I am, it took me three tries). Does the Lobster man still peddle lobster near the front gate? My eldest daughter is a Mainiac, born in Presque Isle in January 1977. Lots of good memories of that real northern tier base, but I don't even want to go back for a visit.

[Jeremiah Weed 0]

Sat nuke alert in Buffs at Loring for 4.5 years during the Cold War. Only place I know of where you can hit a golf ball out of the country from the golf course (of course it is only open 2 weeks per year and, yes, being the great golfer I am, it took me three tries). Does the Lobster man still peddle lobster near the front gate? My eldest daughter is a Mainiac, born in Presque Isle in January 1977. Lots of good memories of that real northern tier base, but I don't even want to go back for a visit.

 

I was at Loring from 88-93, after standing down from the nuclear mission, but gaining the Harpoon and the North Atlantic anti-ship mission.

 

From 88-91 I lived on Loring AFB on Loring Drive pretty much right by the main gate. In 91 moved to the base housing that existed in Presque Isle from when Presque Isle Air Force Base was there. PI was much nicer than Limestone or Caribou, but still not too great.

 

There was no lobster man when I was there, but tons of people selling potatoes in the fall. I haven't been back since I left. Don't care to either.

 

Side note, BUFF crews flew missions mostly in and maintainers maintained A/C from Castle AFB in ODS. The actual A/C from Loring flew from England and Spain with crews/maintainers from other bases. I never understood that.

Edited October 15, 2008 by Jeremiah Weed

[JediMaster 451]

The problem with low-alt flight is that while you're safer from the bigger SAMs and fighters, you're more vulnerable to the IR SAMs and AAA which are far harder to spoof. You also have to worry about CFIT (a problem the Bone has had a very public relationship with over the years) when you're doing 600kts below 500ft!

 

I meant "Mach 2" when I said supersonic because I don't consider "1.2" to be very supersonic.

[+Dave 2,322]

I meant "Mach 2" when I said supersonic because I don't consider "1.2" to be very supersonic.

 

Have you ever been Mach 1.2? Its very supersonic.

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

I read an article once on the possible re-introduction of stuff like barrage balloons near important targets to stop low level aircraft. Strange.

[WDH 0]

Found this sitting around in my aircraft room and hope that the skinning guru's might have a look.B.A.TurleyIII

P.s.Have alot of decals to various military aircraft dating back to 1970.

[+Dave 2,322]

WDH

 

For those to be any use, you have to scan them a super high stupid resolution. Some of my decal scans are in the 100's of MB's.

[Stick 773]

You cant hear an aircraft coming at Mach 1.2,its only when its past and broken all your glass that you know its gone by.A man who can shoot a shoulder launched missile at a Mach 1 plane must have big cohones.

Can an F-22 supercruise at low altitude?

Low altitude penetration may be vulnerable to heat seekers and AAA, but then again Im sure mission planning would take into consideration the various threats to such a strategy- I imagine suitable weapons would be deployed.

So far I am convinced a B-1 can come out of the worst scenario. Remember its job is not to mix it up with the bad guys, but to deliver its payload and get out of dodge.

[WDH 0]

WDH

 

For those to be any use, you have to scan them a super high stupid resolution. Some of my decal scans are in the 100's of MB's.

Dang it!Well thanks Dave..HaHA!

[+Dave 2,322]

Back to what I said about terrain masking. If he is banging along as fast as it can, the guy on the ground is only to get seconds to do anything then its gone. Yes we all the Murphy's law factor will always come into play. i.e. the golden bb, but overall I think a B-1's chances in the weeds are still outstanding.

[jenrick 0]

I'd say the advantage that stealth high level has over low level penetration is the number of detection systems you can be tracked by and weapon systems you can be engaged by. At under about 3K everyone with a rifle has a chance of shooting you down. Good intel and mission planning will keep you from flying over enemy troops concentrations most likely, but all it takes is one lucky guy with a gun. Additionally you've got a much more obvious signature, screaming over head and breaking windows is gonna have some radio reports flying along to the ADC. Nothing you can really do about that. Everyone with a working set of ears can let the ADC know where you're at roughly.

 

A high level penetration with stealth isn't going to tip anyone on the ground off unless they see the aircraft shilouetted against the moon or something. No noise or visible signature when done correctly. Far as detection goes you only got a very limited number of systems that will be able to detect or track you, and of course your stealthiness is designed to prevent that. Additionally there are few fewer aircraft and high altitude missile systems then there are small caliber AA guns, men with rifles, etc if you are detected.

 

Arguably if you're located at high level, the threats are much more capable and deadly (an SU-27 vs. a grunt with an AK-47), but I'd say low level subjects the aircraft to a significantly higher chance of being engaged. This of course is all based on an enemy with some AD capability beyond individual troops with rifles. In the environment we're operating in currently higher level attacks just make sense, as there is almost no threat above small arms range. Contrast that with the Israeli experience in the Yom Kippur war, where the relative lack of concentrated ground fire made it safer to stay out of the higher altitude ranges due to the massive amount of SAM's being deployed.

 

All things being equal I'd say being invisible beats being fast and low.

 

 

-Jenrick

Edited October 16, 2008 by jenrick

[+Dels 649]

All things being equal I'd say being invisible beats being fast and low.

This is true, but even a Herc doing 300kts at 250ft is hard to engage with a MANPADS or Small Arms/AAA. At that height and speed, there's only 12 seconds to engage and you can't hear where it's coming from due to the sound scattering at low levels. A bad guy would basically need to have his SA-7/14/16/18 or ZPU at the ready and know where you're coming from.

 

And that's at 300kts, not 600kts!!!

Edited October 16, 2008 by Dels

[Stick 773]

So much so they bagged an F-117 in Yugoslavia-nothing is ideal!