Pages

Tuesday, October 30, 2018

Remote Payload

Is technology putting the Air Force out of the close air support business?

That is pretty cool:

In 2018 the marines found that the multitude of sensors on their new F-35B vertical take-off jets could spot ground targets in all weather and at night and pass the target location on to a nearby HIMARS vehicle that would then fire a GMLRS rocket at the target. To maintain maximum stealth capabilities the F-35 carries bombs and missiles internally but the capacity of the internal bomb bays are limited. HIMARS can supply the guided weapons for one or more F-35Bs. Some helicopters are equipped with similar sensors and digital communications systems and can also pass on GPS target data to a HIMARS vehicle. An F-35B could even maintain its stealth by sending the target information via an encrypted burst transmission that is difficult to use for location finding.

An empty--not just an empty-wing--F-35 could essentially be a spotter plane for ground artillery. And some helicopters can do the same thing.

The post also notes the increased range possible for the GMLRS ground-to-ground rocket. So while helicopters could be used for close air support spotting, the F-35 would be needed for deeper targets that helicopters can't get to.

Which is nice. Because I worry that the Air Force will have other higher priority things to do besides close air support. If the plane can simply help ground forces fire their own weapons, perhaps it is more likely to be done. Of course, that Air Force priority issue isn't a problem for Marines who have their own aircraft committed to supporting Marines.

But if F-35s and helicopters can do the job, why couldn't Army drones be equipped for this? If the Army adds HIMARS artillery units to the force pool and equips Army drones that can spot for the artillery unit, couldn't the Army essentially take over close air support?

Wouldn't the Air Force actually be grateful for being freed from this chore?