You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
-Land of the Free
The Pentagon Is Building the "Arsenal Plane," a Giant Flying Battlewagon
2016-02-03
U.S. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter has revealed the existence of a program to develop a so-called "Arsenal Plane." Designed to back up fifth generation fighters such as the F-35 with a large number of conventional weapons, backing up the high-tech fighters with tried-and-true ordinance.

The new plane would supplement the F-35 in places where the fighter-bomber is weak, particularly in weapons carrying capability. The F-35 can only carry a handful of weapons internally‐anything carried on the outside of the aircraft makes it more visible to radar. To make matters worse, that internal storage must be shared between air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons.

n one possible scenario, a pair of Joint Strike Fighters could fly towards a heavily defended enemy ground target armed only with air-to-air missiles for self protection. Several hundred miles behind them an Arsenal Plane--relying on intelligence gleamed by satellites or unmanned vehicles--could launch a pre-planned strike against enemy air defenses. Stealthy and with a range of more than 200 miles, JASSM can be launched from beyond the reach of enemy air defenses, ensuring the Arsenal Plane's safety. Meanwhile, the stealthy F-35s creep closer to the target. After the first round of missile strikes, the F-35s then use their Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) to assess damage to enemy defenses. They could then ask for another round of follow-up strikes on surviving defenses, or request the Arsenal Plane to unleash a barrage on the target itself.

One thing we don't know about the Arsenal Plane is what aircraft the Pentagon has in mind. The Secretary of Defense only alluded to "one of our oldest aircraft platforms." This could refer to the B-52 bomber, which has long range, a midair refueling capability, an internal capability to carry eight JASSMs, and underwing pylons that could carry up to a dozen others. The Arsenal Plane could also be converted older versions of the C-130 Hercules.

Above all, the Arsenal Plane must be affordable, and this suggests taking an existing platform such as the B-52 and performing simple upgrades. The Pentagon has a lot of planes to buy and not a lot of money. The Arsenal Plane is coming at a time when the Air Force is planning to purchase the F-35, KC-46 Pegasus airborne tanker, Long-Range Strike Bomber, and T-X jet trainer. But its presence in the air could conceivably help them all.
Posted by:Sven the pelter

#16  As per #13, does SHIELD + "The Black Widow" aka Not-Laura-Prepon Scarlett Johanssen know???

During the Cold War, it was either an "off-the-shelf" 747 or Galaxy loaded to the max wid various ALCMS + ALBMS/ALGMS.

Capable of thoroughly destroying any small or medium = "average-sized" country on Earth wid both Conventional Warheads andor Nukulaar.

ANOTHER REASON TO LOVE REAGAN-BUSH41.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2016-02-03 20:04  

#15  But does it have port holes?
Posted by: newc   2016-02-03 18:14  

#14  So the F-35 isn't really a fighter - more of a recon?

CF, the F-35 is a multi-role aircraft. Jack of all trades, master at none. It was intended to be cheap (that ship has sailed) and to be led into battle as a bomber by the F-22 air superiority fighter. But there were not enough F-22s built for that scenario to be effective.

Its internal bomb storage is only large enough to hold bombs xor AAMs; it is inadequate to hold both. External mounts would defeat stealth. The F-35 will lose in a dog fight due to its lack of maneuverability. It is supposed to use stealth and long range AAMs to knock out enemy aircraft at a distance (I affectionately call this the "dry gulch" strategy after US westerns where an enemy lines the edges of a gulch and in a surprise attack, shoots down at the people trapped at the bottom). Bummer if the enemy can figure out how to beat stealth.
Posted by: Sven the pelter   2016-02-03 14:25  

#13  Sorta like this?

Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2016-02-03 13:17  

#12  So the F-35 isn't really a fighter - more of a recon?
Posted by: CrazyFool   2016-02-03 13:16  

#11  R-Type
Posted by: Sven the pelter   2016-02-03 12:49  

#10  Drone swarm attacks
Drone swarm defense
Arsenal Planes
Fetal tissue grown into meat

Going right past 1984 and into a redux of R-Type.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2016-02-03 12:30  

#9  The new plane would supplement the F-35 in places where the fighter-bomber is weak, particularly in flying.
Posted by: Skidmark   2016-02-03 12:15  

#8  War zeppelins.
Posted by: SteveS   2016-02-03 10:54  

#7  Last time I checked they were called short range to theater ballistic missiles. Those wouldn't be AF controlled/funded delivery devices. Hey guys, let's duplicate functions.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2016-02-03 08:26  

#6  If it's "affordable", how can the insiders get rich off it? It will never fly. Sorry.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey   2016-02-03 08:03  

#5  Yep, sounds like a way to save face on the F-35 and call it something else.

of course with the new name comes a whole new bunch of crazy crap requirements.

The F-35 is going to look like the Alexander Gorki before it is all over and done with and then it can't fly
Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom   2016-02-03 05:19  

#4  In other words, the arsenal plane is a C-17 loaded to gross max with JDAMs and JASSMs. Install suitable roll on racks & conveyor systems to eject said munitions out the back door.

This concept keeps coming up every 25 years or so. Somehow it goes away just as quickly.

Somebody must have had a heart attack at the last "progress" report on the F35.

Posted by: Nguard   2016-02-03 03:49  

#3  gorb, thinking further along that line, drop A-10s from the B-52s to increase the range.
Posted by: Sven the pelter   2016-02-03 01:34  

#2  Maybe they could also have A-10s back it up for ground support?
Posted by: gorb   2016-02-03 01:32  

#1  F-35s armed only with AAMs. F-35s can't dog fight so they would have to dry gulch any enemy fighters. Why can't you arm the B-17sB-52s with AIM-120s and forget the F-35s?
Posted by: Sven the pelter   2016-02-03 01:21  

00:00