cmb56
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:30 pm

Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:23 pm

I have a question that has origins in the Vietnam war. At the time the rules of engagement for American fighter pilots over the North required a visual ID before they could engage enemy Migs. Given the very political environment that any conflict will bring with it could these same rules be impossed by a political leadership more worried about perception that the lives of our own pilots. Could the president by a rules of engagement decree simply negate the value of stealth? If an F-22 had to visually ID the SU-27s or Mig-29s it was hunting then most if not all the stealth value is gone and you are stuck in an old fashioned dog fight and the guy that gets inside gets the kill.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11006
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:12 pm

Yes, the President can set the ROE for any conflict during his administration. You may remember that President Clinton restricted bombing operations to 15,000' or above as a ROE. He did not want any US aircraft shot down, and possibly have a POW. Of course, that did not work very well, as the US bombed the Chinese Embascy, unintentionally. Also the Serbs ripple fired SAMs and successfully shot down a F-117 stealth fighter.

Other ROEs that contributed to the shoot down were all aircraft flying the same routes and times every day.
 
11Bravo
Posts: 1679
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:54 am

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Mon Aug 02, 2010 12:57 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 1):
Of course, that did not work very well, as the US bombed the Chinese Embascy, unintentionally.

The bombing of the Chinese Embassy had nothing to do with the ROE or the altitude restrictions. The target was misidentified. The attack was very accurate, they just picked the wrong target prior to the mission.
WhaleJets Rule!
 
BMI727
Posts: 11123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:36 am

Quoting CMB56 (Thread starter):
Could the president by a rules of engagement decree simply negate the value of stealth?

In a word, yes.

Quoting CMB56 (Thread starter):
If an F-22 had to visually ID the SU-27s or Mig-29s it was hunting then most if not all the stealth value is gone and you are stuck in an old fashioned dog fight and the guy that gets inside gets the kill.

While the "first look, first shot, first kill" mantra of the F-22 would be history, the Raptor is a more than capable dogfighter and should be able, with a well trained pilot, to at least match the Flankers and probably beat the MiG-29.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 1):
Also the Serbs ripple fired SAMs and successfully shot down a F-117 stealth fighter.

There was also the fact that the Serbs used visual spotters, and the lack of electronic warfare aircraft also worked against the Nighthawk. Furthermore, if I recall correctly, just as in Bosnia some years before, the allies fell into a fairly predictable pattern of attack routes in the area.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
Burkhard
Posts: 1916
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:34 pm

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Mon Aug 02, 2010 12:37 pm

Wasn't the interpretation of passive signals in large computer networks by western hacker scene another fact in this?
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Mon Aug 02, 2010 1:53 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 1):
You may remember that President Clinton restricted bombing operations to 15,000' or above as a ROE.

Do you have ANY evidence to back this up??

Because from what I've read, it was General Short who made that determination. You need to stop throwing out bogus statements.

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 2):
The bombing of the Chinese Embassy had nothing to do with the ROE or the altitude restrictions. The target was misidentified. The attack was very accurate, they just picked the wrong target prior to the mission.

Exactly. I have no idea where he got the idea that the bombing was a result of piss poor ROE. I think it's pretty obvious that he's more interested in grinding a political ax.  

In fact, SecDef Cohen later said, "...one of our planes attacked the wrong target because the bombing instructions were based on an outdated map." I know of no investigation that fingered the ROE as the cause.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/340735.stm

Quoting CMB56 (Thread starter):

Anyway, it would be nice to think that after the lessons of Viet Nam, politicians would know to minimize their meddling in military operations. Micromanaging the fine details from the Situation Room has never been a wise move.

...But we still manage to trip over our own feet. Hell, Donald Rumsfeld was one of the biggest micro-managers to run the Pentagon. He literally got involved in which specific units would/would not deploy to Kuwait, for the invasion of Iraq. The idea of the SecDef taking charge of the TPFDL is the epitome of a broken system.
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6688
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Mon Aug 02, 2010 2:29 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 1):
Also the Serbs ripple fired SAMs and successfully shot down a F-117 stealth fighter.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 3):
Furthermore, if I recall correctly, just as in Bosnia some years before, the allies fell into a fairly predictable pattern of attack routes in the area.

The primary reason, no need to get up to the presidential level, there are enough "managers" at the lower levels to mess things up.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 5):
Anyway, it would be nice to think that after the lessons of Viet Nam, politicians would know to minimize their meddling in military operations. Micromanaging the fine details from the Situation Room has never been a wise move.

When the B-52 bombing campaign of the North began it was not the politicians back home who decided that the slow turn was the only manuever to get out of dodge.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 5):
...But we still manage to trip over our own feet.

Unfortunate that this still occurs, my simple solution is that commissioned officers have to serve in the field for at least 5 years before being kicked up the promotion ladder to desk jobs, now they may mess up the day to day operation of the military but hopefully the 5 years will train and or weed out the "boarderline" cases. Simplistic I know, but we cannot always rely on wars to bring better leaders to the fore, uncessary casualties always preceed such events.
 
kingairta
Posts: 454
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:24 pm

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Mon Aug 02, 2010 3:53 pm

Back on subject. I'd suspect that the stealth craft would still have the upper hand if it had to visually identify the target. Because he knows where the target is at and has the surprise advantage.
 
HaveBlue
Posts: 2108
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 3:01 pm

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Mon Aug 02, 2010 7:47 pm

I like CBM56's point... we've long had capabilities that we weren't allowed to use. Hell the F-14 could track 24 targets at once and fire 6 Phoenix missiles simultaneously at 6 different targets from over 100 miles away... but do you think we'd ever get to use it that way? Nope, nothing short of a full on war with the USSR and if we had tons of Soviet bombers headed this way. The point is that even with all that capability at hand, it was useless most of the time because ROE's state you have to 'see' the target and make sure it isn't friendly. The fact is a Tomcat could kill an enemy long before the enemy would know a F-14 was there... but it would never be allowed to.

I think this handicaps the F-22 as well... it doesn't matter how far away he can kill a percieved enemy, he's still going to have to get close enough to 'see' that he's not one of ours.
Here Here for Severe Clear!
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2639
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:38 am

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 3):
While the "first look, first shot, first kill" mantra of the F-22 would be history, the Raptor is a more than capable dogfighter and should be able, with a well trained pilot, to at least match the Flankers and probably beat the MiG-29.

Likely in this case you would use the F22 as backup to older frames. So if some F16's ID a formation of planes as hostile, the F22 can then support from BVR.
 
cmb56
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:30 pm

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:27 pm

Sounds like an interesting tactic. Sort of like the Sptifires take on the Me-109s while the Hurricanes attack the bombers. But if the friendlies and bad guys start to mix it up how do you support that from BVR. The same rule then comes into play. Visually identification required. I also don't think anyone in the USAF wants to consider a situation where the F-22 is simply a "goood match" for any enemy aircraft. That sounds like a kill ratio of 1 : 1.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11006
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Thu Aug 05, 2010 3:44 pm

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 9):
Likely in this case you would use the F22 as backup to older frames. So if some F16's ID a formation of planes as hostile, the F22 can then support from BVR.

I doubt the F-22 would fire from BVR, if friendly F-16s were close enough to get a visual ID on the enemy. The F-16s would simply take the kill shot themselves.

Quoting CMB56 (Reply 10):
Sounds like an interesting tactic. Sort of like the Sptifires take on the Me-109s while the Hurricanes attack the bombers. But if the friendlies and bad guys start to mix it up how do you support that from BVR. The same rule then comes into play. Visually identification required. I also don't think anyone in the USAF wants to consider a situation where the F-22 is simply a "goood match" for any enemy aircraft. That sounds like a kill ratio of 1 : 1.

Even though the Sptifires were mostly sent after the Bf-109s and the Hurricanes went mostly for the Ju-88s, each would not pass up an attacking German aircraft they were close to. The Hurricanes, although never given as much credit as the Spitfire was, was still a good dogfighter and could hold its own against the Bf-109s.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2639
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:46 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 11):
I doubt the F-22 would fire from BVR, if friendly F-16s were close enough to get a visual ID on the enemy. The F-16s would simply take the kill shot themselves.

Unequal numbers, and the problems of maintaining contact with modern highspeed jets make BVR still very critical even if the intial contact is capible of winning 1 on 1. The stealth and speed of the F22 would be well used to assist the more numerous conventional fighters. Certainly we don't have enough F22 to leave everthing to it.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6688
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Sat Aug 07, 2010 3:49 pm

Best equipment for any stealth a/c is a visual sighting system like what was on the F-14's unless one is in an all out war, ROE will always negate the value of stealth as positive ID's will be required. A long range visual tv system in this digital age with proper magnification would be priceless on any a/c which carries BVR weapons and has some stealth capabilities.
 
HaveBlue
Posts: 2108
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 3:01 pm

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Sat Aug 07, 2010 9:46 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 13):
Best equipment for any stealth a/c is a visual sighting system like what was on the F-14's unless one is in an all out war, ROE will always negate the value of stealth as positive ID's will be required. A long range visual tv system in this digital age with proper magnification would be priceless on any a/c which carries BVR weapons and has some stealth capabilities.

Agreed, 100%.
Here Here for Severe Clear!
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7695
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: Can The President Negate The Value Of Stealth?

Sat Aug 07, 2010 10:31 pm

It's not just some political/PR move not to allow shoot first ask questions later, there are situations where this would lead to a war you don't want to fight.

And what would each pilot think, knowing any of his allies (including his coworkers) could shoot him if there is a doubt about his ID ?
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Florianopolis and 7 guests