In the United States, MC-130J Commando II transport aircraft equipped with missiles

47

According to the American columnist Joseph Trevithick, although the missiles were not actually launched, the US Air Force was able to study the features of using the MC-130J as an aircraft capable of transporting and dropping not only personnel, but also carrying missiles on board.

Northern Edge exercises are held every two years. This year, the US Air Force announced them only on June 4, 2021. Testing the aircraft's advanced capabilities, as noted by Dean Evans, Rapid Dragon Program Manager at the Office of Strategic Planning and Experiments at the US Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), allows for additional capabilities to be explored during intense combat.
Earlier, the US Air Force has already conducted several experiments to drop simulated ammunition from the MC-130J and C-17A Globemaster III as part of a program now called Rapid Dragon.



During the last demonstration at the Northern Edge exercise in 2021, the Air Force Special Operations Command (AFOSC) equipped the MC-130J with a special payload simulator. While in the air, the plane received information about the drop point weapons via an out-of-line data link from the Standoff Ammunition Application Center (SMAC).

But as part of the demo scenario, an external sensor identified a new target and transmitted the information to the command post. Further, the missiles were re-aimed at a new target.

According to Joseph Trevithick, the Rapid Dragon concept itself provides for the use of transport aircraft as "missile trucks", which allows to increase the power of operating armed units during potential high-tech operations against potential adversaries - China and Russia. Also, writes the observer, the new feature allows for a cheaper option for launching missiles, compared to buying traditional bombers.

This could allow a variety of airborne aircraft to deploy a range of weapons en masse via an autonomous roll-down and roll-back pallet system, and could also offer the Air Force an alternative way to increase the weight of the aircraft.

- emphasized Dr. Evans.

Until recently, Trevithick writes, until recently, the US Air Force mainly conducted tests as part of the Rapid Dragon program in order to launch missiles from the battle-proven JASSM family. But this program may well be adapted to other ammunition, as well as other types of payload. It is known that one of the tests involved testing a special pallet loaded with a Cargo Launch Expendable Air Vehicles with Extended Range, or CLEAVER.

At the same time, Trevithick emphasizes, in order to prove the real viability of the Rapid Dragon concept, the US Air Force will have to answer questions about how it will be able to correlate operational requirements for air transportation with requests for additional strike capacity during a real conflict. For example, now the American army is experiencing a certain shortage of air traffic, and in a real conflict, it can significantly increase.

Accordingly, the military will have a choice: either to drop ammunition, or to transport personnel. How will they answer this question? While this is not very clear, but the fact remains: the Rapid Dragon concept, which Trevithick writes about, turns into a real combat opportunity.

47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    8 June 2021 10: 50
    The concept of the arsenal aircraft has been under development for a long time. The main plus is the rapid build-up of forces for the first disarming strike. Given the development of gliding bombs, cruise missiles and UAVs, it is becoming more and more relevant. Transport workers can release entire swarms of the "golden horde" without entering the air defense zone. Air superiority in fighters.

    After gaining air superiority and destroying air defenses, gliding bombs will destroy ground forces and infrastructure. Neither a ground operation nor nuclear strikes are needed to destroy a state. Conditional karabakh multiplied by one hundred.

    1. +2
      8 June 2021 10: 57
      Quote: OgnennyiKotik
      Arsenal aircraft concept

      The main thing in this whole venture - "the plane received information about the drop point of the weapon through a data link out of line of sight from the Standoff Ammunition Application Center (SMAC)."
      1. +2
        8 June 2021 11: 11
        Quote: Bez 310
        data transmission out of line of sight

        I agree. Without this, the concept does not work. Therefore, intelligence is a key element in any war.
        UAVs have brought new opportunities. More precisely, new technologies for transmitting data in real time. Drones have been launched from airplanes since the Second World War and Vietnam, but only now they can provide control commands online.

    2. 0
      8 June 2021 10: 58
      Quote: OgnennyiKotik
      The concept of the arsenal aircraft has been under development for a long time. The main plus is the rapid build-up of forces for the first disarming strike.


      "First Disarming Strike" , against who ?

      Against these ??? -

    3. +1
      8 June 2021 11: 00
      Damage zone С 400, let alone С 500 do not tell me. About MIG 31, I hope you are informed? Yeah, ours will look at this boozer with folded hands, and wait for these "Christmas trees" to come out to the launch area. You can bow before American weapons, but Not to the same degree. At sea, yes, here they are definitely stronger, for the time being.
      1. 0
        8 June 2021 11: 04
        Quote: tralflot1832
        Damage zone С 400, let alone С 500 do not tell me. About MIG 31, I hope you are informed? Yeah, ours will look at this boozer with folded hands, and wait for these "Christmas trees" to come out to the launch area. You can bow before American weapons, but not to the same extent.


        Yes, let them at least smash their foreheads in their idolatry. What is it to us?
        Let such "anti-partisan" systems continue to develop, considering that we are a gas station torn to shreds ...
      2. +8
        8 June 2021 11: 30
        Quote: tralflot1832
        The affected area is C 400, and even more so C 500, do not tell me

        I will.
        Theoretically 400 km.
        But in reality it is only under conditions
        data transmission out of line of sight

        And who will form and transmit this data?
        A pair of ancient A-50s?
        Not funny.
        The flight range of the JASSM mentioned here, by the way, is 900 km, which is twice the range of the S-400.
        1. 0
          8 June 2021 11: 47
          Jacket in stock (Konstantin), can you explain to me why we are building over-the-horizon radars? belay
          1. +3
            8 June 2021 11: 52
            Quote: sabakina
            Can you explain to me why we are building over-the-horizon radars?

            To warn of a missile attack by ICBMs and MRBMs. As air defense, they are of no value.
            1. 0
              8 June 2021 11: 57
              Is that true, they see only the fire and flames of ICBM and MRBM missile engines? belay
              1. +3
                8 June 2021 13: 04
                Quote: sabakina
                Is that true, they see only the fire and flames of ICBM and MRBM missile engines? belay


                The thing is that ZGRLS cannot give target designation in any way.
                No way.
                Accordingly, the maximum that will turn out is to detect on the display a spot of marks at a distance with an accuracy of plus or minus 50-100 km, as in the range. and in the direction.
                And the launch and guidance of missiles so far can only be conducted by the forces of the individual air defense systems themselves.
                We do not yet have over-the-horizon guidance systems using external target designation.
          2. +8
            8 June 2021 12: 02
            Quote: sabakina
            Why are we building over-the-horizon radars?

            To increase your information awareness.
            They will help to notice the approaching armada of aircraft from a distance and wake up the personnel of the air defense missile systems and interceptor pilots. But they are no longer able to aim missiles at the target.
            And our missiles, as I have already written, will not reach the launch point of the JASSMs.
            Now, if there were a sufficient number of AWACS aircraft and, even better, such drones capable of constantly monitoring the air at a distance of 1-2 thousand km from our borders, then yes.
            1. 0
              8 June 2021 12: 23
              Is that true, we see ICBMs, we see the Fi-35, we don't see the CD? Listen, I'm not Beria, but I can ...
              1. +4
                8 June 2021 12: 36
                Quote: sabakina
                We see ICBMs, we see Fi-35, we don't see the CD?

                We see ICBMs only at the moment of launch, that is, a huge fool of several tens of meters.
                I don’t know about Fi35, but it is also very large and in the meter range it’s not stealth.
                A cruise missile is an order of magnitude smaller than an aircraft and 2 orders of magnitude smaller than an ICBM, even without taking into account stealth, it is simply small.
                But even if the over-the-horizon radar station sees the CD “out there,” so what?
                Well, even target designation will give (which is impossible by definition, but you can, for example, launch rockets with autonomous homing systems for good luck "somewhere there"). The number of approaching missiles will still be much greater than our few air defense systems can fire.
                Even if each C130 fires a couple of missiles, plus thousands of regular bombers, it will be even more than a thousand missiles. Do we have that many antiaircraft guns?
                1. -2
                  8 June 2021 12: 44
                  Kostya, where do you serve? bully
                  1. +1
                    8 June 2021 12: 49
                    Quote: sabakina
                    where do you serve

                    I am a pensioner. What about?
          3. -1
            8 June 2021 12: 08
            I forgot it on purpose, probably!
      3. 0
        8 June 2021 11: 31
        Ours, too, were bombed from transport workers quite recently. This means that the concept has the right to life and can justify itself.
      4. +6
        8 June 2021 12: 05
        What prevents to add, on the one hand, the number of combat-ready MiG-31s, S-400 batteries, and, on the other hand, the number of S-130 alone (offhand about 600 pieces) and S-17 (about 200) in service with NATO ? But you don't even really need to redo them, just load them with "smart" pallets with "smart" missiles and reset them at the right point. F-15EX (22 AIM-120 on each), EA-18 Growler are flying nearby, clogging all the surroundings with directional interference, and of course the KC-135. Weird alignment, kmk. request
        1. +2
          8 June 2021 12: 34
          Quote: Torvlobnor IV
          F-15EX (22 AIM-120 on each), EA-18 Growler are flying nearby, clogging all the surroundings with directional interference, and of course the KC-135.

          Growler is in the Navy, in the Air Force on the F-15/16 they hang electronic warfare systems for suppression.
          AWACS still need to be added and the F-16/35 group in reserve. Naturally, the F-22 is against serious customers.
  2. +3
    8 June 2021 10: 51
    "... use a range of weapons in massive okay ... "
    Keyword explaining why all this is needed. That is, during a global war, when the main combat aircraft and air defense of the opponents are exhausted, there is an opportunity to bomb from transport aircraft.
    1. 0
      8 June 2021 11: 15
      The transporters still need to survive it, the kerdyk will come to space navigation, the rockets will be guided by hand! wassat
      1. +2
        8 June 2021 11: 50
        Andrey S., I think after the big "badabum" we will have to remember about spears, bows and arrows ...
      2. +3
        8 June 2021 11: 52
        Quote: tralflot1832
        hand the rockets will be guided!

        And what, the B52 or the F16 missiles are directed in some other way?
        No, in the same way, from external target designation. And if communications and navigation are kirdyk, then neither Hercules nor F16 will be able to launch anything anywhere.
        1. +3
          8 June 2021 12: 29
          It always surprises me with how easily all space satellites go astray, although there is so much space debris in orbit that you already think that astronauts are suicide bombers. Firstly, you destroyed military satellites, you think that commercial ones do not carry dual-use equipment or scientific ones. The British Admiralty before PVM paid naval companies to strengthen the performance characteristics of their ships. I think that in 100 years nothing has changed in the Pentagon and NASA can also pay extra to businessmen.
  3. -5
    8 June 2021 10: 56
    which allows to increase the power of operating armed units during potential high-tech operations against potential adversaries - China and Russia.

    Again old songs - the main thing is to cram the word "high-tech" laughing And do not care that you have a target against a developed air defense system - a slow-moving, hefty transport aircraft, besides flying very high (otherwise you will throw off the hell) - that is, it can be seen from afar.
    But what about the songs about the fact that there is only one panacea against developed air defense - stealth? laughing Oh, on stealth, everything was cut before you, do you need to come up with a new plot?
    In general, the concept is not new, they only sharpened it to finish off the enemy with the already absent air defense, and there the whole point is that it is cheaper than a bomber, and there are no bombers - B-1b is over, for example))) But after scratching a turnip, we decided to compose a fairy tale, that this is not from poverty, but on the contrary - oh, how high-tech!
    Give corn? A high-tech aircraft with a minimum of metal, that is, stealth, low-noise, and also with a shortened take-off and landing, that is, STOVL! Well this is how much you can cut if you pass it off as a new development!
    1. +5
      8 June 2021 11: 36
      Quote: Cowbra
      Give corn? High-tech aircraft with a minimum of metal, i.e. stealth,

      By the way, the corn workers have done quite well in the recent war in Karabakh.
      So your joke failed.
      And no high technologies are needed to launch long-range missiles on external target designation, any corn truck will do with a suitable carrying capacity.
      We load our Calibers onto boats, are they somehow better?
      Main data exchange system.
  4. -5
    8 June 2021 11: 00
    The Americans continue to prepare for war with civilians or with very weak armies ... Or just the goal is to cut the budget
    1. +3
      8 June 2021 13: 10
      Quote: Growlers
      The Americans continue to prepare for war with civilians or with very weak armies ... Or just the goal is to cut the budget


      Again agitation ...
      Again we see not what it really is.

      The Americans in no way remove their information security, Bombers with huge stocks of missiles ...

      They additionally add the number of carriers of these same guided bombs and missiles ..
      For the prohibitively cheap option of tripling-quadrupling the volley, this is quite important and valuable.
      This is the dream of any general.
      And if a cut was needed, then hundreds of bombers were additionally created.
      And then the penny costs for the modernization of communication systems, for the updated dumped carts, and for the weekly retraining of pilots ...
      That's all.
      Pennies.

      And you, like a training manual - about cutting ...
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. -1
        10 June 2021 15: 59
        "Sawing" in the United States is present like in no other country. Do not be offended, this is an American essence. And such a "flying cow" is indisputably good against a weak, very weak opponent. With a little bit of existing air defense, he is not a tenant ...
        1. -1
          10 June 2021 20: 43
          Quote: Growlers
          "Sawing" in the United States is present like in no other country. Do not be offended, this is an American essence. And such a "flying cow" is indisputably good against a weak, very weak opponent. With a little bit of existing air defense, he is not a tenant ...

          Why did you choose the nickname "Growler"?
          When you talk about cuts in the US, have you ever participated in 44 and 225-FZ?
  5. 0
    8 June 2021 11: 05
    the military will have a choice: either to dump the ammunition, or to transport the personnel.
    Aircraft are created for certain functions - bombers are bombed, transporters are transporting l / s, b / t and other cargo. Of course, if someone is experiencing a shortage of any kind, then in wartime you can compensate for others. For some reason, I remembered the Second World War, when the U-2 training biplane became a night bomber and did an excellent job with it. But this was prompted by the difficult situation at the front and the lack of aircraft. And the Americans themselves admit that they have problems with transport aircraft, so why fence a vegetable garden?
    1. +3
      8 June 2021 11: 23
      Quote: rotmistr60
      And the Americans themselves admit that they have problems with transport aircraft,

      We would have such "problems". They have 2 times more transport aviation than Russia, China, India combined. It is without allies.
      1. -1
        8 June 2021 11: 53
        And what of all this can be lifted into the air?
        1. +2
          8 June 2021 11: 55
          Quote: nPuBaTuP
          And what of all this can be lifted into the air?

          In peacetime, 30-60% of the entire fleet of equipment is maintained in combat condition. With bringing to 95-98% readiness in the pre-war period.
    2. +3
      8 June 2021 11: 48
      Quote: rotmistr60
      bombers are bombing, transporters are transporting l / s, b / t and other cargo.

      Yes, how bae ...
      Bombers are also just transporting cargo to the drop point.
      They just have their own target search tool.
      And if the target is out of sight of this attachment, then what is it needed.
      He brought the cargo to the point, received information from an external source, transferred it to the cargo and that's it, the flight is over.
    3. +3
      8 June 2021 13: 11
      Quote: rotmistr60
      the military will have a choice: either to dump the ammunition, or to transport the personnel.
      Aircraft are created for certain functions - bombers are bombed, transporters are transporting l / s, b / t and other cargo.


      How does the standard function of BTA aircraft in the form of dropping airborne cargoes differ from dropping bogies with missiles?
  6. +5
    8 June 2021 11: 45
    The vegetable garden is quite understandable.
    Provide an increase in the mass of the volley using improvised methods.
    For the same JASSM, no matter from what carrier it was thrown off, from F16 or from a flying shed, it will fly its thousand kilometers and get to where the source of "external information" directed it.
    How does a bomber differ from a conventional transport aircraft, but only a target detection system? And if there is a separate aircraft / UAV for this, and the target is out of sight, everything is much easier.
    And any advanced air defense system can be pierced with stupid numbers, which the Palestinians have perfectly demonstrated quite recently.
    I am afraid to even imagine what would have happened if 5000 missiles had arrived in Moscow at once. We don't have so many not only S-400s, but also Bukov and Torahs.
    1. 0
      8 June 2021 17: 45
      Quote: Jacket in stock
      I'm afraid to even imagine what would have happened if 5000 missiles had arrived in Moscow at once.
      And what would happen from these 5000 missiles to such a monster as Moscow, taking into account the air defense? Yes, and do you know how many air defenses defending Moscow can shoot down? - It's one thing.

      Well ... 5000 missiles to cities from 100 thousand. population without air defense floor still all right. There are more than 100 cities with a population of 170 thousand or more in Russia alone. at a minimum, 5000 * 170 = 850000 missiles are needed - and that does not mean that there will be complete destruction.

      850000 missiles - no one else's trousers. And what, are we going to sit still and not replenish our arsenal ?! belay

      In the meantime, this car with missiles flies, it will be shot down ten times.
      1. +1
        9 June 2021 03: 33
        Quote: Dali
        In the meantime, this car with missiles flies, it will be shot down ten times.

        Who will shoot down?
        What?
        And, most importantly, why?
        Well, a dozen other transport workers are flying a thousand kilometers from your border, and suddenly you flew to shoot them down ... why, why.? Just like that, you wanted to shoot ....?
        not funny.
      2. 0
        9 June 2021 03: 41
        Quote: Dali
        And what would happen from these 5000 missiles to such a monster as Moscow, taking into account the air defense? Yes, and do you know how many air defenses defending Moscow can shoot down?

        No, I don't know. I can only roughly imagine.
        What would have happened? - see above ... here a friend made a hysteria because two missiles and one drone in Israel did fly and hit. And in Moscow there are also refineries and chemical plants and thermal power plants and so on, so on, so on ...
        Interception of a target by an anti-aircraft missile is a probabilistic thing, and this probability is obviously not 100%.
      3. +1
        9 June 2021 04: 17
        Quote: Dali
        how many air defenses defending Moscow can shoot down?

        And let's count.
        Around Moscow, 20 divisions of the country's air defense forces are in constant readiness. The air defense of the ground forces can be ignored, they usually sleep, and by the time they wake up, the missiles have already arrived.
        there are 6-10 launchers in each division, we will count to the maximum. On the launcher, also if to the maximum, there are 3 large rockets and 4 small ones. Suppose that half of the large rockets are "diamond" 40N6E rangefinders, which no one in their right mind will shoot at "lead pipes". In total, there are 400 medium and small missiles, plus 150. At each position there is another pair - three Armors, this is another 1200 very small missiles.
        During a raid, half of the divisions will be on the wrong side, they can be ignored. A total of 800-900 missiles. two targets are fired at each target, a total of 400-450 missiles were fired at. The probability of hitting S-400 missiles is approximately 0,9, and they can theoretically shoot down 100-130 missiles. Carapaces have Everything worse, let's say 0,97, that's 300 more missiles. Ideally.
        A total of 400 missiles in one raid.
  7. +1
    8 June 2021 12: 59
    Accordingly, the military will have a choice: either to drop ammunition, or to transport personnel. How will they answer this question? While this is not very clear, but the fact remains: the Rapid Dragon concept, which Trevithick writes about, turns into a real combat opportunity.


    It is strange that the author of the news is not very clear.
    As if everything in this world is single-tasked, straightforward and does not tolerate variations.
    If the BTA aircraft and the BTA crews are prepared both for the transportation of personnel, for the transportation and landing of cargo, they have communication and control systems, as well as the appropriate skills, then why cannot it be used for overlapping options?
    For some reason, our VTA practiced bombing and even firing from stern cannons.

    Or that moment at the beginning of the landing operation, when the coast is being cleared from the resistance forces, why can't the VTA aircraft be missile and bomb arsenals for clearing? and only then, after the cleansing process, the same planes are loaded with troops and transported them ..
  8. +2
    8 June 2021 14: 54
    Question: Why not turn the transport into a "super fighter"? It can carry a more powerful radar (even more than one), and air-to-air missiles "more distant" (fortunately, the internal volume allows, and you can cram missiles with a margin), and how much it can be in the air - no fighter dreamed of it.
    1. +1
      8 June 2021 20: 34
      The trick is that the F-15 fighter is almost the size of the An-26, only disappointing with its wingspan.
  9. -1
    9 June 2021 11: 39
    Accordingly, the military will have a choice: either to drop ammunition, or to transport personnel.

    Exactly like on the Mi-24. There, too, you could choose only one.
  10. 0
    10 June 2021 07: 03
    The new concept is to load civilian vehicles with an arsenal. For example, our barges carry the "Club-K" container.
    And hundreds of such barges ply the seas and okyans.