NEI b I .r.7 FIGHTE] AIR RAFT ..:, I c .:{ ii o Report of the DefenseScien ce Boafd rce -L at) FO rr p( € oc) :1,'::',;j a o(d o6q a o- t (n oo aE O r-r \+{ o Volume o> o BASICREPORT it{+!r!!q# ]J H fiJ gE Ai . ri :.1 +J(d _ l' : : , t{d ," aua nii xv o M, I Mqy I968 .B >d B'v <(, I M.1 ^,F- t1* 4g ^, ?t3r-. I t{l 6b trt \o "" -(Jo o'. *..-- H H 1/') t'r O > t- 3' ln oddition lo securily requirementsthot opply to this documentond mu$Ae compliedwith, eoch rionsrittol outside the Deportmentof Defensemust h\e @ the prior opprovolof the Office o{ the Director of DefenseReseorch ond Ergineering \o t-r -.44 ro GROUP rrrifrIf .:#ftHF, Downgraded at 3-y rrLl{ltr\LFT declassified afte tt:t-,c',#o€oK6 r,5r4DL_ nc4-1iAti!i$.P.+ FIGHTER ATRCRAFT Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force Volume II: Basic Report I May 1958 l I I I ' r ,;r;.lj 'a:. !,q I I I This document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States with_ !1the meaning of the EspionageLaws, Tiile 18,U. S.C. , Sections?93 and ?94. The trans- mission or the revelation of its contents in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by taw. Office of the Director of Defense Research and Engineering Washington, D. C. --ltt ' -.-, ,-.-.-. Ii. i SEER.ET lllt$Lhsruttll MEMBERSHIP of *:tl!&ii&ri{* DEF'ENSE SCIENCE BOARD TASK FORCE on FIGHTER AIRCRAF'T Dr. Richard Garwin, IBM Watson Laboratory Chairman Dr. Thomas Amlie U. S. Naval Weapons Center Mr. Terrell E. Greene The RAND Corporation Dr. Andrew Longacre Syracuse University Mr. Homer Tasker Tasker Instruments Corporation *.*"F Mr. Warren \4rhite Airborne Instruments Laboratory Staff As sistants Colonel P. H. Van Sickle, Office of the Director of Defense USAF Research and Engineering Major Jarnes S. Creedon, Office of the Director of USAF Operations, Department of the Air Force --',,t,:.*3- f {fimrL$$fff? SEER,ET' \lNtlhSrtrtLrI SEER,ET single missile can perform both functions, at a somewhat greater cost per missile but with increased effectiveness and perhaps reduced overall cost because of the reduced force-mix t14peof problems. As the development program proceeds, it should be possible to decide between a single missile and two missiles for this task. t#;' 3. The report mentions the importance of ECM and other counterg to the surface-to-air missile, and t.Le Board wishes especially to stress the critical nature of this problem. In addition, the air battle between a number of our fighters and a number of enemy fighters cannot be effectively handled from individual aircraft, and adequate cornmunications, AWACS, other theater control and tFF aie of great import. With these comments, the DSB forwards the attached report. ilttlw Robert L. Sproull Chairman, Defense Science Board ...*i+;-r{1.1 t .J:.'-:^l:; t sEeREr {/i|/ff':/tssfft,{.# I i .. t.. SEER,ET 14 May r968 MEMoRANDUM To CHAIRMAN, DEFEN'E scIENcE B.ARD '."4t4#* SUBJECT: Finar rReport of the DSB Task Force on Fighter Aircraft As chairman of the DSB Task Force on Fighter Aircraft, I have honor of submitting the the Finar i::! Force i,uport (sEcRET), an Executive Summary as werl as (CONFIDENTIAL). ifru report largely with is concerned. the next generation of fighter aircraft for the Air Force and the Navy. The report concludes that aircraft with the recom_ ""o"ance' togetherwith 3:|j:3 :n:i:; il-o- newhigh-perrormance ;p" "i",ity ove theexp ec r"d s;;:Iri ii,,! l",fJ.T|! tr Tffi i?, ;:irt r recommendations of t,.e Task Force, as taken ;*t"ltjl from the re- l ' That a development program, foll0wing the basic of prototype procurement approach and tesiing, be irriri"r"a fighter aircraft. now for a new An IOC for the u";i l9Z0s_i. should 'competitive e., before t975_ be sought. prot",yp; grams demonstration flight pro- should be pursued, separately for avionics, for and for engines. airframes, z. The fi.ghter should be designed for to-ground both air-to_air and air_ operations, with the priml."y a""ig' emphasis on air_to- air capabirity. The air-to-air Lapability shourd include combat capab*ity. crose_in The air-to-ground capability primarily should be for visual weapon delivery with homing or area ord.nance sofar as autonomous aircraft in- operations are concerned.. 3' Guided (i. e., steerabre) guns and highly-agile missiles should be provided for forward-hemisphere firing, tests reveal unless flight basic flaws in the concept. airframe Missile seeker, propulsion, and target designati-or, "hoota pro*riau for firing at large angles off missiles the aifcraft nose. R"""_h.misphere should be investigated, ordnance tested, a.ra irr"orp""",.a found in the design if desirable on grounds of utility ".rJ;;;;""*"nce tradeoffs. i/lf,df'r/'$$tri#?SEER.ET \$\tLhsrtrw SEER.ET 4. Head-coupled sights and display should be used to elim-. inate tJre gunsight, radar display, TV display, heads-up display, etc. and provide at the same time flexible all-angle TV viewing and target designation. 5. The avionics should incorporate a pulse-doppler radar with low-PRF mode for ground map, but without either electron- ,':aiidqf.*ji*trtl ic ally- s canned phas ed- ar ray or separ ate te rrain- following radar s. A redundant central digital computer should couple the displays to the weapons, manage stores and do the computations required for flexible weapons deliverY. 6. DDR&E should review those development concept papers for systerns which might be available before or about 1975 to pro- vide planning guidelines for synergistic systems rather than to allow each 7-year advanced system to assume the environment as it was at the beginning of the development cycle. 7. Urgent development commitments should be rnade to: a. navigation systems providing terrain avoidance by navigation b. single-frarne TV for remote target designation and homing c. simple hitting surface-to-surface cruise missiles d. artillery-emplaced, ground and airborne target . designating schemes for horning bombs' e. directed, unmanned reconnaissance and target designation f. effective and flexible air-to-ground ordnance, such as proximity-fuzed air-opening dispenser munitions, cost- reduced bomblet land mines, etc. 8. Development should proceed immediately on a turbofan engine of the zo,000 pound thrust class, with bypass ratio and other design features to be jointly determined by the Nawy and the Air Force. The key to this fi.ghter capability is the head-coupled avionics and flexible ordnance system discussed throughout the report. Detailed exarnples of its use are found in Appendix c of the main report. i .*r-irla SEE R,ET' {.iiNSLA$$tr/ * --ii sEeREr'[t\tLhslutLl! I want to call to youq attention also the extent to which our capability and the effectiveness of even these aircraft can be enhanced by the provision of non-fighterborne systems such as: . adequate theater control and IFF (via AWACS), . theater-range cheap surface-to-surface i$siFfr4.ffi target-hitting cruise missiles, . navigation and communication aids, such as satellite sys- tems or I.ORAN, . adequate target-designating systems, such as laser target designators or artillery-emplaced beacons. I personally wish to emphasize the critical threat that surface-to-air missiles will pose and the necessity for an intensive and enlightened Program on penetration aids and tactics in order to counter these mis siles. ) The Task Force is pleased to have had the opportunity to contribute by I its efforts. ! i '/n/t( t' -%< Richard L. Garwin Chairman, DSB Task tr'orce on Fighter Aircraft t .,r:fq-.:,ij.i AMIAsst{:til# SEER,ET sE c R, Er tLt] \11[tLhSStr PREFACE This report of the Defense Science Boardrs Task Force on Tactical Aircraft is written in response to a request (see AppendixA) from the Director of Defense Research and Engineering for the Defense .1ag{\g}g*+,Sfl Science Board to examine the tactical air-to-air missions and air-to- ground missions for the Navy and the Air Force. As a consequence of the indication that the air-to-air problem should receive priority, the Task Force initially submitted a draft report on this mission area October L96t. Air-to-ground missions were the subject of a further draft added 3 February 1968. The present report supplants the pre- vious drafts, without, for the most part, major changes in conclusions or recommendations. one note of caution-the Task Force has not drawn any overall judgment as to the attrition that soviet missiles of the rgTs-19g5 time frame might cause to tactical aircraft nor as to the corresponding tactics and hardware that must be adopted by tactical aircraft if they are to survive in an environment of advanced surface:to-air missiles. Furthermore, the Task Force has addressed only the characteristics of and the program to obtain an optimum fighter aircraft for the I9?5+ period-the necessary number of such aircraft may be affected by strategic and even political considerations. A brief Executive Summary of this material is issued separately . 'u,."=,,,,,' as Volume I of this report. Both the Executive Summary and this basic {.' report were accepted by the Defense science Board on 8 May 1969. Since the effectiveness as a fighter is the most stringent condition for the aircraft, implications of this role on system design and develop- ment programs are treated first. '. --'.." :.1 .--*,{ ..'',:... I, $ff-H# SEERET' --.--&--4!'.- .- -*,..." ...* SEER,ET CONT ENTS Page Membership of the Defense Science Board Task Force on .r,HSiisSSB Fighter Aircraft 11 Memoranda of Transmittal 111 Preface 1'< I.