MDC第二論壇

MDC第二論壇

首頁 | 會員資料 | 註冊 | 最新發表 | 會員列表 | 傳訊 | 搜尋 | 常見問題

所有討論區

軍事討論區

軍事相關問題發問專區

飛行中隊訓練是否用編制內的飛機

請注意: 你必須先註冊才能夠發表回覆.
請按下這裡, 註冊. 註冊一切免費!

視窗大小:

UserName:

Password:

編輯模式:

編輯:

內文:

* HTML is OFF
* Forum Code is ON

表情符號

[quote][i]Originally posted by bystand[/i]
[br]在 airforce-magazine 看到的：

Gordon England, the Pentagon’s No. 2 official, has claimed that the F-22 is "designed for a specific mission" and 183 of them are "enough to do that mission," so USAF should buy no more. His words do not reflect the way the Air Force sees its requirements.
 
England’s comment was a non sequitur. The Air Force does not build a fighter inventory—whether F-22 or F-35—to any "specific mission." It seeks the number needed to maintain 10 rotational air and space expeditionary forces. That number, insists the Air Force, is not 183 Raptors. It is not 250 Raptors. It is not 400 Raptors. It is exactly 381 Raptors.
 
Where does the figure 381 come from? Is it justifiable?
 
In simplest terms, the force-sizing exercise begins with the squadron, the basic unit of organization and building block of an AEF. The Air Force has determined that each AEF requires at least one F-22 squadron for air superiority, interdiction in high threat areas, and so forth.
 
The standard squadron contains 24 combat-coded fighters. The F-22’s Operational Requirements Document validated that metric. The ORD was signed by the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
 
Do the math: 10 squadrons times 24 aircraft equals 240 fighters.
 
Does that mean that 240 F-22s are enough? No. Note that the requirement is for 240 combat-coded F-22s. In order to maintain that many fighters constantly in a combat-ready condition and able to deploy on a wartime mission, the Air Force needs more F-22s for other needs. The question is: How many?
 
The Air Force has analytic formulas for determining the answer. Here they are:
 •For training, 25 percent of the combat-coded force, or 60 more fighters.

•For test purposes, five percent of the total of combat-coded and training aircraft, or 15 more fighters.

•For backup inventory,10 percent of the combat-coded, training, and test aircraft, or 32 more fighters.

•For attrition reserve, 10 percent of everything above, or 34 more fighters.
 
Those four categories, taken together, generate an additional requirement for 141 F-22s. Add up those fighters and the combat-coded ones and you come to—voila—381 fighters.

作者把訓練用飛機單獨列出，不算在 combat-coded 機隊內。難道中隊平時訓練不用自己編制內的作戰飛機？另外有專門編制的單位負責訓練？
[/quote]

按這裡將簽名擋包含在發表中.

T O P I C R E V I E W
bystand	Posted - 09/13/2012 : 06:08:41 在 airforce-magazine 看到的： Gordon England, the Pentagon’s No. 2 official, has claimed that the F-22 is "designed for a specific mission" and 183 of them are "enough to do that mission," so USAF should buy no more. His words do not reflect the way the Air Force sees its requirements. England’s comment was a non sequitur. The Air Force does not build a fighter inventory—whether F-22 or F-35—to any "specific mission." It seeks the number needed to maintain 10 rotational air and space expeditionary forces. That number, insists the Air Force, is not 183 Raptors. It is not 250 Raptors. It is not 400 Raptors. It is exactly 381 Raptors. Where does the figure 381 come from? Is it justifiable? In simplest terms, the force-sizing exercise begins with the squadron, the basic unit of organization and building block of an AEF. The Air Force has determined that each AEF requires at least one F-22 squadron for air superiority, interdiction in high threat areas, and so forth. The standard squadron contains 24 combat-coded fighters. The F-22’s Operational Requirements Document validated that metric. The ORD was signed by the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Do the math: 10 squadrons times 24 aircraft equals 240 fighters. Does that mean that 240 F-22s are enough? No. Note that the requirement is for 240 combat-coded F-22s. In order to maintain that many fighters constantly in a combat-ready condition and able to deploy on a wartime mission, the Air Force needs more F-22s for other needs. The question is: How many? The Air Force has analytic formulas for determining the answer. Here they are: •For training, 25 percent of the combat-coded force, or 60 more fighters. •For test purposes, five percent of the total of combat-coded and training aircraft, or 15 more fighters. •For backup inventory,10 percent of the combat-coded, training, and test aircraft, or 32 more fighters. •For attrition reserve, 10 percent of everything above, or 34 more fighters. Those four categories, taken together, generate an additional requirement for 141 F-22s. Add up those fighters and the combat-coded ones and you come to—voila—381 fighters. 作者把訓練用飛機單獨列出，不算在 combat-coded 機隊內。難道中隊平時訓練不用自己編制內的作戰飛機？另外有專門編制的單位負責訓練？
7 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)
toga	Posted - 09/14/2012 : 14:29:50 猛禽戰機各階段性能提昇次型概述： a. BLOCK 10：初始操作階段構型機，擁有與F-117A類似的初始對地攻擊能力。 b. BLOCK 20：全球打擊能力初始構型機。 * 透過處理器與軟體升級，使CIPS的運算處理能力提升至每秒105億筆指令（早先的說法是猛禽戰機CIPS每秒可處理7億筆指令，並擁有擴充至每秒處理20億筆指令的潛力）。 * 增添高解析度合成孔徑雷達模式。 * 強化電子反制與電子反反制能力。 * 增加雙向語音／資料鏈功能。 c. BLOCK 30／3.1版升級計劃：正在進行中，預定於2010年左右完成。 * 雷達升級為APG-77（V）1版，增加多項空對地模式以及電子硬殺攻擊模式，並擁有識別與以精導武器攻擊多個獨立地面目標的能力。 * 強化戰機ISR與ELINT功能，使其具備監聽與解讀敵方整合防空系統各單位間加密資訊傳輸的能耐。 * 加裝側視被動雷達陣列以提升Information Surveillance Reconnaisance (ISR) 功能。 * 加裝衛星通訊資料鍊以強化長程戰場通訊與ELINT情資傳輸。 * 增添SDB的使用能力（但一次只能同時攻擊兩個地面目標）。 d. BLOCK 35／3.2版升級計劃：預定在2014至2018年間實施。 * 雷達增添新空對地模式 * 換裝TNNT寬頻IP-based超高速戰術資料鏈系統（MADL）～不過由於預算問題，美國空軍考慮取消此一系統換裝計畫。 * 加裝自動地面撞擊迴避系統。 * 強化動態Situational Awareness掌握能力。 * 強化與友軍間的協同作戰與敵我識別能力。 * 強化電戰系統被動式目標定位功能。 * 強化電磁防護能力。 * AIM-120D BVRAAM之使用發射能力整合。 * AIM-9X WVRAAM之使用發射能力整合，不過JHMCS頭盔顯示器仍未能被正式列入升級項目中。 * 多目標同步攻擊能力（能以八枚內掛GBU-39 SDBs同時攻擊八個獨立分離地面目標）。 e. 量產猛禽戰機性能升級批次（註：和量產批次並不完全一致）概述： * F-22A Block 20：36架，僅具備JDAM投射能力，預定部署在佛羅里達州的Tyndall空軍基地做為飛行員轉換訓練機，不會接受Increment 3.1升級計畫，未來唯一的預定改良為引進Auto-GCAS系統以提高飛行安全性。 * F-22A Block 30早期型：63架，預定自2010至2011年起開始接受Increment 3.1升級，具備GBU-39（SDB）投射能力與升級版APG-77雷達（擁有SAR地形繪圖與高速資料傳輸等新功能）；美方目前已找出將Increment 3.2升級版功能整合在F-22A Block 30早期型戰機的Databus之上的方法，未來有可能將之進一步升級為Block 35批次水準。 * F-22A Block 30後期型：86架，在FY2013至FY2015年間接受Increment 3.2升級（升級成本高達80億美金）後改稱為Block 35批次，預定換裝MADL寬頻IP-based超高速戰術資料鏈（但可能因預算問題而取消），強化GBU-39（SDB）多目標標定攻擊能力，自動地面撞擊迴避系統（Auto-GCAS，其預定推廣應用在所有量產型猛禽戰機之上），以及AIM-120D與AIM-9X使用發射能力等新功能。一萌二PAK三聯閃，四代歐風五國潘，十全側衛百戰鷹，成千蟲隼萬國繁。
dasha	Posted - 09/14/2012 : 11:20:19 有的飛機會有一批專門訓練用的,比方Typhoon現在真正能作戰的就是Mk.3/4,T Mk.1與F Mk.2就只能負責訓練,直到F Mk.2消失(通通改良升級完成或退役)為止.F-22早期批次在升級之前大概也比較會拿來訓練用. 但假如批次都一樣,那就會輪流,不一定是特定哪些機號.
Peter Chen	Posted - 09/14/2012 : 02:00:18 這六十架是表示任何時間整個機隊都有大約六十架排訂作訓練任務, 而非有特定六十架拿來做訓練的. 一般我們講妥善率85%, 也不是有85%的飛機永遠不會故障, 壞的永遠是特定那幾架.
bystand	Posted - 09/14/2012 : 00:42:41 quote: Originally posted by Peter Chen ~ ~ 240 0.25 60 300 0.05 15 315 0.1 32 347 0.1 35 381 Do you got it? I have no problem with the mathematics. My question is, why the author use this method to calculate the fleet size, if the flight squadrons could use their own fighter for training. Also, attrition reserve are far less than enough. USAF's attrition rate is about 1% of the fleet size on active duty. If they maintain 240 F-22 actively, they should expect to loss 2~3 each year.
Peter Chen	Posted - 09/14/2012 : 00:15:58 ~ ~ 240 0.25 60 300 0.05 15 315 0.1 32 347 0.1 35 381 Do you got it?
bystand	Posted - 09/13/2012 : 08:37:58 作者將訓練所需的60架戰機單獨列出，加上作戰中隊所需的240架，以及測試，和儲備，得出所需戰機的總數。看起來訓練所用的戰機並不包括在作戰中隊的戰機中。如果訓練和執勤都用中隊編制內的戰機，那為什麼要用文中的方法計算機種的總需求量？
MikeH	Posted - 09/13/2012 : 07:21:43 combat-coded 指的是部隊作戰所需的最低數量以此為基數計算整個機種的需求量並不是說將機隊分為作戰或訓練專用 === 地下軍火庫 http://guns-mikeh.blogspot.com/

MDC第二論壇