Aussie/Swerve – So if RVL/STOL will be the norm on austere surfaces (defined as what? Anything other than US air base concrete protected by an AM-2 heat/blast-shield?) does anyone know when it will be tested and practiced? And what kind of landing guidance will be used in adverse conditions?

It would also be ironic, given the amount of trouble taken to avoid hot-gas ingestion in VL, if the standard recovery mode were to be RVL or VL on a moving ship.

MrMalaya – Your answer will be found on Pprune, but basically the UK has a “Persian Gulf hot day” standard that is hotter than the KPP spec.

You are forgetting about EODAS. If you are close enough to be in a turning fight, then you are likely within the NEZ of the Aim-120D regardless of the launch angle.

So are the other members of the shooter’s formation.

Neither AIM-120D nor EO-DAS are magic. The former requires more time to turn off-boresight than a thrust-vectoring HOBS missile and I believe the seeker gimbal is +-45 degrees. The latter is trying to maintain a dynamic 3D situational picture with only Az-El position and rate data. Plus the standard missile datalink functions only within the fighter radar FOV, as far as I know.

Re: Austere landings – 2 free internetz awarded to anyone producing a pic of an F-35B doing an ashore VL on anything other than concrete protected by AM-2.

The helo operator will get a bigger shock when MoD sends them the bill.

The engine is not “hobbled”. Performance calculations include a normal margin for deterioration between overhauls, which LM hopes can be whittled away.

Aurcov – AESA development has been continuing in a healthy manner outside the JSF program, as witness APG-63, RACR and the Selex range.

And the F-15 DEWS may share some technology with the JSF fit, but will have an active mode and different antennas.

Spud – Since the AG report apparently schwacks the DND, I’d wait to read it before jumping to conclusions.

And the avionics are not “mostly done” because prototypes have been through some exercises on the FTB. That’s some serious wandering into the Baghdad Bob zone.

Loke – That may be true, insofar as the only way to make the F-35 win a contest is to tailor the rules to it, while making up estimates for the cost of other aircraft. Watch for emerging news…

Spud – You might care to reconsider your “the majority of the avionics work is done” in the light of the fact that IOT&E completion has just slipped another three years, to 2019.

Midwave was originally chosen because it had better, more photo-quality resolution at range. I believe that LW is slightly better for atmospheric transmission, in theory, and some IRSTs* either stayed in LW or went dual-band. I think the LockMart IRST may still be LWIR but Selex Galileo has now gone MWIR-only. And all the unclass missile-defense work with airborne IR tracking has used standard Reaper MWIR hardware.

* Real IRSTs. Not the “I’m not an IRST but I play one on TV” excuses on certain aircraft.