jessmo24I got threatened with a BAN for not posting links!
surely the MODS will not show partiality, and hold you to the same standard that they hold me.
jessmo24Links please showing how the F-35s thruts is always mach 1 in verticle mode. I also wanna see the 1700 degrees numvber
jessmo24Thats alright then …copy paste from further down page…
VTOL Pads
The F-35B, or short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL), version of the JSF is capable of both
vertical take-off (VTO) and VL, although take-off will typically be via STO. For landing, VL (or
VTOL) pads will be used. This pads will be exposed to 1700ºF and high velocity (Mach #1)
exhaust. This exhaust will melt the top surface of asphalt pavements, and is likely to spall the
surface of standard airfield concrete pavements on the first VL. Therefore high heat resistant
materials are required for the pavement and for the joint sealants. At the present time there are no
identified sealants that can survive a significant number of VLs, and the pads shall be constructed
using continuously reinforced concrete (CRC). The pads shall have a minimum 96-ft by 96-ft (or
100-ft by 100-ft) CRC center, with continuous reinforcement in both directions to insure that all
cracks and joints remain closed (the center is surrounded by a 50-ft wide paved area). High heat
resistant materials for the pavement have been identified but are still being tested.”sounds cheap to operate 😉
can you post a link please. your info doesnt jive with the link I posted
significant shortfall.”
Trautman acknowledged the JPO concerns about heat and noise but said neither was a game changer nor a serious threat to the program. Heat is “not a show stopper,” the general said, noting the Harrier generates about 1,470 degrees versus 1,500 degrees for the F-35.
On the noise front, Trautman said the F-035 actually is a bit quieter for those standing near the airplane and he said the aircraft has been subject to more noise testing than any previous aircraft. It is, he said, a “non-factor” for the program, though noise is always a management issue for ground and carrier crews.
Read more: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/07/19/jsf-heat-woes-being-fixed-trautman/#ixzz0z9txcvxN
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/07/19/jsf-heat-woes-being-fixed-trautman/#ixzz0z9eajM1P
jessmo241. The F-35 Rear nozzle only puts out about 18k lbs of thrust in stovl mode
2. This is only a few degrees hotter than a AV-8
3. The real issue stems from the IPP which faces downwards and produces enough heat to spall concrete.
4. The IPP produces start up power, and aux power while on the tarmac.
5. The IPP issue is being fixed
London — Changes are being made to the integrated power package (IPP) on the Marine’s F-35 that should limit heat damage to carrier decks and other surfaces, Lt. Gen. George Trautman, deputy commandant for aviation, told DoD Buzz in an exclusive interview one day before the start of the 2010 Farnborough Air Show.
“We have made the decision to adjust the IPP,” he said Sunday, reshaping the nozzle so that the enormous thrust comes out in an oval shape instead of the more highly focused circle now used. The oval “will resolve that problem for almost all surfaces,” he said.
Joint Program Office documents detailed concerns that the STOVL version of the F-35 was too hot and too noisy for carriers and too hot even for some asphalt surfaces
Read more: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/07/19/jsf-heat-woes-being-fixed-trautman/#ixzz0z9eajM1P
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/07/19/jsf-heat-woes-being-fixed-trautman/
6. The other thrust in stovl mode comes from the 18k of cold thrust coming from the lift fan. The area near the front of the landing pad isn’t hot
Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney have successfully performed the first start of an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft test engine, using an integrated power package (IPP) that the functions traditionally performed by the auxiliary power system, emergency power system, and environmental control into a single system. The system was used to start a Pratt & Whitney F135 short-takeoff/vertical-landing (STOVL) engine at the company’s advanced test facility in West Palm Beach, FL. The IPP is a subsystem of the F-35 Power and Thermal Management System (PTMS).
The JSF program has targeted the successful IPP engine start as a major milestone since the beginning of the System Development and Demonstration phase of the program in 2001. The achievement paves the way for additional development testing in preparation for the F-35’s first flight in 2006, and comes about a month after the Pratt & Whitney F135 System Development and Demonstration (SDD) program successfully completed the post test Critical Design Review (CDR) by the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Joint Program Office (JPO). The JPO review found that the F135
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/jsfs-f135-engine-meeting-milestones-0477/
jessmo24LWIR sensors have greater detection range because they work in the band from 8-12 microns. But they give up resolution which is critical for combat identification. This forces you to use ESM or SAR to ID the potential target. If you use SAR, the target could detect it using his ESM and would know your bearing and approximate range based upon signal strength. In other words, you have lost the advantage of a passive detection.
DJ while there is some truth to that, I think the bottom line is that the AESA is more than capable of giving the F-35 a firing solution before enemy ESM ever come into the mix. In fact in the demo videos the F-35 seemed to have some kind of auto response mode for Sead
jessmo24Air Force urged to consider Navy F-18s
By Megan Scully CongressDaily August 6, 2009
As the Air National Guard grapples with an impending fighter jet shortfall that will threaten its ability to protect U.S. airspace, its supporters in Congress and the Pentagon want the Air Force to consider all possible solutions — even buying Navy F-18s to fill the gap.
Lawmakers and other National Guard boosters are becoming increasingly frustrated with the Defense Department and the Air Force, charging that officials have no workable plan to deal with the Guard’s aging fleet.
They argue that 80 percent of the Air Guard’s F-16s, which fly the majority of Air Sovereignty Alert missions, will retire years before their replacements are ready, depleting units of the aircraft they need to secure domestic airspace.
E-MAIL THIS ARTICLE PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION COMMENT ON THIS STORY
RELATED STORIES
* General: Air National Guard needs new fighter jets 07/29/09
* Conferees face multiyear fighter decision 07/27/09
* Former Defense leaders call for simpler acquisition system 06/03/09
* Wear and tear adds up on military aircraft 03/21/08
The workhorse F-15 fleet isn’t in much better shape, having been grounded for three months after one broke apart in November 2007 during a training mission over eastern Missouri.
According to a Government Accountability Office report released this year, the Air Force will not have viable aircraft after fiscal 2015 at some of its 18 ASA sites in the United States — 16 of which are run by the Guard. By 2032, two sites will still not have viable aircraft for the mission.
“Despite the Pentagon’s head-in-the-sand attitude, I’m exploring any and every option on the table to address the looming fighter shortfall,” said Sen. Christopher (Kit) Bond, R-Mo., co-chairman of the Senate National Guard Caucus.
Bond and others have proposed buying “4.5-generation” fighters – advanced versions of current fighters that are less costly than the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter – as one option that could solve the problem quickly.
Across the Capitol, the House has passed a fiscal 2010 defense authorization bill that includes an amendment by Rep. Frank LoBiondo, R-N.J., requiring Defense Secretary Robert Gates to review buying advanced F-15s, F-16s and F-18s for the Air Guard.
“To me, it’s a very critical problem that needs immediate attention in order to avert a real catastrophe in eight to 10 years,” LoBiondo said.
Both the F-15s and F-16s are still in production for international customers. But there is concern that advanced versions of the F-15, a Boeing Co.-built plane with a price tag that could top $70 million, would be cost-prohibitive. As for Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-16, the manufacturer is expected to focus its U.S. efforts on its F-35 program.
While neither plane is out of the question, the Navy’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, another Boeing plane, has emerged as an appealing, though unorthodox, alternative.
Boeing has given the Navy an unsolicited offer to buy 149 of those aircraft carrier-based fighters as part of a multiyear procurement plan at $49.9 million apiece. The price tag would likely drop if the military bought more to equip Air Guard units.
For its part, Boeing said it hasn’t had any discussions with the National Guard about the F-18s. But one defense official said it’s an area the Air Force should review.
“I think the taxpayer demands we look at this because it’s an efficient, highly capable aircraft that can sustain our force structure through this risky period,” the official said.
The Air Force is focusing its budgets on the F-35, which eventually will make its way to the Air Guard. But leaders insist they are open to other solutions, if necessary.
Lt. Gen. Harry Wyatt, chief of the Air Guard, said last week he is “platform agnostic,” but mentioned the F-18 — along with the F-15 and F-16 — as a possible solution, especially if the F-35 program falls behind schedule.
But the defense official expects the Air Force to reject any efforts to buy Super Hornets — or any other older fighters. “The Air Force won’t do it willingly, more than likely, because it doesn’t meet their strategy,” he said.
Buying F-18s would not mark the first time the Air Force purchased planes built for the Navy. During the Vietnam War, the Air Force flew A-7 Corsair IIs, F-4 Phantom IIs, and A-1 Skyraiders, all of which were originally designed for take offs and landings on Navy carriers.
Still, there would likely be concerns within the Air Force and even in some state Air Guard units that buying F-18s would complicate training and logistics.
jessmo24This is an old story but still relevant
General: Air National Guard needs new fighter jets
By Otto Kreisher CongressDaily July 29, 2009
The director of the Air National Guard said Wednesday that the Air Force needs to modernize its entire force — active, Guard and Reserve — “concurrently and proportionately,” citing an urgent need to replace the aging F-15s and F-16s now used to secure U.S. airspace.
The Air National Guard’s needs are “a little more acute, a little more immediate, because our airplanes are a little bit older,” and there is no plan “to address the early age-out of our airplanes,” Lt. Gen. Harry Wyatt said at a breakfast with defense writers.
Eighty percent of the F-16s used for air sovereignty missions will begin to “age out” in eight years, but the new F-35 Joint Strike Fighters will not arrive until the mid-2020s, “several years too late,” Wyatt said.
E-MAIL THIS ARTICLE PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION COMMENT ON THIS STORY
RELATED STORIES
* Effort to salvage helicopter program draws veto threat 07/29/09
* Conferees face multiyear fighter decision 07/27/09
* Senate agreement clears way for vote on future of F-22 07/17/09
* Report: Industry may be unable to meet military’s needs 07/14/09
Noting that the ANG provides “34 percent of Air Force’s capabilities, at 7 percent of the budget,” Wyatt pushed for assigning 60 to 70 of the 187 F-22s now on order to the Guard.
There are no F-22s in the Guard now, although Air Guard personnel fly and maintain F-22s with an active Air Force fighter wing at Langley Air Force Base in Virginia. There are also plans to establish an Air Guard unit in Hawaii, Wyatt said. The Guard provides 16 of the 18 air defense locations in the country.
“That doesn’t mean there aren’t other airplanes out there that could provide that capability, the F-15, the F-16, the F-18,” Wyatt said. Although interested in the capabilities needed to perform his mission, the general said he is “platform agnostic.”
The Air Force currently has no plans to buy more F-15s and F-16s, but Wyatt said that could change if the F-35 falls behind schedule.
He also stood by his recent letter advocating F-22s for his command’s mission to protect the nation, but insisted that he never called for buying more than the 187 F-22s requested by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the Air Force leadership.
Wyatt said his response to a letter from Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., focused on the urgent need to replace the Guard’s aging fleet. The general said he gave “very specific answers” to “very specific questions” from Chambliss, who was fighting to include authority in the fiscal 2010 defense authorization to buy more F-22s, which are assembled in his state.
Wyatt said, for example, that Chambliss asked if the F-22 can provide the capabilities he needed for the air sovereignty mission, and “the answer basically was ‘yes.’ But I also pointed out in the letter that there were other aircraft that also could provide that capability.”
Most of the senior Air Force leaders who had read both letters “did not have a problem with it,” Wyatt said, and he had received “no feedback” from Gates.
2020s? is he wrong or is this when the guard was slated to get aircraft?
jessmo24Spider I read some where that the guard wants AESA for cruise missile defense
which means,F-18e, blk 50+F-16,F-35, or newodel F-15
Which offers bettet valuek? im on a mobile phone, ill
bbl to elaborate
jessmo24LOL wut!?
jessmo24The sensor and the related computer library will distinguish between a tracked or wheeled vehicle. What kind of wheeled vehicle becomes questionable and a short step to commit a war-crime.
Because you wrote the code that’s probably not even finished being written right?
jessmo24Well there you go – in a nutshell Jonesey…spend a bit of cash on the carriers in the next couple of years and make them proper useable carriers or end up buying a real Dog of an aircraft.
I spent 11 years working on Harriers – which are really expensive to maintain and they have a simple direct lift system…the maintenance costs/downtime on the ‘B’ will be horrendous.rgds baz
I think your making the mistake of comparing worn out legacy platforms to new tech. The maintenance issues should be worked out in the phase. The black boxes alone in this aircraft should make it easier to work on, not to mention not having to take the wing off to get to the engine.
jessmo24When during the night a Scud was launched the missile was on the way already. The empty launcher was hardly to distinguish from a commercial truck. Several truck-drivers transporting goods from and to Aqaba in Jordan Awere killed by F-15E-crews during such nights. A F-35 will change nothing about that really, without real intel infos about hide-outs in advance. 😉
Look at 1:54-about 2:00
The AESa and the Ir sensors are fully intergrated.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzDke56vMiU
The F-35 is looking more like and more and like a fast responder in a anti- access atmosphere.
Look at this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J88jKRtSeL8
A-10s get the scub launchers at the end but if that was a F-35, The time from launch to response would have been much shorter, because the striker it self could detect the launch.
jessmo24The F-35 is not, nor is not intended to be a AEW asset. AEW is a C4I function which is performed above the tactical level by aircraft like the E-2C/D that are equipped with the proper radar and other passive ESM. Perhaps the F-35 can become a sensor node, enhancing the commander’s picture of the battlespace. But the radar in the F-35 is not designed to function as a volume search radar, even when networked with other F-35’s.
Yes we all know that the F-35 isn’t a 747 we don’t need you to tell us that.
jessmo24So does a missile launch in the general vicinity of a F-35 mean more than likely the shooter will give away his position? even if its a T-50?
jessmo24so then why all of the hate.
1. This is tactically significant for a small fighter because the fighter can SHARE the data.
2. I would rather have the capability and not need it rather than need it and not have it.
3. Many countries don’t have advanced missile warning sats to play with like the U.S.. this would be a serious Intell asset for said countries
4. The AF is looking at hybrid war and GW1 type scenarios, The faster we can detect a launch and get the shooters on it the less time the tel has to get away.
5. many of you don’t realize your comparing Large 747 style AEW and intel assets to a fighter jet. The fact that you can squeeze this on a fighter should be impressive in itself.
6. And for the person complaining about this being tactically insignificant, they should realize that LM will maybe want to put a laser on the F-35 in the future. Maybe they want a air born BMD capability.
Sign In
