Now you see, WASS did NOT do the same thing that EODAS does. Don’t be fooled by the design detection range being similar, the targets which the ABL was supposed to handle at this distance are MUCH more challenging to detect than Falcon 9. Theatre ballistic missiles are a lot smaller (Falcon has about SIX times the engine thrust of a full-size Minuteman III ICBM and we are talking about substantially smaller BMs here). The bottom line is that, in an apples to apples comparison, EODAS is nowhere near as good in reality.

OK, the DAS won’t detect a smaller BM at 1500km, only at 200 (1/6, so you said):)

Hang on, so now you agree that EODAS does NOT have anything like the range of a conventional IRST (which is basically what EOTS is in air to air mode) after all? You can call it SIRST or whatever other marketing acronym (like YATO for trajectory tracking capability which any MAWS capable of cueing DIRCM has already) LM has cooked up for it, but the fact of the matter is that it simply will not provide spherical coverage out to true IRST ranges, period.

No I don’t agree; the DAS could have a longer range than a LW IRST; but it can’t zoom;

Here we go again, who’d have thought? As snafu has rightly pointed out, by the time the F-35 finally enters service a number of other aircraft will have been fitted with or will very soon receive MAWS with similar capabilities, so EODAS won’t be that special any more. DDM-NG (and RBE-2 AESA) is to enter service on Rafale this year and the Su-35S should not be far behind, while the T-50 (likely including DIRCM, which won’t make it onto the initial F-35 batches) could be just round the corner once the F-35 has reached operational status.

The DDM is not near DAS, is a missile detector.

sounds a lot like what SPECTRA does already 😀

Nope; Spectra is a RF systems; it detects, locates and jamms enemmy radars. The IR/EO suite on Rafale is called OSF (Optronique Secteur Frontale)

As has been pointed out numerous times now this doesn’t actually mean much. Here’s a statement with a similar level of accuracy: 1960s uncooled IR missile seekers with analogue electronics had a range of 150 million kilometres. Don’t believe me? Well, one big problem was that they kept locking onto the sun, so there you go.

Seriously, what EODAS did was detect what is probably among the brightest airborne IR sources you can encounter these days, the Falcon 9 heavy lift rocket. For reference, its mass flow is more than THIRTEEN times that of the F135 and its exhaust plume is CONSIDERABLY hotter due to use of LOX as oxidiser, regenerative cooling of the structure and the absence of turbines behind the combustion chamber.

Ever wondered why a rocket engine plume is incandescent in bright daylight at visible light wavelengths while jet engine exhaust generally isn’t (or just barely, when in afterburner)? That is only the tip of the iceberg too, most of the radiation will still be in the IR spectrum, as in a light bulb. Radiative power is proportional to the fourth power of temperature, so increasing the latter even slightly causes the former to sky-rocket (pun intended).

Even an ICBM, let alone a short-range ballistic missile, isn’t going to be nearly as bright as Falcon 9 and while detection might still be possible at a useful range, for anything that isn’t a such a largish missile it will shrink DRASTICALLY. If you were having visions of EODAS essentially providing a spherical coverage IRST against other aircraft, reconsider.

In order to do the same thing the DAS does, the (now terminated) ABL, has to use 6 dedicated IRSTs ! (http://www.lockheedmartin.com/products/AirborneLaserWideAreaSurveillance/index.html). BTW, the DAS does provide indeed SIRTS (situation awarness IRST) and acts as a cueing sensor: the DAS will just establish the precise direction of the IR contact (no zoom) and slaves the EOTS (this one while having a minuscule FOV, can zoom at impressive ranges). The combinatrion of these 2 sensors is a deadly one.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and detection of the Falcon 9 was against the sky as background. Want to detect something flying below your own altitude against terrestrial background? Shave off another substantial chunk of range.

Of course, any IR sensor will perform better at – 50 deg. C (AA target) vs. a ground target in a hot day…

What is amazing to me is the price — 3.3 billion $ (3 billion CHF) !!! That’s 150 million $ each…OK it includes spares, service, etc. but still…

* F-35A can reach the AoA of up to 50 degrees even with the payload mentioned above, while F/A-18E can do the same thing only under the clean configuration, and the productional EF-2000’s maximal AoA limited by the FCS is no more than 30 degrees in any kind of configuration.

The F 18E can do it loaded too:

My last flight in the E/F was in aircraft E4, loaded with three 480-gallon tanks and 4 Mk 83 bombs, and with the center of gravity ballasted to the aft limit of 31.8 percent. In that configuration, the airplane maneuvered without restriction from -30 to +50 degrees AOA, performed zero airspeed tailslides and spins to 120 degrees per second of yaw rate, and unsuccessfully attempted to generate a stable falling-leaf departure. We’ve engineered out all the known departure modes for rolls up to 360 degrees.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/docs/990414-ART-Super-Hornet.htm

The EO-DAS and was “virtually” tested in Northern Edge:
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a242cffdd-4407-4b16-99b3-d0b71c7826d1&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

And how would 6 straw (DAS) be able to provide 360 vision around F-35 then ?

Beamwidth of the APG-73 is around 3 degrees.
What’s the FoV of the sensor in the AN/AAS-42 ?

neither will scan as fast as a phased array radar
but lack of cuing will not dramatically degrade performance either.

The DAS has a 60 deg. (solid)field of vue, but with a cost: is effective at max. 10-15 nmiles. A dedicated IRST (AAS 42/Shadow, OSF, Pirate) has a much longer range, but a very narrow field of vue.

The afterburner will give you away in IR no ?

IRST are ofter overestimated. The field is so narrow, that it is said is similar with looking through a straw. That’s why an IRST will never be the primary sensor.