I have already clarified that item in the post directly above yours.

just don’t ask how much of that actually works.. :sleeping:

A vast majority of it while still in SDD.

The rest is just software updates.

All the software updates in the world will never give the SH those same capabilities.

I am not saying that these capabilities are used everyday (m1+, 14AAMs, etc) but it’s an “arrow in the quiver” that the F-35 can call upon if needed.

Rafale can do 16.. I know it’s a bad joke but you’ve started..

I did not say that these capabilities are exclusive of the F-35, just that the F-35 has them while today’s SH does not.

The current Super Hornet coming off the line is just as capable as F-35, sans stealth.

Ability to go m1.6 with 2xAAMs & 2x2k bombs – Nope
Ability to go maintain m1+ speed in dry thrust while combat configured – Nope
Ability to carry 6x2k bombs – Nope
Ability to carry 14xAAMs – Nope
Directional LPI Data links – Nope
Automatic sharing of data – Nope
Fully Fused Avionics – Nope
Middleware-based Avionics – Nope
IIR MLD/MAWS – Nope
Automatic BDA – Nope
Track all airborne objects in WVR battle-space – Nope
HMDS – Nope
SATCOM – Nope
Internal FLIR/IRST – Nope
EW via AESA – Nope
F-22 class LPI AESA – Nope
AESA connected to ESM – Nope
Pre-Wired for NGJ-Class pods – Nope
All avionics & stations fiberoptically connected – Nope
STOVL ops – Nope
Austere ops – Nope
Automated logistics system – Nope
In-Ship training systems – Nope
Fully Funded Post-SDD development program – Nope

Now add on top of that the survival & force multiplier benefits of stealth that you so easily dismiss.

Several F-35 docs and videos show triangulation of EODAS data

How can the DAS have the distance with its poor resolution, except for a very vague estimate? How can it have the airspeed of the target given that it doesn’t know the distance, so the variation of the distance in the first place. To be able to do that, the F-35 would have to combine the DAS with the EOTS which probably has a telemetry capability, or at least a much better resolution of the target. Would using the EOTS work in a dogfight when he planes are moving fast relative to one another? That get very complicated.

There are several ways that the F-35 can passively (no radar or EOTS) determine the range (and thereby velocity and vector) to an EODAS track.

1. EODAS tracks do not happen in a vacuum. By the time a track is in WVR range, the type is know. Once known, the EODAS can use the threat library to determine range and velocity based on image recognition. While this is not perfect, it’s enough to guide a WVR weapon.

2. In a vast majority of missions, there will be more than one F-35. Because of this and the automated sharing of data, two or more EODAS tracks will be compared and used to triangulate a more precise target track.

DAS is also not limited to visibility limitations due to time of day, POV, etc.

1. Putting a radar on a gimbal decreases it’s range and increases it’s logistics & maintenance costs.

2. The “Next” in NGJ come from it going from a horn-based jammer to an AESA based jammer for US use.

Tell me how UAI allow an F35 operator to add their own encryption to their indegionuos C4i solutions? Can this be done without access to the F35 source code?
Tell me how an operator of the F35 can add software support for Russian or Chinese missiles that they have in stock using the UAI.

UAI has nothing to do with encryption, that’s part of CNI. With the recent Israeli negotiations it was let known that there is an API that will allow for many customizations like these.

As far as the Russian/Chinese UAI use, it’s up to the weapon mfg to create the “driver” and ensure that the weapon/pylon are UAI compliant. There are even ways around this. There is a patent I recently read that described a way to wirelessly program a UAI weapon from an ipad-like device within the cockpit. No change to the plane is needed.