If you are buying a weapons system that will serve you for the next 30 years then you have to assume that it will be used as such within that timeframe in that role.

Otherwise, buy a civilian jet.

The SACM (Small Advanced Capabilities Missile) program stated one of its goals being the shooting down of rockets/missiles. The CUDA missile concept was designed with SACM in mind. I would assume that in order for SACM to work in that regard, the fighter’s radar would have to be the prime sensor.

Given that SACM is in the concept stages it most likely deals with radar features that would also have to be developed or matured.

The growth is in the “Non-Recurring” section.
In FY2013 it was $54.7 mil and in FY2014 it was $376.9 mil (both years covering 19 airframes).

The only clue as to what that covers is:

Nonrecurring Cost includes such items as the U.S. Air Force share of Production Non-Recurring Tooling per the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Production, Sustainment, and Follow-on Development (PSFD) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the United States and eight partner nations cooperating in the production, sustainment, and follow-on development of the JSF; as well as funding for Diminishing Manufacturing Sources (DMS) parts, concurrency engineering, technical assistance, and Cost Reduction Intiatives (CRI).

A flight of 4 F-35 at 800 miles distance away would face the same situation as if it was a single a/c,
there is only bearing here,

Using your example (800 miles), each 12 mile separation in sensors gives a 1 degree difference in bearing.

a rough bearing at that, given no amplification

The bearing can be made better by using EOTS.

and Ef operate in a bare minimum of 2

I have not seen any quote from EF that they share bearing data in order to generate a track.

The scanning rates withtoday’s IRST systems are extremely fast. On tof that, they use starring imaging in the WFOV mode.

That assumes that you are even scanning in the sector that the AAM is coming from or even CAN scan that sector (below, behind, etc). The major advantage of EODAS is that it is seeing everything, all the time.

to pinpoint ballistic missile launch site with the DAS,
only to then in a consecutive post declaring that IR sensors have poor range measure

This is Foolean logic

Not if you understand how it’s done.

You do not need to measure the range using the EODAS, only the vector of the track. The multiple F-35s that are able to detect the track will then automatically share their vectors and by using simple geometry be able to determine range, bearing, target velocity, launch point, etc.

They can also use the EOTS to gain a tighter vector with the obvious benefit of thereby generating more accurate tracking data.

Check the Budget Docs.. Non-Recurring costs include Post-SDD R&D funding.

There is a F-35 news thread for stuff like this.

Where did you get those from because the jets you are talking about are not F-16 replacement jets.

It sounds like there were several programs that were combined (F-15E/111/16 replacements).

You seem to be concentrating on the Advanced-Attack/Advanced/Fighter-Attack (A-X/A/F-X) program yet ignoring the Multi-Role Fighter (MRF) program. Both of those (among others) were merged into JAST.

btw, One thing that the F-35A gained over the requirement was a 2k bombload as the requirement was to carry 1k bombs internally.