SpudmanWPThe problem of the F35 is the extreme ambition. If a competitor wanted to surpass handling, speed + range and match internal AA-weaponry, RCS and roughly have the same avionics performance (save the TV-helmet) it would be possible to do so and do it at a lower price.
If they are not going to fulfill the same mission set then it’s not “better” and would not even be cheaper.
Take a look at the F-15SE. It has no internal bay, better kinematics, better range, twin engines, no VLO, simpler avionics, etc and is more expensive than an FRP F-35A.
A low-build solution that even tries to match the F-35 simply cannot beat the Economy of Scale, especially in the Dev and sustainment areas.
If it could be done then established builders like Rafale, Saab, etc would be doing it. The fact that they are not speaks volumes.
SpudmanWPIt never ceases to amaze me how some people (the YouTube creator, not you OB) can think that a company that has ZERO VLO experience, ZERO modern avionics experience, and no recent production experience can somehow design an almost-clean-sheet, twin-engine, heavy VLO fighter (that weighs empty the same as an F-35 is loaded) that will somehow magically be cheaper than the F-35A.
Throw in the absolute absence of any Economy of Scale savings (in development, production, and sustainment) and the claim of being cheaper than the F-35 shows it’s true absurdity.
SpudmanWPThe F-35 NEVER had a 2008 IOC date in the schedule.
The earliest documented IOC was a 2002 reference to the USMC IOC in 2010 and a USAF IOC in 2011.
As far as what they are now, USMC in 2015 and USMC in 2016.
Here is the slide form 2002:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]229960[/ATTACH]
SpudmanWPOnly the negotiations on the contract have been suspended.
The actual building of planes has not been stopped.
SpudmanWPThanks for the info and this is my takeaway:
TIDLS can support 4 aircraft and the F-35 can support 25 (normally 6 flights of 4 and 1 terminal, ie BACN, to act as an uplink to the rest of the network).
TIDLS can share solutions (tracks or plots) and the F-35 can share raw data.
TIDLS is a broadcast solution and the F-35’s MADL is LPI & directional.
There are a few more F-35 features that I am not sure are unique or not (most are):
1. The ability for the MADL to handle all the voice comms making them LPI & Directional as well (certainly unique).
2. The ability to assign targets to specific pilots thereby avoiding the confusion of some targets not being addressed. This includes the ability to inventory other F-35’s weapons.
3. The ability for EODAS to do automatic BDA and to change the aspect to an overhead view no matter the actual angle of view (certainly unique).
Correct, Oblig. The Swedish approach (in the early Gripen) stressed jam resistance over LPI as you probably could not do both at the time.
The F-35 does both.
Potato-Head – I am dubious about anyone doing single-ship, weapons-grade using ESM. The physics are against it.
SS-GeoLocation was part of the SH Block2 plan but has continually been delayed. DOT&E even commented on its delay in the latest report.
And of course EO-DAS, like every other JSF system, is not “used” as yet, let alone having been demonstrated and approved for the use of lethal weapons.
What is known is that EODAS integration has been flying for YEARS, it is part of Block 2B (which is flying), and will be part of the F-35B IOC next year.
It’s funny how you are so quick you (and others) are to say things like “plane x can be upgraded with that” or “off the shelf tech can be adapted to do that”, etc but are completely dismissive of what the F-35 IS DOING today and what it WILL DO when it goes IOC next year.
SpudmanWP1. The sheer ability to fuse the data at such a large scale.
So it has a big central computer. Why will other aircraft not catch up (if they have not done so already by 2020)?
It’s not just raw processing power, it’s also every sensor interconnected with Fiber-optic (FO) datalinks, every weapon station having a FO datalink, the ability to the sensors to work together, rather than through the ICP. A good example of this is the relationship and connections between the ESM and AESA radar which has been said to work together on a “pulse for pule” basis.
2. EODAS which is a first-of-its-kind sensor.
Unique in weight and complexity. However, DDL NG and PAWS-2 are in-service IIR systems, so no reason that they could not be used to provide aircraft tracks via SW/processor upgrades, assuming that anyone except JSF believe this is worthwhile.
Since they are not used today for this purpose means that EODAS is unique. The F-22 has similar sensors yet theirs also do not provide anything beyond MLD/MAW capability.
3. The ability to use the ESM to GeoLoacate emissions in a single ship.
Errm – you mean long-baseline interferometry, as used on multiple systems since the 1990s?
I was speaking of single-ship, weapons grade GeoLoacation. The Super Hornet, often referred to as the best (4th Gen) when it comes to its ESM does not even have it (which is why “Single-Ship GeoLoacation” appears in the SH’s “future” upgrade path).
4. The ability to share not only tracks, but raw sensor data between F-35s (and the rest of the network) completely automatically while still maintaining a low EM signature (LPI & Directional datalinks).
The Swedes call this samverkan and it has been operational for years.
Why are you giving me a very ambiguous term in a foreign language instead of naming a system so it can be researched?
Just to make myself clear, I am not saying that these features of the F-35 will “always” be unique, just that today and for the foreseeable future they are unique.
SpudmanWPMy question is, again: which of that makes the F-35 unique in any way?
There are several aspects of its sensors that make the F-35.
1. The sheer ability to fuse the data at such a large scale.
2. EODAS which is a first-of-its-kind sensor.
3. The ability to use the ESM to GeoLoacate emissions in a single ship.
4. The ability to share not only tracks, but raw sensor data between F-35s (and the rest of the network) completely automatically while still maintaining a low EM signature (LPI & Directional datalinks). This sharing of data allows them to build the tracks from previously “untrackable” data.
While there are aspects of the F-35 that are “unique” (EODAS, HMDS, etc) and some not so “unique” (AESA radar, F-22 derived ESM, Sniper XR derived EOTS, etc), what the F-35 does with them certainly is.
The F-35 can turn away and still attack because it has eyes in the back of its head coupled with high off boresight missiles.
Not in a stealthy configuration
Like it or not, the AMRAAM, especially the D, is a HOBS missile.
SpudmanWPHow about direct testimony on how those sensors are used?
Air Vice Marshal Osley: And so the strength of the joint strike fighter—and I use this as an example—is that it has the ability to have up to 650 parameters by which it will identify a potential threat out there. Other aircraft, such as the F22 have about a third of that and fourth-generation aircraft have perhaps half a dozen. So if you are in an F18 or in some of the other Soviet aircraft you only have a very limited understanding of what the threat is and being able to identify it at a distance. If we are able to do as we plan with the F35, and that is to have good access to the software and to be able to program it appropriately with mission data, it will have the ability to identify hostile aircraft at quite a considerable distance.
SpudmanWPThanks for the pic.
It’s hard to say from this far away but that may be one of the ground test birds or a mockup.
I can’t see the bulge that the B has and that looks like the F-35A canopy.
Time will tell.
SpudmanWPPic or it didn’t happen :rolleyes:
SpudmanWPI don’t see why not since it has better handling and better approach SA than the AV-8B.
SpudmanWPThere was also talk of a breach-loaded 120mm mortar taking the place of the 105mm.
Apparently it did not go anywhere.
SpudmanWPGround launched SDB is an interesting option, especially with the laser guided version (150km range).
http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/bds/mediakit/2013/ausa/bkgd_glsdb_1013.pdf
SpudmanWPWell… The A-10 has killed far more friendly units than the B1 (post-1990 data).
Just Sayin
SpudmanWP(emphasis changed in quote above)
” Hostage said the F-35 actually has better stealth than the F-22. “I can’t say some of those things” due to classification, commented Martin, but she said Hostage accurately represented the F-35’s capabilities.
Somewhere in Australia… and in the offices of Aviation Week… grown men are crying. :eagerness:
Remember that Hostage (how cool of a name is that for a General) also said that “stealth” is more than RCS
But stealth — the ability to elude or greatly complicate an enemy’s ability to find and destroy an aircraft using a combination of design, tactics and technology
Sign In
