The F-117 was shot down at 13km… Nobody has ever claimed that ANY VLO asset can survive at that close of a range to the SAM unit.

http://intellibriefs.blogspot.com/2005/11/secrets-of-1999-f-117-shootdown.html

Over and above a VLO airframe, the key to survival is Situational Awareness, the ability to share that info freely with the rest of your assets, and the ability to take advantage of new info as it arrives.

The F-35 has all of that in spades.

EODAS is a 360 MLD/MAWS that provides additional functionality. It is only meant to function in the WVR arena. There are 6 EODAS sensors on each F-35. EODAS cannot zoom except for digital.

EOTS is a combination FLIR/IRST and can function at much greater ranges due to larger sensors and optical zoom. Mid-wave was chosen for better resolution at the IR frequencies of it’s intended targets and meteorological conditions.

BTW even LM no longer call the F-35 VLO but LO only…

Really??? You might want to tell LM that as they as still putting it in their website.

The F-35’s shape, embedded antennas, aligned edges, internal
weapons and fuel, and special coatings all contribute to its
Very Low Observable (VLO) stealth capability.

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed/data/aero/documents/f-35/collateral/2012%20update/F-35_Defining%20the%20Future.pdf

😎

I did say an asset from 20+ years ago, without FLIR, without AESA, etc….

Obviously a modern dedicated SAW platform will likely have better sensors, processing power, and larger FLIR.

The F-35 would not suddenly appear in the middle of that CF. As contacts appear, they are classified and tracked in realtime due to the AESA scan rates. Data from ESM & off-board sources are then fused. Only then, if needed, does a PID need to happen. Once a PID is done, that contact can be either ignored or attacked.

Take a look at those photos above. A ship sized contact at 150km is a piece of cake. The tower in Las Vegas is less than 200 feet across and an AB Class Destroyer is over 500 (2.5 times larger). To put it simply, an AB Destroyer would appear larger at 150km than the above restaurant does in the above photo (at 36nm).

The F-35 will not need to ID hundreds of contacts at the same time. It only needs to ID them as they are detected. Don’t forget that the F-35 is not alone and they will share the load & compare data.

A contact rich environment can actually work to the F-35’s advantage as it helps it to hide it’s radar use.

In addition to a VLO airframe, the F-35 has the benefit of:

1. ESM that is second only to the F-22
2. The EODAS tracks rising SAMs and can alert the F-35 pilots and tell them which F-35 (if any) is the target.
3. The F-35 can dynamically adjust route planning in flight.

but require external cuing

It may be nice to have and would speed up the process, but is not a requirement.

Besides, cuing would likely come from the ESM as a ship is a very “leaky” EM environment.

@Jonsey:

Computerized ID of a target is quite advance. Take a look at these SAR ID images where the APG-81 was able to AutoID tanks sized targets based off of seemingly small SAR returns. EOTS has similar capabilities.

@Rii:

As you can see by the previous EOTS image of a ship on the water, it has no problem with temp gradients and the ship provides a very high contrasting target when compared to the surrounding water.

If an IRST can detect an inbound fighter at say 50km and a FLIR can detect a ship at 75nm… you do the math as to whom will survive the engagement.

Remember that the Sensor does not have to be the Shooter when it comes to the F-35. The Sensor could stay up high and far away, flying a parallel course (seemingly non-aggressive) while the Shooter comes in at 100ft and launches a AShM from over the horizon and is never seen from the ship.