Three things have to happen.

1. The plane’s software and hardware have to be upgraded to UAI spec.

2. Weapon “drivers” need to be written (if they do not already exist as only one set of “drivers” per weapon are written and are usable on any UAI-enabled plane).

3. Separation tests on target plane. Any needed changes are added to the “driver” and then deployment can begin on that plane worldwide (that same day).

I am not talking about escort/standoff jamming in the NGJLite (as that is what the full NGJ is for), but a bolt-on, fully integrated self-protection jammer. If the pod were constructed (LO) correctly then it would not adversely affect the F-35’s RCS and would only be used when needed.

If the F-35’s are doing a bunker-busting run (which precludes current standoff weapons) into a heavy IADS environment (assuming that there is no time to deal with the IADS beforehand), they might need these when it comes to the last 20 or so miles. Before you say “Growler”, it would give away the F-35’s ingress route and eliminate the element of surprise.

Costs and development time could be reduced by leveraging the NGJ’s tech as it is developed.

@swerve:

Maybe that’s why that pic of the F-15 did not have SDBs o the wing pylons.

While shaping is important (and contributes the greatest to RCS reduction), RAM is still needed to smooth the surface, cover rivets & screws, and to cover the seams in access panels.

Sorry if I offended you but I assumed you had a sense of humor. 😉 Besides, there are many ways to legally get dope (especially here in California).

As to my thoughts on the F-35’s generation, if you’d quote the passage that you are referring to, I will gladly rephrase it as to remove all doubt as to how I think about the F-35’s generation.

btw, my inference to you smoking dope was not in reference to your opinion that the F-35 was a 4th gen asset, but was aimed at your inference that I shared your opinion. 🙂

Dude, seriously, put down whatever you’re smoking.

Not only did I never say (or imply) that I agree that the F-35 is 4th gen, nobody else did either. 😉

Post #125 says Japanese KC-767s can get pods if needed. Either way (pods or boom) there is an additional cost that will have to be absorbed into the F-18 & EF bid.

All three have the same bus, but only the F-35 can accommodate Japanese weapons without having to upgrade its software suite. This is a very expensive process and UAI has proven to be only about 10% the cost of traditional integration.

Lastly, there is simply no way around the biggest cost factor for the F-18 and EF, low annual production numbers. The F-18 line has no orders after FY2014 and the EF line shuts down after 2016/17 (IIRC). This will mean that those fighters will cost much more than they do today at FRP.

The only way to mitigate these costs is to secure more orders (India, UAE, SK, etc). The problem is that Japan would not likely bet the contract on that happening.

My total of 32 did not include any of my “theories” from that linked thread, but what the pylons are to be cleared for:

4 x internal SDBs per bay (8 total)
8 x external SDBs (via 2xBRU-69A) on stations 3 & 9 (16 total)
4 x external SDBs on stations 2 & 10 (8 total)

That’s a total of 32 SDBs

Now will you likely ever see this in combat? No, just like you will not be seeing that F-15E above carrying 20 (and certainly not 28).