dark light

SpudmanWP

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 376 through 390 (of 4,849 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2141679
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Lockheed Martin Selects Raytheon To Deliver Next Generation F-35 Sensor System

    https://i.imgur.com/GfyhVMD.jpg

    The Raytheon-built DAS will be integrated into F-35 aircraft starting with Lot 15 aircraft, expected to begin deliveries in 2023. The next generation DAS system is estimated to generate the following results compared to the current system:

    More than $3 billion in life cycle cost savings
    Approximately 45 percent reduction in unit recurring cost
    Greater than 50 percent reduction in operations and sustainment cost
    5 times more reliability
    2 times performance capability improvement
    The new system will also indirectly benefit aircraft readiness and service manpower requirements

    More at the jump

    https://www.f35.com/news/detail/lockheed-martin-selects-raytheon-to-deliver-next-generation-f-35-sensor-sys?linkId=100000002750882

    in reply to: Future of Belgian Air Component #2141705
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    If Belgium does order F-35, will the country then have to contribute financially to fixing the bits that do not yet work/are not going to be there until the mid-2020’s?

    No, since the contract is for full support till 2030, IIRC.

    in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2141778
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    The Hellfire is a HEAT round

    My point was that by adding a frag sleeve, they were able to give the Hellfire good blast/frag performance without having to do major redesign. I am not saying that this is what IMI did, just one posability to solving the need.

    in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2141827
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    A warhead can have great longitudinal strength to be a good penetrator yet fragment horizontally. It can also have a frag sleeve ala Hellfire.

    in reply to: Future of Belgian Air Component #2141944
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    lose about 20 billions of offsets

    Nah, we’ll just buy a lot of chocolate, beer, and cheese :very_drunk:

    in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2141984
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    It seems to be a big rocket for such a short range. My thought is that it flies a very high ballistic arch in order to come in near-vertically in order to defeat the defenses which cannot see/defend in an upwards cone.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2142180
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Yup, far exceeds even the A2A config.

    https://i.imgur.com/pq9Pua4.png

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2142196
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    That pic of an Adir over Teheran looks fake to me.

    The Luneburg lenses kind of give it away not to mention the “What the hell would have taken the picture” aspect.

    in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2142356
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    This is the most detailed description that I could find.

    The most basic input into the model is the touch labor actuals and percent complete by tail
    number received from the contractor. Touch labor actuals represent the sum of actual touch
    labor hours spent assembling a specific jet as recorded by the contractor. The fidelity of the
    estimate is dependent upon receiving actuals which are accurate and complete. Also, worth
    noting is a discussion of standard work expected and planned to occur on a given jet. Standard
    work is essentially planned work on the jet and the given amount of time to accomplish that
    work. Non‐standard work in theory captures all work that is not standard. This could include
    time spent repairing damaged parts, scrap, re‐working errors or any amount of hours spent on
    unexpected tasks in the manufacturing process.

    Touch Labor Estimate Modeling — Extrapolation Of Actuals
    http://www.iceaaonline.com/ready/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/ET-2_Paper_TouchLaborEstimateModeling_Davis.pdf

    in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2142467
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    I wonder what is actually included in those numbers? Assembly only?

    It’s every man-hour to manufacture, assemble, and test every part from the smallest screw to the largest panel.

    in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2142576
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    ALE-70 is a transmit-only towed decoy. Basically the ASQ-239 gathers relevant data from it’s own apertures, the APG-81, and the CNI. The ASQ-239 analyzes & generates a waveform which is transmitted to the ALE-70 via fiber-optic cable where the waveform is physically generated (in a full 360).

    The question is if they wanted ASQ-239 to be an active system (outside of APG-81/ALE-70).

    I remember seeing a jpg of a magazine from 15+ years ago where a BAE rep was giving an interview. It specifically stated that BAE designed the system with space in the wing/tail apertures to install active elements if the customer requested it. He declined to state if the customer exercised that option.

    in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2142675
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Resolved, not fixed !!!!!

    Tomato, Tomato

    Wait, that only works if you can hear me say it :stupid:

    Have you ever talked to an F-15/16/18/etc pilot about all the things that were “resolved” but not “fixed” on their aircraft?

    in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2142737
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    House eyes major boost in F-35 jet purchases

    The House Appropriations Committee released a draft version of its annual defense bill Wednesday that provides $9.4 billion for 93 of the high-tech Lockheed Martin aircraft, which is 16 more than the 77 requested by the military.

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/house-eyes-major-boost-in-f-35-jet-purchases

    in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2142846
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Using the radar as a jammer is an afterthought imho, not part of the original requirements.

    Without digging into the JORD, I have seen docs going back toe the early 2000’s that mention jamming using the radar. Since the APG-81 and ASQ-239 share a dedicated interconnect, I think that it was intentional from the beginning.

    –Edit

    Found one in this 1997 Document. Only the phrase “Electronic Warfare” is mentioned in reference to the radar.

    https://i.imgur.com/fZeRKS6.png

    https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b3de/463970b76704c4ce71416a0554faf322c2b8.pdf

    in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2142901
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Drum roll please…………..

    The Belgian Air Component’s fighter jets replacement program (ACCaP) accelerates again, after having definitively closed the so-called “F-16 gate”. According to the Belgian Defense Ministry spokesperson, the Minister Steven Vandeput is writing the final note which should announce the winner of a hard-fought competition.

    Vandeput is now “preparing the note that he will present during a future Council of ministers, but I will not say which one to not set a deadline,” said on Friday the spokesperson to the French-speaking newspaper Le Soir. Another real sign confirming the Defense Minister willingness to complete the RfGP phase before the NATO summit in early July, as requested by the Belgian Prime Minister, Charles Michel. So there are five Council of ministers left before the summit, which will be held on July 11-12 in Brussels.

    The 33 experts in charge of studying the two official Governmental proposals received to date, the Lockheed Martin F-35 and the Eurofighter Typhoon, have completed their assessment. The country’s Inspectorate of Finances, responsible for evaluating the ACCaP financial aspect, also concluded its final statement.

    This announcement comes a few weeks after France finally detailed its “comprehensive and structuring partnership,” which clearly received a negative welcome from the Belgian military. This meeting, planned “at the request of the Prime Minister,” did not suggested anything new in regards to the letter received on September 2017, the Ministry’s spokesperson stated. “There is nothing more concrete,” she added.

    On the basis of the two offers considered as legally valid, and probably the French “proposal”, the ACCaP pool must now send a final recommendation to the Defense Minister. The complete report, along with the economic aspects, will then be submitted to the federal government.

    http://www.airrecognition.com/index.php/archive-world-worldwide-news-air-force-aviation-aerospace-air-military-defence-industry/global-defense-security-news/global-news-2018/june/4308-accap-program-belgian-defense-minister-final-decision-imminent.html

Viewing 15 posts - 376 through 390 (of 4,849 total)