@SpudmanWP
I don’t see any physical limits to launch an AHEAD successfully vertically except for gravitation looses.
The Millennium CIWS uses AHEAD and is certainly ready to handle plunging AshMs.

Sorry I was not clear enough. I was postulating that an attack on the main S-XXX system while being defended by a dispersed PDS will not have an effective engagement. When the PGM is not headed directly for the PDS the AHEAD rounds are attacking the PGM from a side angle.

Being that is from the side the gun has to track harder to lead the PGM. Also, the AHEAD round will not have an effective ‘stacking’ effect where if the PGM misses one shrapnel ‘disc’ it runs into the next one which is virtually on an identical flight path.

F-15, no
F-16, likely
MiG… not even in the same class of aircraft
Supers, maybe
Gripen, likely
Typhoon, no

When you look at baseline prices you get the above. Throw in all the sensors that the F-35 carries that the above do not (or would have to have more cash added to pay for) and it skews even worse.

Throw in the survival rates in combat (and it’s associated replacement cost) and you begin to understand why many governments worldwide want the F-35 despite the initial pricetag.

GPS is useless against an enemy with a GPS-jamming-capability.

Tell the Iraqis that.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=aerospacedaily&id=news/gps.xml

For a jamming system to be effective it has to position itself between the transmitter and the receiver. For GPS based bombs that is a position between the bomb and space. No such jammer exists.

The DoD has been developing GPS anti-jamming technology since the mid 1990s.

http://defense-update.com/products/g/gps-aj.htm
http://www.aero.org/publications/crosslink/summer2002/06.html

The SDB itself has been designed with a jammed GPS environment in mind.

http://www.govcomm.harris.com/solutions/products/000128.asp

When you consider the following, an SDB attack on a S-300/400 system has a good chance of success:

1. The VLO airframe of the launching platform will allow a launch of the SDB from a closer range and will limit the reaction time of the Point Defense System (PDS).

2. The F-35 is pre-wired for NGJ which can seriously degrade the radars of the PDS.

3. The F-22’s or F-35’s AESA radars (F-22 Inc 3.1 with it’s jamming will start to be installed next year) can also support the jamming of the PDS radars.

4. MALD-J can be launched to arrive in the target area to provide additional jamming of the PDS target tracking radars.

5. MALD can also be used to confuse & overload the PDS systems.

6. JDRADM can (2018 timeframe) add a high speed & VLO aspect to the engagement thereby reducing the reaction opportunity to almost nill.

7. The SDB can be launched from a very high altitude (50,000+ ft), glide to say 20k ft, then pitch over into a vertical dive (bunker penetration flight profile). This will be beneficial in several ways.

A. The high speed of the approaching SDB will reduce the reaction opportunity of the PDS.

B. The PDS is limited in their radar acquisition angle, ie they cannot see directly above themselves.

C. The high speed of a plunging SDB will make a guns defense impossible and necessitate the use of the missiles which have a very limited supply.

Now I know that not everything I proposed is perfect and will work every time. But, I do think that when you take the system as a whole (VLO launch platform, SDB1&2, plunging attacks, NGJ, launch platform AESA jamming, MALD, MALD-J, JDRADM), I think the likelihood of the SAM destruction is good.

The REQUIREMENTS for the JSF were different than what was demonstrated (an thought capable) before SWAT. The purpose of SWAT was not to lower the requirements, but to lower the weight in order to meet requirements.

The requirements for the JSF program started with JIRD-1 (then 2 & 3) and finalized with JORD. JIRD-1 was released in 1995 and covered, among other things, the payload capacity of each model.

Surprising to me was that the CTOL version shared the STOVL’s requirement of only 1000lb internal bombs.

This was the case even after JORD was released and did not change until after the F-35 was selected and the final (or so they thought, ie pre-SWAT) design was known. Looking at all the JSF related SAR reports supports this continuing requirement of only 1000lb internal load in the F-35B.

Here are all the JSF SAR reports from 1996 to 2007 directly from the DoD.
http://www.dod.gov/pubs/foi/reading_room/09-F-1079_JSF_SARS_1996_Present.pdf

A good read in to the early stages of the JSF program (prior to X-35) is here. It also goes into why the F-35C had a 2k but the A&B only had a 1k requirement (internal). One of those reasons was that they were working on a 1k penetrator (JAST-1000) that would allow them to not need a 2k weapon. JAST-1000 development has yet to produce a dedicated 1k class penetrator.
http://www.jhuapl.edu/techdigest/TD/td1801/steidle.pdf

A possible delay in IOC has nothing to do with carrying capability. Now your just grasping at straws.

btw, The review that says that there might be a delay states that it will be due to software development issue and that there has not been any significant hardware issues.

—-EDIT—-

One last note, the original JSF requirement for internal bomb load was 2x1000lb bombs (not 2×2000). It is unfortunate that they could not have the increased carriage, but they did not lose anything off the original requirement.

No, that 5000lb is from a 2009 presentation. Nothing says that the bringback has to be internal only.

You might want to read those specs again:

<br />
Y9 KC-390<br />
Crew: 4 2<br />
Cargo cabin size: (l/w/h) 16.2m/3.2m/2.35m (121.82 m3) 12.68m/3.35m/2.94m (124.89 m3)<br />
Max take-off weight: 77,000kg 81,000kg<br />
Payload: 25,000kg 23,590 kg<br />
Cruising speed: 600~650km/h 954 km/h (mach 0.8)<br />
Cruising altitude: 9,000m 10,973 m<br />
Range: Ferry range 7,800km 6,000 km<br />


The KC-390 has half the crew, can do aerial refueling (both take and give), can take larger cargo (size not weight), goes higher and goes much faster. What it does miss on, it only misses by a little (1,800km ferry offset by refueling and 1,410kg payload)