Remember that for EA reasons, the focusing ability of AESA mostly negates the 4th root rule of radars.

No ring on his finger (or tanline).

Cola, JJ was trying to say that if it takes 2xF414s ($8.6mil) to equal the thrust of 1xF135 ($13.6mil FY2011). Therefore the F414 (2x at 44k lb thrust) cost is $195/lb vs the F135 (1x at 43k thrust) at $316/lb, a 61.7% increase in cost per lb over the F414.

Now the fun part. The F135 will continue to drop in price (the above mentioned 250th F135 will be in 2015).

And lastly, the F135 will likely have a lower SFC (.886 dry) than the F414 (.840 dry, double this for two engines = 1.680). This will lead to much lower fuel costs over the life of the engine for the F135.

and 2 F414’s cost less than 1 F135.

The latest F414 costs 8.8 million and the latest LRIP F135 costs 13. The F135 price will continue to drop (last year was 17 mil) while the F414 is stable and will only climb as inflation rises.

It would at least let him know that radars are active in the area (at least 200 mile radius) and allow him to alter his mission plan accordingly.

Better to be informed than to be ignorant.

The F-117 pilot in this scenario might have had more than a visual warning and might have been able to put a mountain between him and the SAM site.

I forgot to mention the need for additional power – not sure if an additional engine driven generator is going to be enough.

Additional power and cooling are only going to be an issue if they try to make the EA-35 an “internal” only solution.

The NGJ pods will provide all the needed power and cooling required for their own use. Since external stations 3 & 9 are “wet”, the NGJ pod “could” be designed to help cool the thermal load from any internal EA/EW devices on the F-35.

As to increased F-35 power and cooling, Blk 4 is going to have “Power/Thermal Management Improvement”. We will have to wait till about 2015 to see what that is. These improvements will be in place before the NGJ is ready anyhow.

The “reason” the F-117 was lost is mainly due to sloppy mission planning. VLO does not make a plan invisible, just harder to see.

If you keep flying the same mission profile, the enemy (just like they did in Bosnia), will place their asset in it’s path.

No VLO aircraft, be it F-117, F-22, B-2, or F-35 is likely to survive flying directly over a SAM/AAA site.

The F-35 was designed and has always been claimed to have the ability to prosecute missions in areas covered by “double-digit” SAM systems. It has active EW via the APG-81, MALD, JDRADM (~2020), NGJ (~2020), and still retains the ability to have internal AESA Active EW in the leading edge sensor bays (if the client wants to develop it).

if anyone can manage to signup for slideshare and download it, that would be great

I converted it to PDF:

Google Docs:
https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B2Wxyon_-A1fNjljYTE2NTgtMmU2MC00YmIwLTg1YWItMmM1MDdlMWVlMThj&hl=en&authkey=COPn68ML

I re-shared it on Slideshare (as a PDF):
An112kc 100710063555-phpapp02View more presentations from SpudmanWP.