SpudmanWPDepending on the mission, the EA-18 can choose to carry the AIM-9x if it wants to.
.
SpudmanWPThere are several factors that will allow a F-35 to control 2-4 VLO UCAVs.
1. The F-35’s ICP (Computer) has empty space for more processing cards. Each card is designed so that when a higher speed one is avail, they can be swapped out without a need to update the software.
2. The DAS allows the F-35 to track all airborne items and will allow the F-35 to keep the UCAVs in formation.
3. If they put an IRST and DAS into the UCAVs, the F-35 can use them extend it’s Situational Awareness.
4. The UCAVs will first be used just as bomb/missile trucks (ala B-1R).
Think of it this way.
F-35 flies with a couple of UCAVs up high. It commands them to scan the skys with IRST along with the F-35. Due to the increased number of sensors, each IRST is only looking at 25% of the sky thereby increasing the chance of enemy detection.
Through either MALD or on-board sensors, the F-35 locates several SAMs in it’s flight path. The F-35 orders one of the UCAVs to launch several JDRADM missiles to deal with the problem.
Later in the flight, a flight of SUs are detected inbound from the side. The F-35 directs another UCAV to intercept. Due to the UCAV’s superior VLO vs the F-35, it is the best choice against the SU. Through the UCAVs IRST, the SUs are positively ID’d and the UCAV is instructed to engage via JDRADM. Afterwords, the UCAV rejoins the mission.
At the final target, the UCAVs with the A2G munitions and the F-35 can make their approach and prosecute the mission.
The egress is handled the same.
The main point of my example is that the F-35 does not have to make all of the decisions for the UCAVs, just the final target and shoot command. This can be done long before AI is ready.
SpudmanWPI see the first true use of UCAV in A2A as escorts controlled from the F-35.
SpudmanWPI would say when they negotiate the contract… Israel is planning on late this year.
SpudmanWPUAVs are still pretty much cheap, capable and easy to develop.
Pick any two.
Let’s see….
#1 Cheap — Yes
#2 Capable — No
They can only do limited A2G for now and at slow speeds with a very limited warload.
#3 Easy to Develop — No
See #2. Still no A2A, need to be piloted (No AI), no Situational Awareness, no VLO airframes, no carrier ops, etc
SpudmanWPDo you people have any idea what a FY (Fiscal Year) cost calculation is?
Inflation?
I did not say that the cost would be $40 mil when bought, but LM stated that the current calculation is upper $40 miilion in FY 2002 dollars.
Simply put,
from: http://www.halfhill.com/inflation.html
Year — Cost (in millions)
2002 — $47.50 (ie upper $40 Million Baseline)
2009 — $58.34
2015 — $64.41
2020 — $71.81
2025 — $83.25
2030 — $96.51
2035 — $111.88
Remember that these numbers are average price over the entire production run from LRIP to last AC in 2035 timeline.
I guarantee, and am willing to bet anyone, that the average cost of the F-35A (after MYB) will NEVER reach $120 million in 2002 dollars.
SpudmanWPI was browsing and found this gem on the LM website at:
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/products/f35/
The pdf is here:
Juicy morsels:
• BF-4 with full avionics and CF-1 to fly this summer.
• All 3 variants passed “Critical Design Review”.
• In-flight refueling system qualifications complete.
• 100th flight on June 23.
• Final Block 3 software capabilities defined.
• Manufacturing pace is increasing; all test aircraft are in flight testing or production.
• The first Low Rate Initial Production aircraft are also in the manufacturing flow.
Initial Operational Capability (IOC) dates
• 2012 for USMC
• 2013 for USAF
• 2015 for US Navy
Quantities (planned)
• USAF 1,763
• USN/USMC 680
• RAF/RN 138
• Italy 131
• Netherlands 85
• Turkey 100
• Australia 100
• Norway 48
• Denmark 48
• Canada 80
Average Unit Recurring Flyaway Cost (in FY 2002 dollars – the most recent comprehensive estimate)
• F-35A upper-$40 million
• F-35B mid-$60 million
• F-35C mid-$60 million
Eat that all you “it will cost more than a Raptor” crowd…. sorry, I could not resist.
— Things are going well indeed 🙂
SpudmanWPRussian doctrine, for the longest time, has been building inexpensive systems and buying them in bulk.
They did this for several reasons:
1. Not willing to spend the R&D to develop higher tech systems.
2. Not willing to upgrade the manufacturing tech base to produce said systems.
3. Communism, in general, inhibits the desire to produce top notch hardware. There is no incentive to do a good job.
That is now just starting to change.
But if you want to list systems where we still have a large lead in tech:
1. VLO aircraft
1a. Turbine engines
1c. Avionics
2. Satellites
2a. For that matter, anything that deals with space.
3. Computer chip tech
4. Tanks, the M1 is still superior to any Russian tank
5. Airborne fighter radars
6. AWACS
7. UAVs
8. Submarines
9. The US Navy as a whole, especially the Carriers
10… damn my fingers are getting tired typing all this… 😉
SpudmanWPWe don’t need F-22s for our own border.
Where in the world would a significant threat come from that could reach the US mainland that would justify the need of a F-22 over a F-35?
SpudmanWPWhich systems did they have that it took us decades to get??
SpudmanWPThe Russians took DECADES to “match” ours systems back when they had money….
A few years… give me a break.
SpudmanWPIf we are talking “conceptually”, then any system the Rafale carries is over 25 years old.
The Prowlers from the Stennis had the latest EW upgrades that came out after 2000.
It also looks like the Super Hornets from VX-9 were Block 2 with new towed decoys and jammers.
SpudmanWPLooks like VX-9 brought Super Hornets:
VX-9 ‘Vampires’ test their limits in Alaska
by Marine Sgt. Zachary Dyer
Northern Edge 2009 Joint Information Bureau6/25/2009 – ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE, Alaska — Among the 9,000 servicemembers in Alaska for Northern Edge 2009 is a squadron of Sailors, Marines and civilians doing more than just testing themselves against their sister services.
The “Vampires” of Navy Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 9 are tasked with the duty of evaluating new equipment and tactics for the Navy and Marine Corps.
For Northern Edge, the Vampires brought six of their F/A-18 Super Hornets to the “Last Frontier” to fly alongside more than 200 aircraft from the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and Army
“This is probably the most joint exercise I’ve been in during 25 years of service,” said Navy Capt. Dan Doster, the commanding officer of VX-9. “Last night I was working with the ship, I was working F-22s, F-15s and F-18s all in one exercise. Normally you don’t see that.”
The main mission of the Vampires is to conduct operational tests for the Navy and Marine Corps’ tactical aircraft.
“We call it Sailor proofing, Marine proofing,” explained Doster. “We go ahead and use, as much as possible, fleet maintainers and fleet aviators, who get assigned to the squadron – and we go ahead and use fleet tactics, and that’s how we test it. We go ahead and put it in a real-world situation, and say ‘Does it work?’.”
The second mission of the Vampires, based out of Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, Calif., is to develop new tactics to correspond with the aircraft they evaluate. Before sending platforms like the F/A-18 Super Hornets or the Marine Corps’ new AH-1Z Cobras and UH-1Y Hueys to the fleet, the Marines and Sailors of VX-9 develop their own “playbooks” to go with the aircraft, explained Doster.
According to Doster, that’s what drew the Vampires to come to Alaska and participate in the Northern Edge – the opportunity to develop new tactics while working with a wide variety of aircraft.
“What makes it really good for us is that the morning events have been large force exercises, but in the afternoon events we can break off and take lessons learned from those morning events and go down more to the unit level or work with units that we particularly have an interest in,” explained Doster. “And then we can do some of our tactics development objectives and testing. We can try new tactics and bring them back to the large force exercise.”
While the pilots train in the sky, the maintainers and ordnancemen are doing their very own training on the ground to become more proficient at their respective jobs.
“I’m happy to be a part of a large-scale mission like this,” said Petty Officer 2nd Class John Dixon, an aviation ordnanceman with the Vampires. “From what I’ve been told, this is going to change the way we fight air-to-air combat wars. This is going to change the way we go against our foes. It’s a big deal. We’re sharpening the edge on the tip of the spear.”
SpudmanWPYour also assuming that they did not test it on the F-18G, F-22, etc.
–edit, More info–
I wonder if the Prowlers of VAQ-138 took part.
VAQ-138 are stationed on the USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74) , which did take part in Northern Edge 2009.
http://www.pnwlocalnews.com/whidbey/wnt/news/49550837.html
–Edit—
I do know that VX-9 was there, with F-18’s (maybe Growlers since they have all three versions).
SpudmanWPum.. Dude.. re-read your history lessons again.
WWII was largely won in the air.
Without air, the European conflict could have gone the other way.
Without air, the Pacific campaign would have been ship-to-ship before we could have even landed our forces.
Without air, no H-Bomb and MILLIONS would have died in the taking of the Japanese islands.
Air also played a significant role in Korea, Vietnam, and GW1 & GW2.
You also missed my point (pardon the pun)
I said the F-22 would be the SHARP point of the spear, not the whole spear.
Sign In
