View Full Version : F-35B & Paveway IV


ORAC
31st Jul 2007, 08:31
Raytheon press release:

Raytheon awarded contract for Paveway IV Weapon Integration on F-35 Lightning II
(2007-07-30) By: Raytheon Systems Limited

Raytheon Systems Limited (RSL) has been awarded a contract to support the integration and flight trials of the Paveway IV new generation guided weapon on to the Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing (STOVL) version of the F-35 Lightning II aircraft, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter.The contract is valued at £24 million.

The UK is currently one of six European nations that are planning to take delivery of the F-35 aircraft. The integration of the RSL developed Paveway IV onto the F-35B will ensure that the UK has an autonomous weapon solution for this platform.

Tobin Touchstone, Director of Precision Systems at RSL said, ''This is a significant opportunity for RSL to further develop its aircraft integration portfolio and place RSL's Precision Systems business as one of the U.K.'s centres of excellence for this type of activity. Through technology reachback to the U.S. RSL, along with its Paveway IV team members, has grown significantly the U.K.'s indigenous capability in precision guided weapons.''

The integration programme will focus on providing documentation, input to the development of the aircraft systems and flight clearance of the weapon on to the aircraft. The latter part of the programme will concentrate on support to flight trials and certification. In addition to the general support activities, RSL will also be providing BAE Systems with the required trials hardware.

Raytheon Missile Systems (RMS) in Tucson, Arizona, will supply the Enhanced Computer Control Group (ECCGs) guidance sections, Telemetry sub-systems, Instrumentation, Test Equipment and associated support.

The F-35B will be the world's first short take-off and vertical landing aircraft capable of operating routinely at supersonic speeds. It also will be the world¿s first stealthy STOVL aircraft. The U.S. Marine Corps, the U.K.'s Royal Air Force and Royal Navy, and the Italian Navy all plan to operate the F-35B.



L J R
31st Jul 2007, 13:18
Will BAE Systems add a widgett to the Bomb for the UK's air vehicles 'to make it better' at a cost of 1 millon per Bomb?

c-bert
31st Jul 2007, 14:51
In BAE's (limited) defence I think the MoD normally requests a widget added at £500k.

BAE then fail to carry out the work but still charge £1 million at which point the MoD requests that the widget is removed at further cost, whereapon deciding that widget is still required. Widget survives in service for 2 years before being sold to a developing nation for a tenner.

LowObservable
31st Jul 2007, 16:37
The F-35B will be the world's first short take-off and vertical landing aircraft capable of operating routinely at supersonic speeds.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/yak141a.jpg
With PW4, Dave B will go to war with an offensive load equivalent to a Hurricane, unless you want to be non-LO without active jamming...

MostlyModerate
31st Jul 2007, 17:14
''This is a significant opportunity for RSL to further develop its aircraft integration portfolio and place RSL's Precision Systems business as one of the U.K.'s centres of excellence for this type of activity. Through technology reachback to the U.S. RSL, along with its Paveway IV team members, has grown significantly the U.K.'s indigenous capability in precision guided weapons.''


Did this man really say this ?

modtinbasher
31st Jul 2007, 19:01
The F-35B will be the world's first short take-off and vertical landing aircraft capable of operating routinely at supersonic speeds.

And having spent many, many years in the system, I've been around the buoy, several times, but, I would lay a decent wager that our one, in the UK, will just fall short of what the others can do! We'll be sold down the line......., again. Before the "incoming", just remember this came from a real old scroat who's been there before, seen it, smelt it, felt it, and most likely....well, you know. Best I don't ask you to preserve this post for posterity! I'll be lon........g gone, before the MP for what's it's name asks " would the Minister for Defiance confirm whether the replacement for all the Harriers (inc variants) does the job we've paid for"?

MTB

JFZ90
31st Jul 2007, 19:51
LO - like your subtle reply. Never in service, but could add:

Mach 2.04...
http://www.aiaa.org/tc/vstol/29.jpg
but not really very useful as the French found

or this...
http://www.tomtom-net.de/resources/vj101/v101_a.jpg
only Mach 1.14 this time from the germans, but notable for being displayed in the Deutscher Musuem in Munich, proudly listed as the "worlds only supersonic VSTOL aircraft".

soddim
31st Jul 2007, 19:59
I hope PW IV makes the F35B less ugly - it stands a good chance of winning the all-time ugliest aircraft at the moment.

In my experience if it looks right it flies right - hope I'm wrong.

Archimedes
31st Jul 2007, 20:19
''This is a significant opportunity for RSL to further develop its aircraft integration portfolio and place RSL's Precision Systems business as one of the U.K.'s centres of excellence for this type of activity. Through technology reachback to the U.S. RSL, along with its Paveway IV team members, has grown significantly the U.K.'s indigenous capability in precision guided weapons.''


Did this man really say this ?

MM - the more frightening thing would be if he understood what he said... :eek:

Engines
31st Jul 2007, 21:20
Low Observable - what exactly has the F-35B done to you?

With PW4, Dave B will go to war with an offensive load equivalent to a Hurricane, unless you want to be non-LO without active jamming... Today 15:51

Not true. Way off. Wrong.

Can't give the details, but the UK commitment to the F-35B is not based on a mass outbreak of stupidity in the MoD. I'm not saying 'trust them blindly', but can't you give the aircraft an even break?

Regards

India Four Two
1st Aug 2007, 08:14
''This is a significant opportunity for RSL to further develop its aircraft integration portfolio and place RSL's Precision Systems business as one of the U.K.'s centres of excellence for this type of activity. Through technology reachback to the U.S. RSL, along with its Paveway IV team members, has grown significantly the U.K.'s indigenous capability in precision guided weapons.''


Did this man really say this ? Unfortunately, he probably did, or more likely had some PR flunky write it for him. This is a fairly typical example of a corporate press release these days, at least in North America. I find this new usage of the verb "to grow" particularly irritating.

And what's "technology reachback" - piston engines and biplane wings for smart bombs, perhaps?

pba_target
1st Aug 2007, 09:44
Soddim....did you not see the boeing competitor!?

warty99
1st Aug 2007, 09:48
Suspect the man said it, the PR hadn't the foggiest what it meant, and was forced as a result to put it in verbatim.

Any PRO who writes like that themselves should be shot.

Archimedes
1st Aug 2007, 14:31
I42 - 'technology reachback' = product support from the US manufacturer... I.e. - point at which UK based team scratches head, gets on phone/e-mail and says 'well, we can't think how to get this working. Any ideas from across the pond, boys?'

LowObservable
1st Aug 2007, 18:24
Engines,
Outbreak of cattiness is involuntary response to FifthGenerationTM Overdose Syndrome.
I count an internal capacity of 2 x 500 pound PW4s. Clearly more accurate than the 500 pounders on the Hurricane, but the same size. As far as I know the 1000-pound LGB doesn't fit on the B, and the UK is not buying the 1000 lb JDAM or, yet, the SDB.
And I did not even mention that the Hurricane had between four and twelve more internal guns!
And as for active EW I stand ready to be enlightened.
LO

soddim
1st Aug 2007, 19:07
Yes, pba-target, I did. Maybe we could have done worse!

Do hope the matelos don't mind flying ugly aorcarft!

hoodie
1st Aug 2007, 20:04
The F-35 is ugly?

What would you have said if the other guy had won?

http://www.paxmuseum.com/X32/x32%20Small%20Web%20view.jpg

incubus
1st Aug 2007, 21:22
Do hope the matelos don't mind flying ugly aorcarft! (sic)
Well, they flew the sea harrier for long enough...

Violet Club
2nd Aug 2007, 12:35
LoObz

You are wilfully ignoring the efforts of thousands of trademark lawyers and should be ashamed of yourself.

You know full well that it's '5th Generation' TM – and Paveway TM, for that matter.

But thank you for not mentioning that PIV still has problems going BNAG at the right time (and in the right place)...or that a 500 lb weapon has become almost useless for CAS when the next street over is full of kids or market shoppers.

So hurrah for RAF decision making – before too long it will have one type of guided bomb that it probably can't use – but the jets can hardly carry any in the first place, so it's another victory for common sense.

VC

LateArmLive
2nd Aug 2007, 16:58
Erm, actually, the PWIV is really quite a good weapon (or will be soon:rolleyes:).

OFBSLF
2nd Aug 2007, 17:39
The F-35 is ugly?
What would you have said if the other guy had won?Ah, yes. The Boeing entry, nicknamed the Monica.

Double Zero
2nd Aug 2007, 23:05
Incubus -

You think the Sea Harrier is ugly ? Compared to the Boeing JSF job ???!

The FRS1 - as now only seen in FRS 51 guise with the Indian Navy, is a very good looking jet indeed - IMHO the best looking Harrier or much else by a mile.

I once saw a product support type explaining, using a photo of J.F. in an FRS 1 at low level, how the pitot probe worked, to his secretary.

" Oh, I thought it was for styling ! "

The FRS / FA2 was a different matter aesthetically, but it looked good to the guys getting into it, not those opposing it, which must be the final count...

I haven't bothered working out posting photo's here before as it seems an exercise in ego for someone in my old job ( and anyway you all might think my stuff crap especially compared to the current digital results ! ) but if anyone should like to discuss please PM me.

DZ, ex - Dunsfold photographer...http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/infopop/icons/icon7.gif

incubus
3rd Aug 2007, 08:09
Granted, the Boeing is an absolute pig but just because one aircraft is a munter does not mean everything else is a beauty queen. :E

Not_a_boffin
3rd Aug 2007, 08:10
With a gob like that surely the X32 should have been the Cherie......

Wader2
3rd Aug 2007, 14:02
In my experience if it looks right it flies right - hope I'm wrong.

Late to the thread but that is exactly what I was thinking. However, remind me what BUFF means as in B52 :}

Not_a_boffin
3rd Aug 2007, 15:29
Or indeed SLUF as A7.....

LowObservable
3rd Aug 2007, 16:21
Short Little Ugly Fella, as the old Vought PR brochures said...

Sad really, since the X-32 was actually one of the neatest ideas in combat aircraft since the A-4. What else is that size and has 20,000 pounds of internal fuel? And the concept of confining the differences to the three versions to the engine nacelle (which was all secondary structure bolted to the wing) was much tidier from a manufacturing viewpoint than the JSF.
It would have been an excellent solution to a CV/STOVL requirement - but the design got really nasty when CV drove them to four tails.

So it will be a bit lame when the USN finally cancels Dave-C and goes to a Super Hornet + UCAS wing.

And it has been pointed out that they had problems (reingestion and stalls) which I suspect forced them to throttle back in VL (hence the removed inlet lip and landing gear doors). However, it should also be pointed out that they were beaten by a design that was unexecutable and had to be reworked drastically, and is even now hanging on the VL by its fingernails.

Also, I remember Bill Gunston writing about the first pics of a new US fighter arriving in the Flight office, and everyone standing around cackling about how the designers had clearly screwed up and had to make all sorts of ugly fixes to make it work at all...

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/f4/bluebook/images/d4c-1034.jpg

soddim
3rd Aug 2007, 19:11
LowObservable - what a beautiful jet. No wonder I enjoyed some 2600 hrs in it so much.

It looks like it was built to do the job - and it did!

A 'proper' jet that talked to you. The whiz kids can put their software somewhere else - this one flies without it.

ORAC
22nd Aug 2007, 08:21
My PGM for a Fuze… Paveway-IV Hits Trouble in Britiain (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/my-pgm-for-a-fuze-paveway-iv-hits-trouble-in-britiain-03644/)

In 2003, Raytheon UK operation won the GBP 120 million pound contract to develop and produce Paveway IV, beating Boeing's INS/GPS guided JDAM. The GPS/INS and laser-guided bomb 500 pound bombs are a British project, and will add a number of other enhancements including longer range than previous Paveway versions.....

The British military had wanted to deploy Raytheon's latest Paveway IV bombs in Afghanistan in September 2007, on board its newly-upgraded Harrier GR9 aircraft. Unfortunately, a recent MoD statement reveals that testing problems with the Thales UK's Aurora fuze have removed that option….

"As a result of poor system reliability during operational evaluation trials, the Paveway IV in-service date is likely to slip. Mitigation action is being investigated and we cannot, as yet, confirm the new date."

While other aspects of the system performed well, fuze difficulties mean bombs that don't go off. Defense News' report quotes Raytheon UK Paveway IV program manager John Michel, who believes qualification will be delayed at least until November 2007, with an estimated sign-off on the weapon's final design certification at the end of the year and a new set capability trials during "the first half of 2008."...

The contract is firm priced, meaning the contractors will bear the burden of any cost overruns. Meanwhile, other components already are being produced ahead of the fuze section so that overall delivery won't be as badly affected.

The firm has contracts to integrate the weapon on the F-35B (July 2007, GBP 24M), Tornado GR4 (agreement in principle, contract to follow, in service by 2010), and Eurofighter Typhoon (issued from BAE, introduction in 2012). When integration work on the different aircraft types is added, the project is forecast to cost GBP 341 million pounds, according to the National Audit Office's Major Projects Report 2006.

FantomZorbin
22nd Aug 2007, 08:35
The contract is firm priced, meaning the contractors will bear the burden of any cost overruns.


ORAC, is that 'Firm' as in the UK or USA definition? 'Firm' is not fixed in the UK contractual definition whereas it is in the USA, therefore which Law has precedent in the Contract?