F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IN FOCUS: Simulation seen as key to cost-effective military training
Even the boys working with the F35 put some serious reservations when it comes to relying too much on simulation training;
Even the boys working with the F35 put some serious reservations when it comes to relying too much on simulation training;
"ACC has done several studies and evaluations of live and simulator training to determine the right mix of live and virtual training that maximises combat readiness while reducing training costs in today's fiscally constrained environment," says USAF major command. While the technology has great strengths in terms of procedural training and large-force employment exercises, it also has some serious accuracy limitations. "ACC also views most simulator training as a complement versus a replacement of live fly training due to the strengths of each training medium," says USAF.
....
Even with some level of motion, one major limitation of simulators is that they cannot replicate the physiological effects on the human body. Simulators cannot train student pilots on aspects of flight such as experiencing g-loading and the associated vestibular effects; nor can they replicate physiological exhaustion. A simulator is also unable to replicate the "feel" of an aircraft, such as airframe buffet cues.
"All of this is important in dogfighting - the feel of energy bleed and increasing buffet as you trade [airspeed] for nose position," says one senior USAF officer.
A senior USAF instructor pilot says he has never flown any simulator that has been able to model the flight dynamics of a fighter accurately - despite some of the latest simulators incorporating inflating g-suits, speakers for vibration and even moving plates in the seat.
For the US Navy, the problem is even more acute. There is no substitute for some of the specialised tasks naval aviators are required to carry out - such as carrier landings - which must be performed in a real aircraft.
....
There are, however, those who advocate increasing carrier qualification training in simulators to reduce naval aviators' required flight hours. "That makes us as flightcrew very nervous," Charles says.
Perhaps where the simulator is most lacking is that students are always consciously aware that there is no real danger. Another senior USAF pilot says: "You simply cannot replace the sight, sound, smell, g-forces and fear you experience when actually flying."
Charles concurs. "You can't put the fear of dying in the sim," he says. "You can't ever replicate the fact that if you get low at the boat that you will actually hit the boat."
For many younger pilots, "getting in the simulator is playing a very expensive video game", Charles says. "Now, there are folks who are very good in the sim, but do very poorly in the jet."
Charles says many young pilots are simply overwhelmed by having to operate the aircraft and its systems while simultaneously experiencing g-forces and other airborne environmental factors. "But on the other hand, there are some folks who do mediocre in the sim and get in the jet and they perform very well," he says.
....
During a real Red Flag exercise, for example, a flight lead for a four-ship of fighters might have to fly though bad weather and navigate to where he needs to go in suboptimal conditions. The pilot may also have to deal with snags with air traffic control and or administrative tasks, which happen as a matter of course during a regular flying day.
It may be necessary to deconflict from other airborne traffic or manage safety rules, or deal with issues such as an aircraft malfunction or bad radios. Charles cites situations where a USN flight lead might have to substitute a different pilot or aircraft for a certain task mid-flight as a result of unforeseen problems.
"There is friction in just getting to the fight that is not represented in the sim," the senior USAF pilot says. "There are pluses to the sim, but I still think that you need to have the majority of your training in the air."
....
Even with some level of motion, one major limitation of simulators is that they cannot replicate the physiological effects on the human body. Simulators cannot train student pilots on aspects of flight such as experiencing g-loading and the associated vestibular effects; nor can they replicate physiological exhaustion. A simulator is also unable to replicate the "feel" of an aircraft, such as airframe buffet cues.
"All of this is important in dogfighting - the feel of energy bleed and increasing buffet as you trade [airspeed] for nose position," says one senior USAF officer.
A senior USAF instructor pilot says he has never flown any simulator that has been able to model the flight dynamics of a fighter accurately - despite some of the latest simulators incorporating inflating g-suits, speakers for vibration and even moving plates in the seat.
For the US Navy, the problem is even more acute. There is no substitute for some of the specialised tasks naval aviators are required to carry out - such as carrier landings - which must be performed in a real aircraft.
....
There are, however, those who advocate increasing carrier qualification training in simulators to reduce naval aviators' required flight hours. "That makes us as flightcrew very nervous," Charles says.
Perhaps where the simulator is most lacking is that students are always consciously aware that there is no real danger. Another senior USAF pilot says: "You simply cannot replace the sight, sound, smell, g-forces and fear you experience when actually flying."
Charles concurs. "You can't put the fear of dying in the sim," he says. "You can't ever replicate the fact that if you get low at the boat that you will actually hit the boat."
For many younger pilots, "getting in the simulator is playing a very expensive video game", Charles says. "Now, there are folks who are very good in the sim, but do very poorly in the jet."
Charles says many young pilots are simply overwhelmed by having to operate the aircraft and its systems while simultaneously experiencing g-forces and other airborne environmental factors. "But on the other hand, there are some folks who do mediocre in the sim and get in the jet and they perform very well," he says.
....
During a real Red Flag exercise, for example, a flight lead for a four-ship of fighters might have to fly though bad weather and navigate to where he needs to go in suboptimal conditions. The pilot may also have to deal with snags with air traffic control and or administrative tasks, which happen as a matter of course during a regular flying day.
It may be necessary to deconflict from other airborne traffic or manage safety rules, or deal with issues such as an aircraft malfunction or bad radios. Charles cites situations where a USN flight lead might have to substitute a different pilot or aircraft for a certain task mid-flight as a result of unforeseen problems.
"There is friction in just getting to the fight that is not represented in the sim," the senior USAF pilot says. "There are pluses to the sim, but I still think that you need to have the majority of your training in the air."
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CM, well aussies costed the f-35 @ 200 hr per year, how many flight hrs do you want?
Someone said they can only sit 4 in the sim at a time...each f-35 is it's own networked sim..pilots can also sit in the plane and connect to the onboard and offboard sim
as well as more effective flight training by using the plane connected to the sim whilst flying
the f-35 have the next generation sim, forget the 3rd and 4th gen sims...before you jump on the bandwagon and bag it, perhaps you should read a bit more about it
with your past experience you could research it and inform the forum
Someone said they can only sit 4 in the sim at a time...each f-35 is it's own networked sim..pilots can also sit in the plane and connect to the onboard and offboard sim
as well as more effective flight training by using the plane connected to the sim whilst flying
the f-35 have the next generation sim, forget the 3rd and 4th gen sims...before you jump on the bandwagon and bag it, perhaps you should read a bit more about it
with your past experience you could research it and inform the forum
Last edited by JSFfan; 25th Apr 2013 at 22:41.
JSFfan, you're just being annoying now by commenting on things you haven't read properly. I said, they were stating that they could only provide 4 sim slots in a day, not that they could only "sit 4 in the sim at a time". I helped develop the wide area sim networking and mixing synthetic with live, but thanks for the enlightening refresher on it.
I'm fully aware of the capabilities of of the new generation of simulators, their fidelity and WAN capabilites. But if you read what we were discussing and you will understand that it's not relevant to your rantings.
As I said earlier, you do need to wind your neck in a bit.
I'm fully aware of the capabilities of of the new generation of simulators, their fidelity and WAN capabilites. But if you read what we were discussing and you will understand that it's not relevant to your rantings.
As I said earlier, you do need to wind your neck in a bit.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
General Bogdan, of all people.
Pentagon downplays comment on F-35 fighter jet cyber threat | Reuters
Pentagon downplays comment on F-35 fighter jet cyber threat | Reuters
(Reuters) - The Pentagon on Thursday downplayed a comment by one of its officials that he is not totally confident in the ability of the $396 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, built by Lockheed Martin Corp, to survive a cyber attack.
...
Bogdan, an Air Force Lieutenant General, told a Senate Armed Services subcommittee that he was "not that confident" about security implemented by the companies that build the plane.
Bogdan said the Pentagon and the international partners recognized the responsibility they had for safeguarding technology on the fifth-generation stealth fighter.
He then added, "I'm a little less confident about industry partners to be quite honest with you ... I would tell you I'm not that confident outside the department."
...
Bogdan, an Air Force Lieutenant General, told a Senate Armed Services subcommittee that he was "not that confident" about security implemented by the companies that build the plane.
Bogdan said the Pentagon and the international partners recognized the responsibility they had for safeguarding technology on the fifth-generation stealth fighter.
He then added, "I'm a little less confident about industry partners to be quite honest with you ... I would tell you I'm not that confident outside the department."
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JSFfan
...each f-35 is it's own networked sim..pilots can also sit in the plane and connect to the onboard and offboard sim as well as more effective flight training by using the plane connected to the sim whilst flying.
The ADF had all these grand theoretical plans of linking Wedgetail, HACTS, MRTT, ARH, & Aegis sims with Vigilare to conduct exercises, but is yet to do so. We've found that coordinating the sim availability is VERY difficult, and even if that can be done, the operational/actual training applications and opportunities are VERY limited!
Last edited by FoxtrotAlpha18; 26th Apr 2013 at 02:22.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JSFfan,
I don't follow. What does the embedded training have to do with networking simulators and live assets that everybody has been talking about?
I don't follow. What does the embedded training have to do with networking simulators and live assets that everybody has been talking about?
Last edited by NITRO104; 26th Apr 2013 at 02:39.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
did the word embedded throw you and you jumped to post? read the whole page slowly and post again
a google will bring up more info too
a google will bring up more info too
Last edited by JSFfan; 26th Apr 2013 at 02:47.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JSFfan
most of it, but it didn't include the simming in the f-35 while sitting on the ground, I got that elsewhere
I asked for a reference to you claim that real aircraft (sitting on the ground) will be linked to sim domes, and you post a link to one that has nothing to do with what you wrote, which you say you got elsewhere... have I got that right?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
F-35 Sims Various for the use of
There are a few 'F-35 Simulators' with the FMS being the main VeryLargeOneInAbuilding. Perhaps 'JSFfan' was thinking about the last 'training aid' (for F-16s then F-35s likely) as seen below in the LastTextPost?
I was surprised by the negative comments about sim training for F-35 pilots from those pilots/instructors who have likely not flown any of the F-35 sims quoted in the 'kbrockman' article quotes earlier, however the good Tomassetti put me right.
Having 'hit the back end o'the boat' at night as some USNers like to put it - I would suggest that my many nights of FCLP (MADDLS) on RW 26 at NAS Nowra (which had a healthy downdraught in a deep gully off the threshold in the usually strong westerly winds at that time of the year) I had mucho respecto for said 'spud locker' at both locations. Nothing simulates the inkyblackmirrorbrightnohorizon first look off a CCA at 'the horror'. There was no simulator for any A4G work in the early 1970s.
Many years later in the early days of Windows 3.1 it was very 'enlightening' to bring my old flying days back using the woeful, inaccurate early MS Flight Simulator. Then Chris Mills via an Australian Personal Computer Magazine article introduced me to a wireframe DOS flight sim that wonderfully simulated ACM against an opponent. This simple sim had me experiencing all the fun and games of 'wot I brought to it' - even bobbing my head 'pulling simulated G'. I think any NavAv pilot will bring their experiences to any NavAv 'boat' simulator. T-45C pilots have their sim and initial CarQual then they may go to the S/Hornet sims and CarQuals, all the while adding their real experiences to their simulators. I still have a healthy respect for any non safe flight in any computer sim.
By all F-35 test pilot accounts the F-35 simulators (perhaps they may need to specify which ones) are very realistic - especially for the non VL people learning how to do same in the F-35B enabled sim, then in real life. Here come the quotes....
F-35 Embedded Training
http://ftp.rta.nato.int/public//PubFullText/RTO/MP%5CRTO-MP-HFM-169///MP-HFM-169-02.doc
"ABSTRACT
The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of Embedded Training (ET) in the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). This paper will cover early ET concept development, the implementation of ET in JSF, now F-35 Lightning II, the pilot perspective of the ET training syllabus, and future development of F-35 ET. In the JSF concept development phase the training system solution included the deployable training device and added ET training capability built into the aircraft. ET was brought to the forefront with fighter pilots’ heavy involvement in extended periods of aircraft deployment to international theaters of war. During these periods fighter pilots were away from continuation training opportunities. In response, the JSF training system concept integrated the ET Virtual Training Model (VTM) in the synthetic training environments to support "anywhere/anytime" interactive combat training while in-flight.
The objective of F-35 ET is to enhance and maintain fighter pilot proficiency. ET is implemented by functionally partitioning the aircraft integrated core processor (ICP). ET consists of the VTM hosted in the ICP and the P5 Combat Training System (CTS) contained in P5 Internal Subsystem (IS). Both VT and P5 CTS provide brief and debrief capabilities.
From the pilot perspective, VT is an overlay of constructive simulation on the real world to provide an enhanced training environment to the pilot. VT mission planning data is inserted in the aircraft via the preloaded portable memory device (PMD). A coordinated data link distribution of VT provides synchronization between a four-ship flight of F-35 aircraft. Pilots may train to a coordinated attack against virtual targets with appropriate threat reactions and kill responses that are shared across participants. All participating aircraft follow the same realistic, virtual pre-planned training scenario. Following the event, the pilot takes the PMD back to off-board mission support for debriefing. The result is combat team training in live flight supplemented and enhanced by a virtual combat environment.....
...ET is becoming a key component of the total training system for the next generation of tactical aircraft. Over the expected life cycle of calendar years 2013 through 2057, the program savings could reach $2,976M...."
___________________
Dutch Space & NLR deliver F-35 Embedded Training System to LM 12 July 2012
http://www.asdnews.com/news-43894/Dutch_Space_and_NLR_deliver_F-35_Embedded_Training_System_to_LM.htm
________
F-35 FMS Full Mission Simulator:
http://www.gizmag.com/f-35-full-mission-simulator/18442/
&
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/seoul-to-rely-on-simulators-to-evaluate-f-35-for-f-x-iii-contest-373006/
__________________
U.S. Government Refuses South Korean Flight Testing on F-35. F-15SE and Eurofighter Will Be Flight Tested For Competition While F-35 Tests Will Be Done On A Simulator June 7, 2012
http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/06/07/lockheed-martin-refuses-south-korean-flight-testing-on-f-35-f-15se-and-eurofighter-will-be-flight-tested-for-competition-while-f-35-tests-will-be-done-on-a-simulator/
"...Q: How can potential customers like Korea evaluate the F-35 capabilities? Answer: The F-35 has a classified, high-fidelity Manned Tactical Simulator that is used by the three U.S. services, eight partner nations and other potential operators to evaluate the F-35 and develop 5th Generation tactics. The simulator allows four F-35 aircraft to fly and operate together as they fight against complex airborne and ground-based threat systems. Air combat is evolving to depend more on stealth, sensors, sensor fusion and interoperable networks. So it is essential to evaluate advanced fighters using simulator systems that enable pilots to fly and fight together to defeat sophisticated threat systems. Pilots from the USAF, the USN, the USMC, and many international nations have extensively flown the high-fidelity simulator and verified it is the best tool to evaluate F-35 capabilities. All of the international nations who have selected and ordered the F-35 have evaluated its capabilities using the Manned Tactical Simulator.
Q: Can Korea fly the F-35? Answer: At this time the F-35 fleet is fully occupied with test, train-ing and delivery activities, so Korea will not be able to fly the aircraft. Potential customers like Korea have the opportunity for multiple pilots to fly the high-fidelity Manned Tactical Simulator similar to operations conducted by the U.S. Services and F-35 international partners & customers. In addition, potential customers can also fly the F-35 Handling Qualities Simulator which is a motion-based system that allows an assessment of F-35 handling / flying qualities and is the same simulator used by test pilots for their initial training. Potential customers may also have the opportunity to closely observe F-35 flight operations, discuss F-35 capabilities with USAF and Lockheed Martin test pilots, participate in pre-flight and post-flight pilot activities, and observe or participate in numerous types of maintenance activities."..."
___________________
F-35 INTEGRATED TRAINING CENTER BY SCOTT R. GOURLEY
http://www.nxtbook.com/faircount/F-35LightningII/JSFII/index.php#/136
"...Full Mission Simulators, which features a 360-degree dome. And we also have a Deployable Mission Rehearsal Trainer (DMRT), with two cockpits in a milvan. They are the exact same cockpits, exact same software, and exact same instructor/operators stations, except things have been ‘condensed.’ In other words, instead of having three or four screens at the instructor/ operator station, there is one; and instead of having a large 360-degree dome, it is a smaller dome with smaller field of view," she said.
"The DMRT helps because it can be deployed on a ship — a carrier or an LHD for any of the services or partner countries,"..."
________________________
Live Virtual Constructive technology set to revolutionize air combat training 13 Apr 2012 Dave Majumdar
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/live-virtual-constructive-technology-set-to-revolutionize-air-combat-training-370661/
"The US Air Force and Lockheed Martin are getting ready to demonstrate the first operational use of live virtual constructive (LVC) training technology on 26 April at Luke Air Force Base (AFB), Arizona.
The technology has the potential to revolutionize the way air forces train-particularly for aviators who will fly 5th generation machines like Lockheed's F-22 Raptor and F-35.
While currently USAF, US Navy and US Marine Corps pilots fly their aircraft against other friendly jets replicating enemy "bandits" such as the Russian Sukhoi Su-30 Flanker, often there are not enough adversaries for pilots to train against.
"There are not enough airborne resources that we can go fly and fight against that would give us the maximum training benefit for all the JP-8 [jet fuel] that we're burning," says Robert McCutchen, Lockheed's F-16 training expert at the Luke AFB Networked Training Centre. "To be able to go out and fly a four-ship against two adversaries doesn't really maximize your ability to employ that airplane as a four-ship."
LVC would offer that four-ship of real F-16 fighters the ability to fight against eight to 12 virtual bandits. Those computer-generated adversaries would show up on the F-16's sensors just like real enemy fighters and would have realistic flight characteristics, McCutchen says.
The adversaries would be managed by instructors who would control those virtual enemies and manage their tactics. They would also make sure the virtual adversaries do not get into visual range.
"We'll have individuals on the ground who will be manipulating and managing the scenario and making sure these computer-generated little guys stay outside the visual range of the live fighters," says the retired 5000+ hour F-16 weapons school graduate.
The addition of so many virtual enemy forces in the air and on the ground greatly increases the complexity of training missions.
"We'll be able to robust their scenarios," McCutchen says.
The limitation, of course, is that LVC cannot simulate a visual-range opponent. The targets are virtual, but it should still be a useful training tool.
This is especially true for the F-22, where Raptor units have a difficult time coaxing dissimilar fighter units to fly against them due to the lopsided nature of the training. The F-35, McCutchen says, will face similar problems of not having enough high-performance adversaries to train against.
"The F-35 is going to have the same problem and the LVC is going to be a way that the air force to going to move forward and make the technology mature through the F-16 so that we can help future F-35 pilots," he says...."
I was surprised by the negative comments about sim training for F-35 pilots from those pilots/instructors who have likely not flown any of the F-35 sims quoted in the 'kbrockman' article quotes earlier, however the good Tomassetti put me right.
Having 'hit the back end o'the boat' at night as some USNers like to put it - I would suggest that my many nights of FCLP (MADDLS) on RW 26 at NAS Nowra (which had a healthy downdraught in a deep gully off the threshold in the usually strong westerly winds at that time of the year) I had mucho respecto for said 'spud locker' at both locations. Nothing simulates the inkyblackmirrorbrightnohorizon first look off a CCA at 'the horror'. There was no simulator for any A4G work in the early 1970s.
Many years later in the early days of Windows 3.1 it was very 'enlightening' to bring my old flying days back using the woeful, inaccurate early MS Flight Simulator. Then Chris Mills via an Australian Personal Computer Magazine article introduced me to a wireframe DOS flight sim that wonderfully simulated ACM against an opponent. This simple sim had me experiencing all the fun and games of 'wot I brought to it' - even bobbing my head 'pulling simulated G'. I think any NavAv pilot will bring their experiences to any NavAv 'boat' simulator. T-45C pilots have their sim and initial CarQual then they may go to the S/Hornet sims and CarQuals, all the while adding their real experiences to their simulators. I still have a healthy respect for any non safe flight in any computer sim.
By all F-35 test pilot accounts the F-35 simulators (perhaps they may need to specify which ones) are very realistic - especially for the non VL people learning how to do same in the F-35B enabled sim, then in real life. Here come the quotes....
F-35 Embedded Training
http://ftp.rta.nato.int/public//PubFullText/RTO/MP%5CRTO-MP-HFM-169///MP-HFM-169-02.doc
"ABSTRACT
The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of Embedded Training (ET) in the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). This paper will cover early ET concept development, the implementation of ET in JSF, now F-35 Lightning II, the pilot perspective of the ET training syllabus, and future development of F-35 ET. In the JSF concept development phase the training system solution included the deployable training device and added ET training capability built into the aircraft. ET was brought to the forefront with fighter pilots’ heavy involvement in extended periods of aircraft deployment to international theaters of war. During these periods fighter pilots were away from continuation training opportunities. In response, the JSF training system concept integrated the ET Virtual Training Model (VTM) in the synthetic training environments to support "anywhere/anytime" interactive combat training while in-flight.
The objective of F-35 ET is to enhance and maintain fighter pilot proficiency. ET is implemented by functionally partitioning the aircraft integrated core processor (ICP). ET consists of the VTM hosted in the ICP and the P5 Combat Training System (CTS) contained in P5 Internal Subsystem (IS). Both VT and P5 CTS provide brief and debrief capabilities.
From the pilot perspective, VT is an overlay of constructive simulation on the real world to provide an enhanced training environment to the pilot. VT mission planning data is inserted in the aircraft via the preloaded portable memory device (PMD). A coordinated data link distribution of VT provides synchronization between a four-ship flight of F-35 aircraft. Pilots may train to a coordinated attack against virtual targets with appropriate threat reactions and kill responses that are shared across participants. All participating aircraft follow the same realistic, virtual pre-planned training scenario. Following the event, the pilot takes the PMD back to off-board mission support for debriefing. The result is combat team training in live flight supplemented and enhanced by a virtual combat environment.....
...ET is becoming a key component of the total training system for the next generation of tactical aircraft. Over the expected life cycle of calendar years 2013 through 2057, the program savings could reach $2,976M...."
___________________
Dutch Space & NLR deliver F-35 Embedded Training System to LM 12 July 2012
http://www.asdnews.com/news-43894/Dutch_Space_and_NLR_deliver_F-35_Embedded_Training_System_to_LM.htm
________
F-35 FMS Full Mission Simulator:
http://www.gizmag.com/f-35-full-mission-simulator/18442/
&
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/seoul-to-rely-on-simulators-to-evaluate-f-35-for-f-x-iii-contest-373006/
__________________
U.S. Government Refuses South Korean Flight Testing on F-35. F-15SE and Eurofighter Will Be Flight Tested For Competition While F-35 Tests Will Be Done On A Simulator June 7, 2012
http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2012/06/07/lockheed-martin-refuses-south-korean-flight-testing-on-f-35-f-15se-and-eurofighter-will-be-flight-tested-for-competition-while-f-35-tests-will-be-done-on-a-simulator/
"...Q: How can potential customers like Korea evaluate the F-35 capabilities? Answer: The F-35 has a classified, high-fidelity Manned Tactical Simulator that is used by the three U.S. services, eight partner nations and other potential operators to evaluate the F-35 and develop 5th Generation tactics. The simulator allows four F-35 aircraft to fly and operate together as they fight against complex airborne and ground-based threat systems. Air combat is evolving to depend more on stealth, sensors, sensor fusion and interoperable networks. So it is essential to evaluate advanced fighters using simulator systems that enable pilots to fly and fight together to defeat sophisticated threat systems. Pilots from the USAF, the USN, the USMC, and many international nations have extensively flown the high-fidelity simulator and verified it is the best tool to evaluate F-35 capabilities. All of the international nations who have selected and ordered the F-35 have evaluated its capabilities using the Manned Tactical Simulator.
Q: Can Korea fly the F-35? Answer: At this time the F-35 fleet is fully occupied with test, train-ing and delivery activities, so Korea will not be able to fly the aircraft. Potential customers like Korea have the opportunity for multiple pilots to fly the high-fidelity Manned Tactical Simulator similar to operations conducted by the U.S. Services and F-35 international partners & customers. In addition, potential customers can also fly the F-35 Handling Qualities Simulator which is a motion-based system that allows an assessment of F-35 handling / flying qualities and is the same simulator used by test pilots for their initial training. Potential customers may also have the opportunity to closely observe F-35 flight operations, discuss F-35 capabilities with USAF and Lockheed Martin test pilots, participate in pre-flight and post-flight pilot activities, and observe or participate in numerous types of maintenance activities."..."
___________________
F-35 INTEGRATED TRAINING CENTER BY SCOTT R. GOURLEY
http://www.nxtbook.com/faircount/F-35LightningII/JSFII/index.php#/136
"...Full Mission Simulators, which features a 360-degree dome. And we also have a Deployable Mission Rehearsal Trainer (DMRT), with two cockpits in a milvan. They are the exact same cockpits, exact same software, and exact same instructor/operators stations, except things have been ‘condensed.’ In other words, instead of having three or four screens at the instructor/ operator station, there is one; and instead of having a large 360-degree dome, it is a smaller dome with smaller field of view," she said.
"The DMRT helps because it can be deployed on a ship — a carrier or an LHD for any of the services or partner countries,"..."
________________________
Live Virtual Constructive technology set to revolutionize air combat training 13 Apr 2012 Dave Majumdar
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/live-virtual-constructive-technology-set-to-revolutionize-air-combat-training-370661/
"The US Air Force and Lockheed Martin are getting ready to demonstrate the first operational use of live virtual constructive (LVC) training technology on 26 April at Luke Air Force Base (AFB), Arizona.
The technology has the potential to revolutionize the way air forces train-particularly for aviators who will fly 5th generation machines like Lockheed's F-22 Raptor and F-35.
While currently USAF, US Navy and US Marine Corps pilots fly their aircraft against other friendly jets replicating enemy "bandits" such as the Russian Sukhoi Su-30 Flanker, often there are not enough adversaries for pilots to train against.
"There are not enough airborne resources that we can go fly and fight against that would give us the maximum training benefit for all the JP-8 [jet fuel] that we're burning," says Robert McCutchen, Lockheed's F-16 training expert at the Luke AFB Networked Training Centre. "To be able to go out and fly a four-ship against two adversaries doesn't really maximize your ability to employ that airplane as a four-ship."
LVC would offer that four-ship of real F-16 fighters the ability to fight against eight to 12 virtual bandits. Those computer-generated adversaries would show up on the F-16's sensors just like real enemy fighters and would have realistic flight characteristics, McCutchen says.
The adversaries would be managed by instructors who would control those virtual enemies and manage their tactics. They would also make sure the virtual adversaries do not get into visual range.
"We'll have individuals on the ground who will be manipulating and managing the scenario and making sure these computer-generated little guys stay outside the visual range of the live fighters," says the retired 5000+ hour F-16 weapons school graduate.
The addition of so many virtual enemy forces in the air and on the ground greatly increases the complexity of training missions.
"We'll be able to robust their scenarios," McCutchen says.
The limitation, of course, is that LVC cannot simulate a visual-range opponent. The targets are virtual, but it should still be a useful training tool.
This is especially true for the F-22, where Raptor units have a difficult time coaxing dissimilar fighter units to fly against them due to the lopsided nature of the training. The F-35, McCutchen says, will face similar problems of not having enough high-performance adversaries to train against.
"The F-35 is going to have the same problem and the LVC is going to be a way that the air force to going to move forward and make the technology mature through the F-16 so that we can help future F-35 pilots," he says...."
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 26th Apr 2013 at 06:19. Reason: usual dud formatting
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nice links spaz and the f-35 sims will be good with a dozen top air forces wanting them and with the cost R&D costs distributed it shouldn't be too bad
fox, my link addressed this part of what I said "more effective flight training by using the plane connected to the sim whilst flying".
I will get on google and find where they said that they will also sim from the f-35 whilst on the ground
fox, my link addressed this part of what I said "more effective flight training by using the plane connected to the sim whilst flying".
I will get on google and find where they said that they will also sim from the f-35 whilst on the ground
Last edited by JSFfan; 26th Apr 2013 at 07:37.
Spaz,
Some good stuff there, thank you. It pretty much backs up what we have beenseeing thus far and demonstrates that they are making good use of the currenttechnologies and capabilities. Some cutting edge, but most not exactlynew.
That said, one of the very important issues here stems from a comment madeearlier regarding F-22 training and the difficulty in finding willingadversaries due to the lop-sided nature of the affiliation - a factor that wecould expect to be equally relevant for F-35 (at least it better be!). Also limitations on using 'the full capabilities' in public. A vital point here is that using one's own high tech platforms as live trainingadversaries has a lot of negative connotations. In other words, you probablywouldn't want to use, say, F-22 to go up against F-35 for reasons largelybeyond the scope of this forum. So the simulator becomes the obvious place totrain against potential adversaries, platforms other than one's own and theones that JSF should be designed to go against. All of that is well withincurrent simulator capabilities, including computer generated virtual adversaries.
Similarly, the fidelity of the modelling of flight characteristics is easilygood enough today to introduce pilots to aircraft handling and a lot of keyevents - in truth, we've been doing that for a long time now to very goodeffect. Indeed, flight modelling is so good it can also allow pilots toexperience regimes of the flight envelope that would be prohibited in liveflight.
All of that accepted, there remains the issue of establishing where the'floor' (as LO called it) is positioned. And the concern I was raising earlierremains; regardless of how many flight hours (live, not synthetic) nations havebudgeted for, there will always be pressure to try to save money by transferringmore hours to the simulators. Whilst I fully support the maximum use ofsynthetic training devices, I would always caution against over-blown claimsthat we can make simulators so realistic that they can fully take the place oflive flying.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 66
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do agree that a lot of training can be done in a sim, the issue for me is how accurate is the sim? I say this particularly for the F35 when the previously advertised performance envelope changes, we all know the realignments... If a sim had been developed for the initial hoped for performance envelope how certain can anyone be that it has been adjusted to reflect the actual performance of any of the F35 variants. Thinking that I assume an early F35C simulator would enable arrested carrier landings... Carts and Horses comes a bit to mind.
Good point, Philip. Fortunately it's a reasonably simple matter to alter parameters in the sim software. However, that all depends on the manufaturer being up-front about the performance figures, obviously. And that, with the best will in the world, can be influenced by the intended use of the simulation. Probably enough detail for the public domain.
Addendum: sorry, I missed out your second point. Yes, arrested landings are a simple matter and landing on is a good example of a key event that sims are quite good at. They are also a prime example of the biggest differences between live and synthetic. The sim generates a surprising level of pucker factor, but nowhere near what the aircraft can give you. I've done it in the sim a fair bit, but I would never imagine I could even attempt in for real.
Addendum: sorry, I missed out your second point. Yes, arrested landings are a simple matter and landing on is a good example of a key event that sims are quite good at. They are also a prime example of the biggest differences between live and synthetic. The sim generates a surprising level of pucker factor, but nowhere near what the aircraft can give you. I've done it in the sim a fair bit, but I would never imagine I could even attempt in for real.
Last edited by Courtney Mil; 26th Apr 2013 at 09:07.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
F-35 Sim uses same source code
For 'PhillipG' about F-35 FMS accuracy this quote (and there are many others including test pilot quotes) should suffice... [now I see there is some 'hiccup' about simulating arrests onboard in an F-35C sim?] BAE in WHACKworth, UK, or where ever, was simulating these things during the 'cats n'flaps' era but now is back to SRVLing nicely. A great deal of effort has gone into making the F-35C easy to deck land - with JPALS an individual arrest wire can be targeted for automatic landings. Plus there has been work on making the control/control surfaces make more effective timely adjustments for better glideslope control at Opt AoA. The hook is under development whilst the interim hook changes have proved successful.
Lockheed Martin Delivers First F-35 Full Mission Simulator to Eglin Air Force Base
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/news/p...11JSF-FMS.html
"..."JSF training technology brings a revolutionary new capability to the joint services," said Col. Arthur Tomassetti, 33rd Fighter Wing Vice Commander. "The smooth surface, high-resolution dome is a dramatic improvement over legacy fighter simulators. The high visual acuity and utilization of a significant amount of real aircraft parts and source code will allow us to train a wide variety of mission tasks previously not accomplished in simulators. The F-35 FMS [Full Mission Simulator] will be our primary pilot training device, and we are anxious to start putting it to good use."
In all F-35 simulators, actual aircraft software is used to give pilots the most realistic experience and allow software upgrades in step with the F-35 development...."
_______________________
Director, Operational Test and Evaluation | F-35A Joint Strike Fighter
Readiness for Training Operational Utility Evaluation Feb 2013
http://pogoarchives.org/straus/ote-i...o-20130215.pdf
“...Full Mission Simulators (FMS) are excellent; however, some deficiencies were noted with minor impacts on training.
The Full Mission Simulator (FMS) environment, including the contractor instructors and instructor workstations, was effective in training the students in the syllabus events and preparing them for flight, although correction of minor deficiencies would improve training effectiveness. Comments from the pilots and observations indicated that the simulator was an excellent training device, with higher fidelity than simulators used for training in legacy fighter aircraft. One of the four primary student pilots stated that it was “one of the best parts of the whole program.” However, the following three issues with the simulator training were identified by the student pilots, which adversely affected the effectiveness of the simulator....
...During end-of-course interviews, each student pilot stated that the simulators adequately prepared them for the flying training portion of the syllabus....”
____________________
Eglin’s F-35 flight simulators integral part of pilot training By LAUREN SAGE REINLIE 16 Feb 2013
Eglin?s F-35 flight simulators integral part of pilot training (VIDEO) - Top Story - Northwest Florida Daily News
"...The rooms that house Eglin’s four simulators are classified and not open to the public or the media. Lockheed Martin, the company that produces them, declined to disclose its dimensions, the specifications of the computer system that runs it or the cost. Representatives said the information was sensitive, technical data.
The pilots who have used the simulators, though, testified to their staggering size and scope while in a classroom at Eglin recently.
They compared using the simulators to going on a theme park ride or hopping aboard the Battlestar Galactica — the pilot is immersed in another world. The pilots said they are an invaluable tool in learning to fly the military’s newest fighter jet.
“I’m positive I’m not the only pilot in this room that has forgotten he is in a simulator,” said Marine Maj. Michael Rountree, one of the first certified F-35 pilots and an instructor at the school. “You don’t even remember that you’re not moving. The way things move around you in that 360-degree globe, it feels like you’re flying and you just forget.”...
...Another groundbreaking aspect of the simulator is how dynamic it is. Instructors sit at a control consul outside and manipulate a host of conditions, from the environment to how the plane is functioning, Wilder said. An instructor can make the simulator mimic different malfunctions or emergencies until the student learns how to respond correctly so the jet can be landed safely....
...The simulator also can allow pilots to practice refueling in the air, landing on an aircraft carrier, evading missile fire from other aircraft or the ground and flying in formation.
Two simulators also can link together. Pilots in one will see when the pilot in the other lowers his landing gear....
...Wilder, who was an F-16 pilot in the Air Force for 16 years before moving to Lockheed to develop the F-35, said no simulator he’s ever seen has offered that level of detail.
“That’s Disney World kind of stuff,” he said. “You just don’t do that in military simulators anywhere to that kind of fidelity, but that’s the detail they’ve gone with us. That’s amazing to me.”..."
Lockheed Martin Delivers First F-35 Full Mission Simulator to Eglin Air Force Base
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/news/p...11JSF-FMS.html
"..."JSF training technology brings a revolutionary new capability to the joint services," said Col. Arthur Tomassetti, 33rd Fighter Wing Vice Commander. "The smooth surface, high-resolution dome is a dramatic improvement over legacy fighter simulators. The high visual acuity and utilization of a significant amount of real aircraft parts and source code will allow us to train a wide variety of mission tasks previously not accomplished in simulators. The F-35 FMS [Full Mission Simulator] will be our primary pilot training device, and we are anxious to start putting it to good use."
In all F-35 simulators, actual aircraft software is used to give pilots the most realistic experience and allow software upgrades in step with the F-35 development...."
_______________________
Director, Operational Test and Evaluation | F-35A Joint Strike Fighter
Readiness for Training Operational Utility Evaluation Feb 2013
http://pogoarchives.org/straus/ote-i...o-20130215.pdf
“...Full Mission Simulators (FMS) are excellent; however, some deficiencies were noted with minor impacts on training.
The Full Mission Simulator (FMS) environment, including the contractor instructors and instructor workstations, was effective in training the students in the syllabus events and preparing them for flight, although correction of minor deficiencies would improve training effectiveness. Comments from the pilots and observations indicated that the simulator was an excellent training device, with higher fidelity than simulators used for training in legacy fighter aircraft. One of the four primary student pilots stated that it was “one of the best parts of the whole program.” However, the following three issues with the simulator training were identified by the student pilots, which adversely affected the effectiveness of the simulator....
...During end-of-course interviews, each student pilot stated that the simulators adequately prepared them for the flying training portion of the syllabus....”
____________________
Eglin’s F-35 flight simulators integral part of pilot training By LAUREN SAGE REINLIE 16 Feb 2013
Eglin?s F-35 flight simulators integral part of pilot training (VIDEO) - Top Story - Northwest Florida Daily News
"...The rooms that house Eglin’s four simulators are classified and not open to the public or the media. Lockheed Martin, the company that produces them, declined to disclose its dimensions, the specifications of the computer system that runs it or the cost. Representatives said the information was sensitive, technical data.
The pilots who have used the simulators, though, testified to their staggering size and scope while in a classroom at Eglin recently.
They compared using the simulators to going on a theme park ride or hopping aboard the Battlestar Galactica — the pilot is immersed in another world. The pilots said they are an invaluable tool in learning to fly the military’s newest fighter jet.
“I’m positive I’m not the only pilot in this room that has forgotten he is in a simulator,” said Marine Maj. Michael Rountree, one of the first certified F-35 pilots and an instructor at the school. “You don’t even remember that you’re not moving. The way things move around you in that 360-degree globe, it feels like you’re flying and you just forget.”...
...Another groundbreaking aspect of the simulator is how dynamic it is. Instructors sit at a control consul outside and manipulate a host of conditions, from the environment to how the plane is functioning, Wilder said. An instructor can make the simulator mimic different malfunctions or emergencies until the student learns how to respond correctly so the jet can be landed safely....
...The simulator also can allow pilots to practice refueling in the air, landing on an aircraft carrier, evading missile fire from other aircraft or the ground and flying in formation.
Two simulators also can link together. Pilots in one will see when the pilot in the other lowers his landing gear....
...Wilder, who was an F-16 pilot in the Air Force for 16 years before moving to Lockheed to develop the F-35, said no simulator he’s ever seen has offered that level of detail.
“That’s Disney World kind of stuff,” he said. “You just don’t do that in military simulators anywhere to that kind of fidelity, but that’s the detail they’ve gone with us. That’s amazing to me.”..."
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 26th Apr 2013 at 12:41. Reason: Added text explanation 'carts / horses' + wayward square bracket