F-35"D" Model
Thread Starter
F-35"D" Model
I see that the Israeli's are asking for a 2-seat Wild Weasel version of the F-35. Would we be better off ditching the lift fan and getting a WSO in our JSFs???
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't think it's going to be happening now though...........well not for the IDF anyway, would look good on our new carriers once they have been modded for cat'ntrap...
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deja Vu
The Harrier, or rather P1127, started off barely able to hover on tethers ( rather hairiliy, and I still know the people in those films, was honoured to work with them decades later );
From a stripped out barely hovering machine, it wasn't long before the thrust increased to be useful, transition flights were undertaken, then hey presto the 2-seater emerged.
Some would say 2-seat trainers should be available from the word go, but life & engine development doesn't work that way...
I'm sure as soon as the F-35B or whatever model is ready, a two-seater must be high on the list; if for not for training, for taking high ranking U.S and other customer types for a ride, which is crucially important - I'm not joking !
From a stripped out barely hovering machine, it wasn't long before the thrust increased to be useful, transition flights were undertaken, then hey presto the 2-seater emerged.
Some would say 2-seat trainers should be available from the word go, but life & engine development doesn't work that way...
I'm sure as soon as the F-35B or whatever model is ready, a two-seater must be high on the list; if for not for training, for taking high ranking U.S and other customer types for a ride, which is crucially important - I'm not joking !
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Uk
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I wonder if LM has done any design work on a two seat version? Obviously no detail design work would have been conducted."
i understood it'd been chopped for cost reasons, still if their willing to pay for it...........
i understood it'd been chopped for cost reasons, still if their willing to pay for it...........
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Computophile planner with 'cranial rectumitis'
There is no longer any need for a "type transition" trainer... our flight simulators are now good enough to replace them completely... and at a much lower cost!
Originally Posted by Leon L
I see that the Israeli's are asking for a 2-seat Wild Weasel version of the F-35. Would we be better off ditching the lift fan and getting a WSO in our JSFs???
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leon L
I see that the Israeli's are asking for a 2-seat Wild Weasel version of the F-35. Would we be better off ditching the lift fan and getting a WSO in our JSFs???
What's wrong with the F-18G?
Originally Posted by Leon L
I see that the Israeli's are asking for a 2-seat Wild Weasel version of the F-35. Would we be better off ditching the lift fan and getting a WSO in our JSFs???
What's wrong with the F-18G?
However, Leon L is in the UK... which is building 2 carriers which have no catapults, thus the F-18G won't work from their ships.
He is speaking of needing a SEAD aircraft to operate from their carriers... so they need something else!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thought a big selling point of the F-35 was the HMI and the SA it gives the driver which negated the need for a talking GPS 
, plus the care free handling and accurate sims.
I'd guess LO will make the F-35 the primary SEAD choice, even for the USN with the Growler taking other aspects of EW.
Leon L, if the RN "ditched" the fan for a backseat wouldn't that stop it operating from the CV?
, plus the care free handling and accurate sims.I'd guess LO will make the F-35 the primary SEAD choice, even for the USN with the Growler taking other aspects of EW.
Leon L, if the RN "ditched" the fan for a backseat wouldn't that stop it operating from the CV?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also consider... both the USN & the USMC currently operate the EA-6B Prowler, but only the USN is replacing them with the EA-18G Growler.
That is because the USN will operate their F-35Cs beside their F/A-18E/Fs (Super Hornets), and they need a dedicated ECM/DECM* "radar jammer" EW aircraft to accompany strike packages to protect the SHs.
The USMC is not buying any SHs... they are intending to replace all their F/A-18C/Ds, and all their AV-8B Harrier IIs with F-35Bs... meaning all their fast-jet combat aircraft will be LO, reducing the need for a dedicated EW aircraft.
Additionally, the F-35 has a radar system that has been described as having "significant EW capabilities" above and beyond any specialized self-protection ECM/DECM units in the aircraft.
The ability to use the main radar in this fashion has led the USMC to conclude that an all F-35strike package simply won't need to be escorted by a dedicated EW aircraft!
Thus, as long as only F-35s are operated from the RN's carriers, there is no need for a specific EW variant, as one or two F-35 in the strike package can be tasked as "EW escort", with their targeting info being networked from the other aircraft in the strike package.
The only need for a dedicated "EW escort" will be to protect RAF Typhoons... and since they only operate from land bases, a 2-seat F-35D without the lift fan won't have any problems... nor would the cheaper option, buying a few EA-18Gs for the RAF!
*ECM = electronic counter-measures (jamming);
DECM = deceptive electronic counter-measures (spoofing).
Combined they are called EW (electronic warfare)
That is because the USN will operate their F-35Cs beside their F/A-18E/Fs (Super Hornets), and they need a dedicated ECM/DECM* "radar jammer" EW aircraft to accompany strike packages to protect the SHs.
The USMC is not buying any SHs... they are intending to replace all their F/A-18C/Ds, and all their AV-8B Harrier IIs with F-35Bs... meaning all their fast-jet combat aircraft will be LO, reducing the need for a dedicated EW aircraft.
Additionally, the F-35 has a radar system that has been described as having "significant EW capabilities" above and beyond any specialized self-protection ECM/DECM units in the aircraft.
The ability to use the main radar in this fashion has led the USMC to conclude that an all F-35strike package simply won't need to be escorted by a dedicated EW aircraft!
Thus, as long as only F-35s are operated from the RN's carriers, there is no need for a specific EW variant, as one or two F-35 in the strike package can be tasked as "EW escort", with their targeting info being networked from the other aircraft in the strike package.
The only need for a dedicated "EW escort" will be to protect RAF Typhoons... and since they only operate from land bases, a 2-seat F-35D without the lift fan won't have any problems... nor would the cheaper option, buying a few EA-18Gs for the RAF!
*ECM = electronic counter-measures (jamming);
DECM = deceptive electronic counter-measures (spoofing).
Combined they are called EW (electronic warfare)
Thread Starter
I'd guess LO will make the F-35 the primary SEAD choice, even for the USN with the Growler taking other aspects of EW.
Leon L, if the RN "ditched" the fan for a backseat wouldn't that stop it operating from the CV?
Leon L, if the RN "ditched" the fan for a backseat wouldn't that stop it operating from the CV?
Surely F35C could match SU-33 Flanker D performance and QE Class is only a few feet short of Kuznetsov?
Obviously, a cable arrestor system would need to be embodied but not the expensive catapult.
Dunno, thoughts?
LJ (not Leon L - wherever that came from?)
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
The USMC is not buying any SHs... they are intending to replace all their F/A-18C/Ds, and all their AV-8B Harrier IIs with F-35Bs... meaning all their fast-jet combat aircraft will be LO, reducing the need for a dedicated EW aircraft.
Secondly, the LO is only there when using the internal bay on - small, and even smaller on the B - as soon as you start hanging external ordinance on the airframe then EW is as necessary as at present.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ORAC, I didn't make that up... that is what the USMC is saying.
Read this statement (in a March 3 2010 article in Aviation Week) from Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Duane Thiessen, deputy commandant for programs and resources.
U.S. Defense Budgets And Plans Collide | AVIATION WEEK
Read this statement (in a March 3 2010 article in Aviation Week) from Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Duane Thiessen, deputy commandant for programs and resources.
U.S. Defense Budgets And Plans Collide | AVIATION WEEK
The Marine Corps offers some insight into how it plans to handle the airborne electronic attack (EA) portion of the problem. The flying life of the service’s upgraded EA-6B Prowler aircraft, already long in the tooth, is being used up at five times the peacetime rate. The solution is a recasting of the F‑35B as a “multispectral, theater information-integration plus strike fighter,” says Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Duane Thiessen, deputy commandant for programs and resources. “It’s going to change the way we do business.” But to afford it, the Marines have to forgo buying additional fourth-generation aircraft such as the EA-18G Growler EA aircraft. Instead, the F-35B will become the Marines’ EA replacement to the EA-6B.
“Our intention is to shift EA to the JSF; and where there is opportunity in unmanned air systems, we will take advantage of that,” says Thiessen. “We have no plans for a two-seater. There is a lot of interest in trying to put some of this [EA capability] in [an unmanned aircraft system]. That is probably not going to be a Marine Corps program.”
“Our intention is to shift EA to the JSF; and where there is opportunity in unmanned air systems, we will take advantage of that,” says Thiessen. “We have no plans for a two-seater. There is a lot of interest in trying to put some of this [EA capability] in [an unmanned aircraft system]. That is probably not going to be a Marine Corps program.”
