F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Op-Ed: More Creative F-35 Bookkeeping: Backers Play Fast and Loose with F-35 Costs (Source: Defense-Aerospace.com; published Nov. 27, 2013)
Originally Posted by LowObservable
What is certain is that LM, the Pentagon and the other parties involved have gotten the press fully under control, it is downright laughable to read article upon article in various press sources who are all literally identical word for word and no more than statements straight out of the LM press map.
LM has also played "new media" quite well - but it's a field where the contractor has the advantage because there is very little money in it. For instance, there's one DC-based defense news site that has two fully-paid-up LockMart shills on its "board of contributors" and (surprise) takes a pro-JSF line.
ORAC - Good find. Working out how 40 aircraft have that impact on program costs hurts my head. And anyone who cites New Zealand and Malaysia as sales prospects has suffered a recent blow to the head.
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Annapolis
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New Zealand has no plans to buy F-35. At a recent Pentagon meeting with SecDef Hagel, Defense Minister Jonathan Coleman told reporters when asked about a F-35 purchase: “That’s just not part of our horizon. We’re a small defense force. We’re very niche in what we do. We need capabilities that support those very specific things we need to do, largely in our backyard.”
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
Two Turkeys in a Pear Tree
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
VX-23 Flight Sciences Aircraft F-35B/C Explanation
Slightly OLD NEWs but what the hey huh?
STRIKE TEST NEWS Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 23 Newsletter 2013 Issue [produced 11 Oct 2013]
&
&
&
http://www.navair.navy.mil/nawcad/in...ownload&id=767 (PDF 1.5Mb)
STRIKE TEST NEWS Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 23 Newsletter 2013 Issue [produced 11 Oct 2013]
"...Considerable carrier suitability testing was performed at NAS Patuxent River and NAS Lakehurst, bounding the scope of the technical challenges discovered with the landing and arresting gear systems on the F-35C. During this testing, CF-3 performed the first field arrestment during a roll-in arrestment to MK-7 arresting gear. Later in the year, CF-3 conducted over 40 successful roll-in arrestments to MK-7 and E-28 arresting gear and performed five operationally representative fly-in arrestments to MK-7 arresting gear...."
"...F-35B (STOVL) Flight Sciences aircraft
For each variant, Flight Sciences aircraft specifically go after flight test data requirements that would not be available in production configuration. Each has a unique set of instrumentation that has been incorporated throughout the airframe, and truly make these each one-of-a kind aircraft. They were the first to roll off the production line in Fort Worth, and each one is critical to the completion of the flight test program.
The Flight Science jets do not have full sensor suites installed and do not run the block software that provides warfighting capabilities of the jet...."
For each variant, Flight Sciences aircraft specifically go after flight test data requirements that would not be available in production configuration. Each has a unique set of instrumentation that has been incorporated throughout the airframe, and truly make these each one-of-a kind aircraft. They were the first to roll off the production line in Fort Worth, and each one is critical to the completion of the flight test program.
The Flight Science jets do not have full sensor suites installed and do not run the block software that provides warfighting capabilities of the jet...."
"...USS WASP Second Sea Trials (DT-II, scheduled for August 2013)
Building on the resounding success of the first sea trials for the F-35B on USS WASP in October of 2011, the team has completed significant efforts in preparation for expanding the envelope at-sea for the USMC/UK pilots who will operate F-35B aircraft at-sea. There is no better way to understand the performance of an aircraft than to take into the operational environment and make it work. The purpose of DT-II is to continue to expand the F-35B flight envelope, ultimately enabling fleet operations in operationally realistic wind and sea state conditions, at night, and with operationally realistic weapons load-outs. The first F-35B developmental test (DT-I) allowed the test team to evaluate the aircraft’s flying qualities and performance in conducting L-Class shipboard flight operations, mainly in the heart of the operating envelope. Additionally, F-35B maintenance and servicing functions will be evaluated. While onboard Wasp, the F-35B and various functions of the ship are instrumented with sensors that will collect data and allow for post-event analysis. Test findings may drive improvements to the F-35B for operations at-sea in preparation for USMC initial operational capability, currently scheduled for 2015...."
Building on the resounding success of the first sea trials for the F-35B on USS WASP in October of 2011, the team has completed significant efforts in preparation for expanding the envelope at-sea for the USMC/UK pilots who will operate F-35B aircraft at-sea. There is no better way to understand the performance of an aircraft than to take into the operational environment and make it work. The purpose of DT-II is to continue to expand the F-35B flight envelope, ultimately enabling fleet operations in operationally realistic wind and sea state conditions, at night, and with operationally realistic weapons load-outs. The first F-35B developmental test (DT-I) allowed the test team to evaluate the aircraft’s flying qualities and performance in conducting L-Class shipboard flight operations, mainly in the heart of the operating envelope. Additionally, F-35B maintenance and servicing functions will be evaluated. While onboard Wasp, the F-35B and various functions of the ship are instrumented with sensors that will collect data and allow for post-event analysis. Test findings may drive improvements to the F-35B for operations at-sea in preparation for USMC initial operational capability, currently scheduled for 2015...."
"...SHIP SUITABILITY PROJECT TEAM LCDR Thomas “Ub” Kneale, Department Head
...We have three basic responsibilities here at Ship Suitability: Precision Approach and Landing Systems (PALS); Shake, Rattle, and Roll (SRR) or “shakes;” and new ship systems. This year we’ve been heavily involved in all three. PALS certification is our bread and butter, and we perform it on aircraft carriers and L-Class ships at regular intervals and as required if performance starts to degrade. You can think of it as an FAA flight check for ship landing systems, except that the aircrew wear sunglasses more often, and we actually help to fix issues that might exist rather than just clobber the airspace at random and disappear. “Shakes” are the testing we do to the limit of shipboard conditions (maximum off-center arrestment, maximum sink rate arrestment, etc.) for new aircraft systems in order to certify them for shipboard use. This is challenging and rewarding flight test, which takes us right to the edge of the aircraft and launch and recovery system limits. Finally, new ship systems include projects like the Electro-Magnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) and Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS). These are exciting new technologies which will forever change carrier aviation....
...In the accomplishment of our ship suitability mission, one of the lesser known things we do here at VX-23 is operate a unique, shore-based TC-7 catapult and Mk-7 arresting gear. While the workload imposed on our 30 sailors on this shore tour is often arduous, it has rarely been more intense than for the months of 6-7 day work weeks imposed by the rigorous testing to qualify the X-47B Unmanned Combat Aerial System (UCAS) for the historic first shipboard arrestment of any Unmanned Aerial System (UAS). The hard work and professionalism exhibited by our highly trained and proficient site crew was critical to the success of the X-47 mission. I want to express my hearty thanks and job well done to our TC-7/Mk-7 personnel. BZ!"
...We have three basic responsibilities here at Ship Suitability: Precision Approach and Landing Systems (PALS); Shake, Rattle, and Roll (SRR) or “shakes;” and new ship systems. This year we’ve been heavily involved in all three. PALS certification is our bread and butter, and we perform it on aircraft carriers and L-Class ships at regular intervals and as required if performance starts to degrade. You can think of it as an FAA flight check for ship landing systems, except that the aircrew wear sunglasses more often, and we actually help to fix issues that might exist rather than just clobber the airspace at random and disappear. “Shakes” are the testing we do to the limit of shipboard conditions (maximum off-center arrestment, maximum sink rate arrestment, etc.) for new aircraft systems in order to certify them for shipboard use. This is challenging and rewarding flight test, which takes us right to the edge of the aircraft and launch and recovery system limits. Finally, new ship systems include projects like the Electro-Magnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) and Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS). These are exciting new technologies which will forever change carrier aviation....
...In the accomplishment of our ship suitability mission, one of the lesser known things we do here at VX-23 is operate a unique, shore-based TC-7 catapult and Mk-7 arresting gear. While the workload imposed on our 30 sailors on this shore tour is often arduous, it has rarely been more intense than for the months of 6-7 day work weeks imposed by the rigorous testing to qualify the X-47B Unmanned Combat Aerial System (UCAS) for the historic first shipboard arrestment of any Unmanned Aerial System (UAS). The hard work and professionalism exhibited by our highly trained and proficient site crew was critical to the success of the X-47 mission. I want to express my hearty thanks and job well done to our TC-7/Mk-7 personnel. BZ!"
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 30th Nov 2013 at 01:45. Reason: for mate und spulin + MOR
"...Considerable carrier suitability testing was performed at NAS Patuxent River and NAS Lakehurst, bounding the scope of the technical challenges discovered with the landing and arresting gear systems on the F-35C. During this testing, CF-3 performed the first field arrestment during a roll-in arrestment to MK-7 arresting gear. Later in the year, CF-3 conducted over 40 successful roll-in arrestments to MK-7 and E-28 arresting gear and performed five operationally representative fly-in arrestments to MK-7 arresting gear...."
Interesting language highlighted. "Bounding the scope of the technical challenges" is not exactly the language of triumphant breakthroughs. Note also that there were 40 roll-in arrestments, which are described as "successful" while the fly-in arrestments are not. And in a test sequence like that, would you not normally schedule more than five passes?
Interesting language highlighted. "Bounding the scope of the technical challenges" is not exactly the language of triumphant breakthroughs. Note also that there were 40 roll-in arrestments, which are described as "successful" while the fly-in arrestments are not. And in a test sequence like that, would you not normally schedule more than five passes?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
Long Hook SuperHorneto Testin'
Check this out: http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...ml#post8180517 [The amiable Butler quote]
AND... I'll look for more which AFAIK explains further why the INTERIM testing of the INTERIM design of the new hook design is what it is. But wait we have covered that already.
__________________
I'll assume that proper hook testing on the 'finished' hook system will look like this from Dec onwards? Probably this info posted already but worth repeating.... I'll look forward to future reports on the F-35C testing from VX-23 or anyone interested.
Naval Air Museum Association The Kneeboard Mag'n Spring 2012
Unnatural Acts of Landing Patuxent River
http://api.ning.com/files/8OBnZkm85r...Spring2012.pdf (0.8Mb)
__________________________
More?....
Lockheed’s comprehensive Q&A on the F-35 By Philip Ewing, June 19th, 2012
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/06/19/lo...a-on-the-f-35/
&
The day of the unmanned aircraft. Dave Majumdar 15 May 2013
The day of the unmanned aircraft. - The DEW Line
AND... I'll look for more which AFAIK explains further why the INTERIM testing of the INTERIM design of the new hook design is what it is. But wait we have covered that already.
__________________
I'll assume that proper hook testing on the 'finished' hook system will look like this from Dec onwards? Probably this info posted already but worth repeating.... I'll look forward to future reports on the F-35C testing from VX-23 or anyone interested.
Naval Air Museum Association The Kneeboard Mag'n Spring 2012
Unnatural Acts of Landing Patuxent River
“For most people, the idea of flight testing means seeing how fast an airplane can go or how quickly it can maneuver. While answering these questions may be part of a flight test program, there is more to flight testing than speed and agility. Navy carrier aircraft must also withstand the stressful loads of repeated arrested landings (traps) that can exceed 6 Gs on the aircraft.
The landing gear must:
- Survive thousands of landing shocks
- Reduce the loads reaching the aircraft structures and crew
- Allow the pilot to stay in control of the aircraft’s behavior
Ground Loads Testing shows that an aircraft structure can withstand carrier operations at maximum takeoff and landing weights. Normal landings at these conditions are no problem. But testing must also show that an aircraft can absorb these loads when:
- Its sink rate (how fast it descends) is high (as much as 26 feet per second!)
- Its wings are not level when it lands
- Its tailhook catches an arresting cable to the side of the center line
- The carrier deck pitches and heaves...
...During Super Hornet development, Ground Loads Testing required 125 test flights, 370 catapult launches, 471 traps, & 3 years to complete. Incidents included blown tires & various airplane parts (other than the wheels & tailhook) hitting the deck."
The landing gear must:
- Survive thousands of landing shocks
- Reduce the loads reaching the aircraft structures and crew
- Allow the pilot to stay in control of the aircraft’s behavior
Ground Loads Testing shows that an aircraft structure can withstand carrier operations at maximum takeoff and landing weights. Normal landings at these conditions are no problem. But testing must also show that an aircraft can absorb these loads when:
- Its sink rate (how fast it descends) is high (as much as 26 feet per second!)
- Its wings are not level when it lands
- Its tailhook catches an arresting cable to the side of the center line
- The carrier deck pitches and heaves...
...During Super Hornet development, Ground Loads Testing required 125 test flights, 370 catapult launches, 471 traps, & 3 years to complete. Incidents included blown tires & various airplane parts (other than the wheels & tailhook) hitting the deck."
__________________________
More?....
Lockheed’s comprehensive Q&A on the F-35 By Philip Ewing, June 19th, 2012
"...Q: All right, we’ve talked about the helmet & the software. What about the C’s tailhook redesign?
A: Here’s what O’Bryan said: “The distance between the main landing gear and the tailhook on the F-35C is the shortest of any naval aviation carrier airplane that we’ve had. Because we have to hide the hook — because if you had a hook exposed you wouldn’t be as stealthy airplane, that distance is tighter than any other. So it means when you roll over the wire when you land on the deck, the wire goes flush to the deck, and then you have to pick that wire up as it’s generally on the deck. So what we’ve had to do is re-design the hook shank.
Every airplane’s hook shank — as you’d imagine, you ground those things down, dragging it around, so it’s a remove-and-replace kind of thing. It has a bolt through the back of it and it holds on to the hook and we’ve redesigned that to have a lower center of gravity, or in a more mundane way, to make it a sharper hook point. And that allows us to pick up the wire. And we’ve already done testing on that. We’ve done it at 80, 90 and 100 knots and we’ve got a good design for the hook point now.
The other thing we need to do is, we need to make sure that the hook stays flush on the deck. So what you don’t want — and I was a Navy pilot, so I apologize if I’m using a lot of vernacular here – you want to keep that hook on the deck so it doesn’t bounce, or the words we used was skip. It can do that a couple different ways. It can move laterally and it can hit other stuff and just bounce, if you will. Another technical term. So what we’ve done is we’re going to modify what’s called the hold-down damper, kind of a good name for a thing because it does exactly that, it holds the hooks down, it dampens any oscillation. We’ll increase pressure on hook to do that.
The whole thing is a remove-and-replace assembly so any modifications we make to it is an easy fix.”"
A: Here’s what O’Bryan said: “The distance between the main landing gear and the tailhook on the F-35C is the shortest of any naval aviation carrier airplane that we’ve had. Because we have to hide the hook — because if you had a hook exposed you wouldn’t be as stealthy airplane, that distance is tighter than any other. So it means when you roll over the wire when you land on the deck, the wire goes flush to the deck, and then you have to pick that wire up as it’s generally on the deck. So what we’ve had to do is re-design the hook shank.
Every airplane’s hook shank — as you’d imagine, you ground those things down, dragging it around, so it’s a remove-and-replace kind of thing. It has a bolt through the back of it and it holds on to the hook and we’ve redesigned that to have a lower center of gravity, or in a more mundane way, to make it a sharper hook point. And that allows us to pick up the wire. And we’ve already done testing on that. We’ve done it at 80, 90 and 100 knots and we’ve got a good design for the hook point now.
The other thing we need to do is, we need to make sure that the hook stays flush on the deck. So what you don’t want — and I was a Navy pilot, so I apologize if I’m using a lot of vernacular here – you want to keep that hook on the deck so it doesn’t bounce, or the words we used was skip. It can do that a couple different ways. It can move laterally and it can hit other stuff and just bounce, if you will. Another technical term. So what we’ve done is we’re going to modify what’s called the hold-down damper, kind of a good name for a thing because it does exactly that, it holds the hooks down, it dampens any oscillation. We’ll increase pressure on hook to do that.
The whole thing is a remove-and-replace assembly so any modifications we make to it is an easy fix.”"
&
The day of the unmanned aircraft. Dave Majumdar 15 May 2013
“...The X-47B guys have had to redesign their tail hook a number of times now due to the same inaccurate Navy-supplied wire dynamics model that was partly responsible for the F-35C's woes....”
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 30th Nov 2013 at 17:06. Reason: fourmat + add text quots
I'll look for more which AFAIK explains further why the INTERIM testing of the INTERIM design of the new hook design is what it is.
O'B is talking in June 2012, just before that hook flunked its roll-in tests at Lakehurst. ("If anyone tells you five out of eight is good, it's not." - C. Bogdan, Sept 2012.)
The summer 2013 tests pretty much need to be the final hook point/damper for sea trials to happen next summer.
And as it said in the press release trumpeting the success of hook tests so far in 2013.... oh, wait, there isn't one. Dog, night-time &c.
O'B is talking in June 2012, just before that hook flunked its roll-in tests at Lakehurst. ("If anyone tells you five out of eight is good, it's not." - C. Bogdan, Sept 2012.)
The summer 2013 tests pretty much need to be the final hook point/damper for sea trials to happen next summer.
And as it said in the press release trumpeting the success of hook tests so far in 2013.... oh, wait, there isn't one. Dog, night-time &c.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
As I recall the 'five of eight' [not always clear when people refer to numbers without other info] referred to fly-in tests with the INTERIM design when the 2 failures [referenced below] were due to the aircraft not being in a position to arrest as required on touch down. This is part of the amiable butler quote referred to earlier above with a different set of numbers from 19 Sep 2012:
"...In three of five recent attempts, the redesigned hook did capture the wire; the failures were due to the pilot landing the aircraft too far from the wire for a successful arresting. This testing “was highly successful in demonstrating that when presented the wire... it will grab the wire,” says J.D. McFarlan, Lockheed Martin’s vice president of test and evaluation for the F-35 program. He briefed reporters Sept. 18 during the annual Air Force Assn. conference in Washington. These failures to grab the wire were predicted by models based on where the pilots landed the aircraft, McFarlan says. This, he notes, helps to validate the modeling work done on the redesigned hook....”
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"...In three of five recent attempts, the redesigned hook did capture the wire
the failures were due to the pilot landing the aircraft too far from the wire for a successful arresting. This testing “was highly successful in demonstrating that when presented the wire... it will grab the wire,” says J.D. McFarlan, Lockheed Martin’s vice president of test and evaluation for the F-35 program
-RP
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
Without supporting context / test dates the numbers become a bit meaningless anyway. Not long to wait. Meanwhile here is one test location at NAS Lakehurst with some info about that test site for those arresting moments.
Addition:
Scroll down long page to about midway (past the airship disaster) to see the more recent test facilities at Lakehurst:
Abandoned & Little-Known Airfields: Eastern New Jersey
_______________________
T&E-01 RUNWAY ARRESTED LANDING SITE (RALS) NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND - LAKEHURST, NJ | 2013-4
http://seniordesign.ece.drexel.edu/w...2013Navair.pdf (2.4Mb)
Addition:
Scroll down long page to about midway (past the airship disaster) to see the more recent test facilities at Lakehurst:
Abandoned & Little-Known Airfields: Eastern New Jersey
_______________________
T&E-01 RUNWAY ARRESTED LANDING SITE (RALS) NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND - LAKEHURST, NJ | 2013-4
“The Runway Arresting Landing Site
(RALS) site is unique in its ability to make both high speed ground roll-in arrestments and fly-in arrestments on either the Mk 7 Mod 2 or Mk 7 Mod 3 arresting gear, with the addition of the Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) in the near future. Over 3,000 feet of runway are available to build up speed while the aircraft remains on the runway with over 8,000 feet after the arresting equipment. The runway arrested landing site includes an underground complex located on a 12,000 foot dedicated runway. MK-7 Mod 2, Mod 3, and Mod 3+ arresting gear are located under the runway, and accurately simulate a fleet aircraft carrier installation. It provides a place to test changes to aircraft recovery equipment and aircraft under safe controlled conditions prior to introduction to the fleet. The RALS is the only facility in the world capable of making both highspeed, ground roll-in and fly-in arrests on all types of recovery systems used in the fleet. The roll-in procedure is especially useful because it allows safe, repeatable test conditions. If the aircraft should bolter (miss the arresting gear wire), there is 7,000 feet of runway in which the aircraft can either takeoff or come to a safe stop.”
(RALS) site is unique in its ability to make both high speed ground roll-in arrestments and fly-in arrestments on either the Mk 7 Mod 2 or Mk 7 Mod 3 arresting gear, with the addition of the Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) in the near future. Over 3,000 feet of runway are available to build up speed while the aircraft remains on the runway with over 8,000 feet after the arresting equipment. The runway arrested landing site includes an underground complex located on a 12,000 foot dedicated runway. MK-7 Mod 2, Mod 3, and Mod 3+ arresting gear are located under the runway, and accurately simulate a fleet aircraft carrier installation. It provides a place to test changes to aircraft recovery equipment and aircraft under safe controlled conditions prior to introduction to the fleet. The RALS is the only facility in the world capable of making both highspeed, ground roll-in and fly-in arrests on all types of recovery systems used in the fleet. The roll-in procedure is especially useful because it allows safe, repeatable test conditions. If the aircraft should bolter (miss the arresting gear wire), there is 7,000 feet of runway in which the aircraft can either takeoff or come to a safe stop.”
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 2nd Dec 2013 at 01:59. Reason: ADD extra URL for Lakehurst Facilities
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
Future F-35 Upgradability
't43562' enquired about F-35 "upgradability" [ http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...ml#post8158179 ] here are some pointers to the future:
Climb Time for the F-35 John A. Tirpak Dec 2013
Climb Time for the F-35
http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineA...13/1213f35.pdf (0.7Mb)
Climb Time for the F-35 John A. Tirpak Dec 2013
"...Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark A. Welsh III rarely misses a chance to advocate for the F-35 as crucial to the service’s future combat ability. Last spring, he also said the F-35 will have to bear a much greater part of the air superiority mission than it was ever intended to, because of the small number of F-22s.
“I believe the Chief is probably right,” Bogdan said in the interview. As a replacement for the F-16, the F-35 will inherit the Viper’s air-to-air role.
To give it more dogfighting capability, Bogdan said the F-35 program has a science and technology funding line that looks at future capabilities and growth potential for the fighter. “We are specifically targeting sensors and weapons that enhance our ability in the air-to-air realm,” he reported. “We … will make this airplane even better than it is today in an air-to-air role.”
There are block upgrade plans “already in place for the aircraft,” Martin said. There are “significant roadmaps” for electronic warfare, communications, weapons, and sensors, “not only to support the US but our partners as well.” The summit-level steering committee is “now in the process of looking at Block 4A and 4B for added capabilities,” she said.
The power plant is a likely improvement area. Bogdan said there could be modular enhancements to the F135 engine, or “a whole new engine 20 years from now.” The entire S&T community, he said, “continues to advance engine technology, and … the F-35 is going to use some of that someday. We have to.”
Moreover, the F-35’s stealth can be improved, he said.
“It’s not just coatings, … shape, [or] … countermeasures kind of stuff. There’s a whole host of things you can do” without affecting the aircraft’s shape or “mold line.” The program “would like to tap into that,” he said.
Bogdan acknowledged that Lockheed Martin offered stealthy external weapons or fuel pods on the stillborn FB-22 proposal, and something similar could extend the F-35’s range, even as the services are putting a premium on longer-range systems to defeat anti-access, area-denial threats.
However, combat commanders “have to decide in some form of trade if they’re willing to pay the penalty of maybe a little less stealth, a little less payload for increased range,” Bogdan said. “I’ve not heard that demand signal yet.”..."
“I believe the Chief is probably right,” Bogdan said in the interview. As a replacement for the F-16, the F-35 will inherit the Viper’s air-to-air role.
To give it more dogfighting capability, Bogdan said the F-35 program has a science and technology funding line that looks at future capabilities and growth potential for the fighter. “We are specifically targeting sensors and weapons that enhance our ability in the air-to-air realm,” he reported. “We … will make this airplane even better than it is today in an air-to-air role.”
There are block upgrade plans “already in place for the aircraft,” Martin said. There are “significant roadmaps” for electronic warfare, communications, weapons, and sensors, “not only to support the US but our partners as well.” The summit-level steering committee is “now in the process of looking at Block 4A and 4B for added capabilities,” she said.
The power plant is a likely improvement area. Bogdan said there could be modular enhancements to the F135 engine, or “a whole new engine 20 years from now.” The entire S&T community, he said, “continues to advance engine technology, and … the F-35 is going to use some of that someday. We have to.”
Moreover, the F-35’s stealth can be improved, he said.
“It’s not just coatings, … shape, [or] … countermeasures kind of stuff. There’s a whole host of things you can do” without affecting the aircraft’s shape or “mold line.” The program “would like to tap into that,” he said.
Bogdan acknowledged that Lockheed Martin offered stealthy external weapons or fuel pods on the stillborn FB-22 proposal, and something similar could extend the F-35’s range, even as the services are putting a premium on longer-range systems to defeat anti-access, area-denial threats.
However, combat commanders “have to decide in some form of trade if they’re willing to pay the penalty of maybe a little less stealth, a little less payload for increased range,” Bogdan said. “I’ve not heard that demand signal yet.”..."
http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineA...13/1213f35.pdf (0.7Mb)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
Flt Lt Nichols 1st RAF Number 1 Group pilot F-35B
Spaz - Re the first, of course there are upgrade plans. There were upgrade plans for the F-22, as well. How's that worked out for ya?
The Block 30 configuration, planned for 2008-2011, extends the growth seen in the Block 20. Side-looking radar arrays are envisaged to provide a significant ISR capability in the aircraft along with enhancements to provide full air defence suppression (Wild Weasel) and time-critical target engagement capabilities. A Satcom terminal will be added to provide continuous network connectivity during deep-strike profiles.
The post-2011 Block 40 aircraft is intended to be the definitive Global Strike configuration, including incremental enhancements to Block 30 additions, to provide full sensor networking, range enhancements, highly integrated ISR capabilities, and a Helmet Mounted Display similar to the JSF. Longer term planning for post Block 40 envisages an Electronic Attack variant, essentially replacing the lost EF-111A Raven. A stealthy stores pod for JDAM and SDB was also in development to enable carriage on external pylons.
Lockheed-Martin / Boeing F-22 Raptor; Assessing the F-22A Raptor
(And before you say anything about "bbbbut APA" this was an entirely accurate summary of 2006-07 plans. Just the only online source I can find before breakfast.)
And as for your second....
the ‘game-changing’ jet.
Because cliches.
The Block 30 configuration, planned for 2008-2011, extends the growth seen in the Block 20. Side-looking radar arrays are envisaged to provide a significant ISR capability in the aircraft along with enhancements to provide full air defence suppression (Wild Weasel) and time-critical target engagement capabilities. A Satcom terminal will be added to provide continuous network connectivity during deep-strike profiles.
The post-2011 Block 40 aircraft is intended to be the definitive Global Strike configuration, including incremental enhancements to Block 30 additions, to provide full sensor networking, range enhancements, highly integrated ISR capabilities, and a Helmet Mounted Display similar to the JSF. Longer term planning for post Block 40 envisages an Electronic Attack variant, essentially replacing the lost EF-111A Raven. A stealthy stores pod for JDAM and SDB was also in development to enable carriage on external pylons.
Lockheed-Martin / Boeing F-22 Raptor; Assessing the F-22A Raptor
(And before you say anything about "bbbbut APA" this was an entirely accurate summary of 2006-07 plans. Just the only online source I can find before breakfast.)
And as for your second....
the ‘game-changing’ jet.
Because cliches.
Last edited by LowObservable; 2nd Dec 2013 at 14:13.
LO in re Evan Williams, it's "bang for the buck" remains in a class by itself. Combination of smooth, tasty, not expensive.
The F-35? Remains to be seen.
The F-35? Remains to be seen.