Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

Old 5th Apr 2013, 11:36
  #1661 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 51st State
Posts: 145
A quick question regarding the F-35B specifically

The technology behind, and the stability of the vertical landing phase looks superb.

However, where exactly do the two roll posts efflux out of the wings for stability? Do under wing stores positions have any impact on these roll posts effectiveness, or does the efflux impinge on what stores can be mounted on which pylons?

Just an engineering curiosity on my part that hopefully someone with a better understanding may be able to shed some light on.
HaveQuick2 is online now  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 11:57
  #1662 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,501
EM/CM - The SE and JSF are very different as far as development is concerned. The main new bits on the SE are the conformal weapon bays. The external aerodynamics/mass &c are the same as the existing CFTs, so testing an F-15E and firing an AMRAAM does help clear up the remaining unknowns. I suspect that other RCS measures have been tested here and there.

Otherwise, a lot of the new stuff on SE - AESA, Mk 2 helmet, BAE EW system - is already extant or in full-scale development for Saudi.

EM - How use would the Sniper or JSF EOTS be today?

Weather Forecast - North Korea, KR - Local & Long Range | Weather Underground

Note... that is just a snapshot for April 5. But it drives home the point that this ain't Iraq.

HQ - The roll posts are located at the wing-body junction. Supposedly they don't interfere with the inboard pylons... but then, the F-35 KPP does not call for the ability to VL with anything other than internal stores. Some interesting questions have been raised about an asymmetric hung-store case and whether the roll posts have the authority needed to counter that and provide control.

Last edited by LowObservable; 5th Apr 2013 at 12:09.
LowObservable is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 12:08
  #1663 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tarn et Garonne, Southwest France
Posts: 5,283
eaglemmoomin,

Don't really know enough in that area to offer an opinion either way, I'm afraid. I know a Stike Eagle can get where it needs to go with its internal nav kit, but (although they seem to offer a lot) I wouldn't know what kit they might want for day 1 air-to-ground as I haven't seen the specs they're looking at for the ROK sales pitch (well, none of us have).

The only thought I can offer is that if it were the case that it couldn't at least claim to do the day 1 stuff the Koreans want, they'd have kicked it out the door in 2009.

I'd be more interested to see the crew keep all the threats head-on so that they're not displaying the barn-door radar reflector (even with canted tails)!

LO, agreed. The APG82, HMS and DEWS do look like nice kit.

It ain't Iraq in terms of weather OR threat.

Last edited by Courtney Mil; 5th Apr 2013 at 12:12.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 12:33
  #1664 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 70
Posts: 1,938
F-35B Load Out

'HaveQuick2' store station 2/10 and 4/8 (as per graphic) carrying capacities were reduced to being able to carry only a maximum of 1,500 lbs during the SWAT (weight reduction process). I'll imagine that the 'emergency jettison' function will take care of any hung stores including the pylons being jettisoned if need be.

SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 12:52
  #1665 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tarn et Garonne, Southwest France
Posts: 5,283
Spaz, useful graphic. How do those stations impinge on the roll posts?
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 13:12
  #1666 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: australia
Age: 46
Posts: 37
I'm having trouble with the F-15 having a low frontal radar cross section.
Don't intakes give a clear view of the fan blades?
JaseAVV is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 13:19
  #1667 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tarn et Garonne, Southwest France
Posts: 5,283
My understanding is a radar baffle in the intake. They'd have to do someting to it, you're right there!
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 13:30
  #1668 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
It will be interesting when and if Boeing releases a total cost on the ROK offer. When the f-35 clean-sheet total buy of $180M ea is very similar to 4+ gen packages

I guess the F-15se will have similar to the SH in the intake

Last edited by JSFfan; 5th Apr 2013 at 13:38.
JSFfan is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 13:36
  #1669 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tarn et Garonne, Southwest France
Posts: 5,283
No idea. The only figure I ever read was $100m all in, but I think that was in the days of the single, complete package, not the split FMS/Direct Sales proposal. To be honest I'm sure they've ever deliberately revealed a figure. Interesting that they don't even feature it on their regular web site, but I guess it's specifically designed and targeted at a very specific group of potential customers.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 13:41
  #1670 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
I can't see it being cheaper than a SH and that's at about $150 now and that's a full production plane, there are a lot of development costs in getting the SE on the flight line

Last edited by JSFfan; 5th Apr 2013 at 13:45.
JSFfan is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 13:48
  #1671 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 70
Posts: 1,938
Between MLG door and inner pylon is the roll post



Some info on roll posts: F-35B - Roll Posts

Underneath graphic:
http://www.codeonemagazine.com/image...28237_8824.jpg

Last edited by SpazSinbad; 5th Apr 2013 at 13:56. Reason: URL
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 13:55
  #1672 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 61
Posts: 6,996
Some cool footage of the first Night Vertical Landing (2nd April 2013)


Coff.
CoffmanStarter is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 14:42
  #1673 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 51st State
Posts: 145
Thanks for the roll posts info. I reckon that a twin store side by side configuration on stations 3 and 9 may be a bit tight though.

You can see the outlets clearer on this photo, not too sure about the polo mint roundel though!!!

HaveQuick2 is online now  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 14:50
  #1674 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
I don't think it specs for external weapon bring back on vertical landing, they might get away with clean pylons and an aim-9
JSFfan is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 16:30
  #1675 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK and where I'm sent!
Posts: 519
Just confirm that you really meant NO external bring-back?
Mach Two is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 16:37
  #1676 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
vertical land has a ~5,000 lb load, split it anyway you want to, just not on the inner pylon I think

Last edited by JSFfan; 5th Apr 2013 at 16:41.
JSFfan is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 16:50
  #1677 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 98
EM/CM - The SE and JSF are very different as far as development is concerned. The main new bits on the SE are the conformal weapon bays. The external aerodynamics/mass &c are the same as the existing CFTs, so testing an F-15E and firing an AMRAAM does help clear up the remaining unknowns. I suspect that other RCS measures have been tested here and there.

Otherwise, a lot of the new stuff on SE - AESA, Mk 2 helmet, BAE EW system - is already extant or in full-scale development for Saudi.

EM - How use would the Sniper or JSF EOTS be today?

Weather Forecast - North Korea, KR - Local & Long Range | Weather Underground

Note... that is just a snapshot for April 5. But it drives home the point that this ain't Iraq.

HQ - The roll posts are located at the wing-body junction. Supposedly they don't interfere with the inboard pylons... but then, the F-35 KPP does not call for the ability to VL with anything other than internal stores. Some interesting questions have been raised about an asymmetric hung-store case and whether the roll posts have the authority needed to counter that and provide control
I'm not sure what your point is here LO the JSF has EO/IR and SAR/GMTI modes so hence that all aspect thing, having all of them gives you an all weather capability.
eaglemmoomin is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 17:03
  #1678 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK and where I'm sent!
Posts: 519
eaglemmoomin,

I don't think he was talking about what the JSF might or might not have. He was responding to the sub-thread on F-15SE and indicating what that has. It seems that mentioning anything good about another airframe is seen by the JSF Religious Fanatics as an attack on the one that can do no wrong.

Calm down.
Mach Two is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 17:10
  #1679 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tarn et Garonne, Southwest France
Posts: 5,283
Well, yes, I must admit that there is a lot of defensiveness when we mention another aircraft that might be seen as a competitor. F-15SE is a very different platform. I certainly have never proposed F-15 as an alternative in any theatre apart from ROK, and I'm only posting about it in that context to answer questions or explain what I know about it. I'm certainly not pushing it.

That said, I do wonder why a handful of folks here see the need to push the F-35 so hard as the solution to every region's needs.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2013, 17:24
  #1680 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 98
No I'm perfectly calm.

I don't think you understand. I made the point that to make the F15SE stealthy you apparently have to take off all the extremely useful pods etc that enhance the aircrafts capabilities. LO made the point that it's wet and misty in Korea.

This is an odd point to make. The whole point of fitting multiple sensors to an aircraft be it surveilance or otherwise is to give you an all aspect all weather capability. Synthetic Aperture Radar and Ground Moving Target Indicator (ie for pattern of life) modes are not effected by the weather, day light etc, an EO/IR sensor on a aircraft can 'see' a suprisingly long way away and is clearly useful for other purposes. I would also think taking the [email protected] designator off of a strike aircraft is an odd thing to be wanting to do.

It was a very odd comment to make about an extremely useful capability, surely you want to maximise the utilty of your platform, 'taking' stuff off seems err backwards.

Last edited by eaglemmoomin; 5th Apr 2013 at 17:33.
eaglemmoomin is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright İ 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.