F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
So from the article reagarding the rolling landings: "The simulations suggest we’ll be OK as long as we limit our speed, so we will have a maximum overtake speed. We don’t know what that will be yet but it is on the order of 40 kt.”
So my read is if they have 25 knots over the deck, and 40 knots overtake speed, true airspeed would be around 65 knots. Seems reasonable to get some lift. Looks like the QE2 will have a good amount of run out space.
“The aircraft does well at slow speed because of the amount of lift you get off the wing. You are getting 1,000s of pounds of lift at speeds you would drive your car at.”
Laser weapons on a ship are doable, albeit they are a work very much in progress.
The same sort of weapon on a fighter won't be a BVR type requirement, but a "dogfighting" requirement that yields a gun with a much faster bullet hitting ... what? ... on the target. If and only if the power/heat/weight problem is resolved.
F-35 has a host of far more pressing issues to address before advancing into the Starfighter II role. The original Starfighter was the F-104.
Slight topic drift about lasers as airborne weapons.
I had heard about this program's demise, but thanks to that link I can put it in my timeline. (Scientist's rant on military laser funding ... axe to grind is funding ... but his points on the challenges are well made).
BFI has been dead longer than I had supposed. You have no idea how many Ballistic Missile Defense meetings and conferences I attended where we got worn out by USAF enthusiasm for the North Korean ballistic missiles being knocked out by a 747 carrying a laser in the boost phase. 
Thankful that is over. The JSF is now the high tech money sink.
The same sort of weapon on a fighter won't be a BVR type requirement, but a "dogfighting" requirement that yields a gun with a much faster bullet hitting ... what? ... on the target. If and only if the power/heat/weight problem is resolved.
F-35 has a host of far more pressing issues to address before advancing into the Starfighter II role. The original Starfighter was the F-104.
Slight topic drift about lasers as airborne weapons.
I had heard about this program's demise, but thanks to that link I can put it in my timeline. (Scientist's rant on military laser funding ... axe to grind is funding ... but his points on the challenges are well made).
But by 2009, the Air Force finally faced facts, realizing that its Airborne Laser still wouldn’t fit into a Boeing 747. Nor could it produce anywhere near the required power to destroy ballistic missiles.
Thankful that is over. The JSF is now the high tech money sink.
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: aus
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lonewolf_50, They recently made public that they are using the C130 and B1 as platform test beds. They are due to be now testings at White sands, a mid power 150kw laser.
High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System (HELLADS)
High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System (HELLADS)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Great Midwest
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First off how did this thread become a laser thread? Second, since this is a DARPA program we are talking about it is “bleeding edge” technology that is a ways off from an operational system. And the testing is a “Ground-based test that was expected to begin in summer 2015 which AFAIK hasn’t started yet.
Finally, consider the many issues of installing a laser capable of being used as a weapon on ANY fighter and you run into a lot of integration issues. On signature driven platform the issues increase. For example what type of aperture would be used to replace the rotating turret used to date on airborne platforms?
As has been suggested by several folks, let’s please get back to reality on this thread.
Finally, consider the many issues of installing a laser capable of being used as a weapon on ANY fighter and you run into a lot of integration issues. On signature driven platform the issues increase. For example what type of aperture would be used to replace the rotating turret used to date on airborne platforms?
As has been suggested by several folks, let’s please get back to reality on this thread.
Oh, a1bill, you do love to go on about it.
Just to keep you happy, here's the latest miniature Australian death-Ray laser ready to slot into the F-35. Tiny, isn't it?
Just to keep you happy, here's the latest miniature Australian death-Ray laser ready to slot into the F-35. Tiny, isn't it?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Back in Blighty...
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right, I'll be back in my box.
Last edited by emitex; 14th Oct 2015 at 09:27. Reason: confusion!
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: aus
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which one is that CM?
This is the 10 year old ozdricm pod that was tested on a lear jet.
7 videos from the 2015 directed energy summit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqAZ...QaB7dG5EioPObV
there is also a PDFs on it in this thread
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=27171
This is the 10 year old ozdricm pod that was tested on a lear jet.
7 videos from the 2015 directed energy summit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqAZ...QaB7dG5EioPObV
there is also a PDFs on it in this thread
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=27171
Last edited by a1bill; 14th Oct 2015 at 09:34.
Why is this thread still being cluttered by attempts to conflate HEL and DIRCM?
DIRCM l@sers are about the size of a hardback book, because they have to fit along with a tracking camera into the small turrets you see attached to a C-17.
They have a power output at best in the low tens of watts.
HEL starts at 10 kW, which I think everyone understands is three orders of magnitude difference. Some claim that you can knock down a plastic mini-drone at a few kilometers with that much power. So far, airborne systems designed for counter-surface or counter-missile roles are considered generally viable at 100-150 kW and upward, or 10000 TIMES the output of a DIRCM.
Babbling about demonstrator DIRCMs is pure timewasting.
DIRCM l@sers are about the size of a hardback book, because they have to fit along with a tracking camera into the small turrets you see attached to a C-17.
They have a power output at best in the low tens of watts.
HEL starts at 10 kW, which I think everyone understands is three orders of magnitude difference. Some claim that you can knock down a plastic mini-drone at a few kilometers with that much power. So far, airborne systems designed for counter-surface or counter-missile roles are considered generally viable at 100-150 kW and upward, or 10000 TIMES the output of a DIRCM.
Babbling about demonstrator DIRCMs is pure timewasting.
Lonewolf_50, They recently made public that they are using the C130 and B1 as platform test beds. They are due to be now testings at White sands, a mid power 150kw laser.
High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System (HELLADS)
High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System (HELLADS)
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: aus
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lonewolf_50, They are saying that some of the missile defense will be on a UAV and they have a gen 3 laser that will be a UAV. (2015 summit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqAZ...QaB7dG5EioPObV )
General Atomics: Third-Gen Electric Laser Weapon Now Ready | Technology content from Aviation Week
http://aviationweek.com/defense/usaf...ers-ready-2020
USAF: Tactical Lasers Ready By 2020
LO:Why is this thread still being cluttered by attempts to conflate HEL and DIRCM.
although they are saying that the 2 will be combined and only have one system, It's just the tech used in both HEL and OZDIRCM are next gen optical fiber that I was initially answering to glad rag. They are far different to the "book' sized mirror DRICM you seem to be referring to.
General Atomics: Third-Gen Electric Laser Weapon Now Ready | Technology content from Aviation Week
http://aviationweek.com/defense/usaf...ers-ready-2020
USAF: Tactical Lasers Ready By 2020
LO:Why is this thread still being cluttered by attempts to conflate HEL and DIRCM.
although they are saying that the 2 will be combined and only have one system, It's just the tech used in both HEL and OZDIRCM are next gen optical fiber that I was initially answering to glad rag. They are far different to the "book' sized mirror DRICM you seem to be referring to.
Last edited by a1bill; 15th Oct 2015 at 14:16.
F-35 has plenty of other weapons systems, and associated software, to properly integrate and get working before Buck F
ing Rogers puts on that lovely helmet and flies about with a laser weapon. Once the test on the Paul F Foster, in three years, is completed we can revisit this topic in this thread. Until then, can we please get back to the Phunky Phiphth Gen Phighter we've been talking about in this thread?