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???

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b3...Dcompblank.png

Yes, as long as they don't mind landing vertically in a conventional jet.

Ha, not far off some of the landings I have been given by the front seaters, eh Artyhug?!

Pah, it was all under control. Well mostly...

Hasn't a D model been doing the rounds on t'interweb for some time?

Still an interesting concept though.

Is it just me or with that canopy does it look like a mini F-14 Tomcat? (no bad thing!)

Its just you...:)

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...

I wonder if LM has done any design work on a two seat version? Obviously no detail design work would have been conducted.

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 !

"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...........

!@#$%^&* "message too short" crap... doesn't count anything inside the quotation!

What's wrong with the F-18G?

Nothing... for the US (who have catapult-equipped carriers) or Australia (who operate them from land bases).

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!

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?

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)

With the greatest respect...
 

Somehow GKnight, I don't think how much LM "info" one imbides, will ever make a silk purse from a sows ear.......

Could we not operate these types as STOBAR (not CATOBAR) off of QE Class's 920ft "runway" with ski jump? Maybe with less than full fuel and only an ASRAAM/AGM-88 fit in the Wild Weasel role?

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?)

Firstly, the USAF doesn't agree concerning LO aircraft not needing EW escort.

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.

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