F-35 Joint Strike Fighter News, Videos and pics Thread

[thunderchief]

Cloaking is possible as was demonstrated by the British in 2006.

And active cancellation isn't 6th gen technology. It is very much 5th gen technology.

The difference is as simple as funding and timeframe of introduction. The F-35 is expected to get DIRCM technology in the Block 5 upgrade, that's sometime around 2023-25 since Block 4 is set for 2021. The PAKFA has been flying with DIRCM since 2012. So any later 4.5th gen and 5th gen project which claims to have full spectrum ECM is a candidate to have active cancellation technology

Current DIRCM technology is mostly useful against mechanically-steered radars , especially those on AAMs like AIM-120 and R-77 (smaller, simpler, cheaper and with less ECCM ) . Against PESA and AESA radars with faster frequency hoping and signal forming current DIRCM is not that useful, it could be even harmful (faster detection ) . Finally, problem of jamming low-frequency radar (L-band and below) remains, because you need larger antennas to receive/emit such signals .

 

[Scratch]

I'm lost a little, how would a Directional Infra Red Counter Meassures system be usefull against radars at all. Isn't it's purpose to blind IR seekers?

Some time ago I also read about a Directed Radio Counter Meassures something, which would be perhaps more to the point then. Not heared of that again lately. I guess modern, powerfull AESA radars are also capable of overloading a radar seeker circuit with a precise pencil beam, though.

 

[A Bar Brother]

There is O doubt that Air Marshal Geoff Brown has far more credibility and integrity than his critics, when he states that the F-35 is 10-20 years ahead of PAK-FA, J-20, and J-31, you really aught to have a little more faith, he's telling you the truth! but believe in moonbeams or whatever, fairy-dust might work as well?

Our officials and technicians say the FGFA will be better than the F-35 (best in the world at the time of introduction). What about that? The French say that the Rafale is as good as the F-35 (better in some respects) while our air force who have extensive knowledge of the Rafale and the FGFA say that the FGFA is a generation ahead compared to Rafale. One insider already says the Rafale sensor fusion is better than the one on F-35.

Claims and counterclaims are constantly made. You don't treat what one person says as gospel just because you like hearing the things you want to hear. The Air Marshal is actually "hoping" the PAKFA and J-20 are 15-20 years behind the F-35. In case he is proved wrong, it won't affect his career since he will have retired by then and RAAF would have already committed to the F-35.

That makes Air Marshal Brown a critic of our officers and technicians who say the exact opposite, who also are equally credible and have the same level of integrity (maybe even more as far as the F-35 is concerned).

 

[A Bar Brother]

I am mindful that this is a F-35 thread and I have probably gone past injury time but I will say two things in closing. Firstly, active stealth is promising in my view but only when and if it works as intended but I think the timeline is probably further out and throwing money at it is not the primer but rather the maturity in technology is the enabler. I envisaged that an established IADS would present significant hurdles in the form of continuous waves from a variety of sensors. Mitigating one band is very different from saturation across multiple spectrum and aspects. Secondly, active cancellation works best when the aircraft itself is already LO or VLO. In other words it is meant to augment passive stealth rather than replace.

When the base RCS using passive stealth is low, then the power required for jamming is low. So there is a benefit right there. But for active stealth to work, you will need the right equipment on board, which the F-35 currently is not planned to have. That's a problem right there. What the F-35 has currently is enough capability against fire control radars in the frontal hemisphere. It can probably actively cancel X band tracks from the front, but that doesn't provide stealth. It is no different from a track breaker.

So if you want active cancellation on both the F-15 and the F-22, the power requirements for the two aircraft will be significantly different, but it is possible to achieve very similar levels of stealth on both aircraft. The difference is the F-15 will have less onboard power than the F-22 for other functions. And a slip up on either would mean the F-15 is more detectable than the F-22 because the enemy's ESM can pick up badly copied signals.

As far as various sensors are concerned, the process is the same, as long as the hardware is capable of handling it. That's why you need full spectrum ECM for active cancellation.

So, yes, the lower the aircraft's RCS, the better is active cancellation.

 

[navyreco]

Last JSF Delivered in 2014 is the First F-35C Carrier Variant for the U.S. Marine Corp

The Department of Defense accepted its final F-35 Lightning II aircraft delivery for 2014 today meeting the program production goal of 36 aircraft. With the last delivery for this year, the government, Lockheed Martin and industry team has delivered 109 operational aircraft to the U.S. and partner nations since the program's inception. The 36th delivery, known as CF-19, was the first F-35C carrier variant delivered to the Marine Corps.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[A Bar Brother]

Current DIRCM technology is mostly useful against mechanically-steered radars , especially those on AAMs like AIM-120 and R-77 (smaller, simpler, cheaper and with less ECCM ) . Against PESA and AESA radars with faster frequency hoping and signal forming current DIRCM is not that useful, it could be even harmful (faster detection ) . Finally, problem of jamming low-frequency radar (L-band and below) remains, because you need larger antennas to receive/emit such signals .

I'm lost a little, how would a Directional Infra Red Counter Meassures system be usefull against radars at all. Isn't it's purpose to blind IR seekers?

Some time ago I also read about a Directed Radio Counter Meassures something, which would be perhaps more to the point then. Not heared of that again lately. I guess modern, powerfull AESA radars are also capable of overloading a radar seeker circuit with a precise pencil beam, though.

DIRCM has nothing to do with RF. So it is useless against any type of radar or RF emitter. DIRCM is used against IR seekers, so it is meant to be used against IR missiles, possibly even IRST.

The reason I brought up DIRCM is to point out that the funding and development road of different aircraft is different. DIRCM and internal ECM are technologies that are available today. Both are already flying on the PAKFA while neither are on the F-35. So, the development road of the F-35 is different from the PAKFA. In case the PAKFA comes with active stealth, then the F-35 and even the F-22 are in a whole world of trouble. If it doesn't, then that's a different story, but I was pointing out to the fact that the PAKFA may come with active stealth far earlier than either the F-22 or the F-35 simply because the base technology exists on the PAKFA while there is none on the F-35 and the F-22.

It is possible that the F-22 may find itself with a new internal ECM after the MLUs, but as far as open source information goes, the F-35 is not planned with one at least until after Block 7, that's around 2025-30. That's too far away. Technically, the F-35 should have been equipped with the DIRCM today, 2014-15, which is around the time the F-35 should have reached Block 5 from the original development schedule. It should have achieved Block 7 by 2017-18 and possibly an internal ECM with active stealth in the 2020s. In order to keep the program within the new budget, all these technologies that exist on other aircraft today have been pushed to the next decade.

Actually, the F-35 is behind its rivals, not 15-20 years ahead simply because its development schedule doesn't make sense for it to be ahead. They have to spend billions more today just to keep up, let alone be ahead.

Btw, internal ECM is very expensive. It costed the French $5 Billion and still rising. The cost incurred in India and Russia are unknown, but even that should be expensive. The NGJ is also around $3 Billion and is just a pod and they say the integration costs alone are too expensive for the F-35.

 

[Jura The idiot]

...

Btw, internal ECM is very expensive. It costed the French $5 Billion and still rising. ...

what did this money buy,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

?
(sorry if you meant something completely different it's the first time I've ever heard about some technologies you guys talk here ...)

EDIT
now I even gave Likes to these posts full of acronyms LOL

 

[HMS Astute]

5th gen aircraft by lowest RCS

• F-22: 0.0001
• F-35A 0.005
• F-35B 0.005
• F-35C 0.005
• T-50 0.3

 

[aksha]

5th gen aircraft by lowest RCS

• F-22: 0.0001
• F-35A 0.005
• F-35B 0.005
• F-35C 0.005
• T-50 0.3

how did you get the RCS of T50'
the 0.3 RCS was originally said by a certain lobbyist called AJAY SHUKLA ,who apparently heard it from someone else who also heard it from someone else and so on..............

 

[A Bar Brother]

what did this money buy,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

?
(sorry if you meant something completely different it's the first time I've ever heard about some technologies you guys talk here ...)

EDIT
now I even gave Likes to these posts full of acronyms LOL

Sorry, I will add some.

RF: Radio Frequency
IR: Infra Red
IRST: Infra Red Search and Track
ECM: Electronic Counter Measures (Jamming)
ESM: Electronic Support Measures (Detecting signals)
MLU: Mid Life Upgrade

Yes, I'm talking about Spectra. Even Spectra is an acronym. And some technologies appear to be new, but are actually quite old, and some are not yet implemented on fighter designs. A lot of the technologies which are new on jets for America are actually 15-20 years old on European jets.