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

[A Bar Brother]

Umm, because LM has an actual product out right now, compared to HAL/Sukhoi?

It doesn't matter. LM has been advertizing the same since the early 2000s, when it wasn't even a prototype.

 

[A Bar Brother]

Every aircraft that you mentioned including the F-35 sits in their respective development cycle based on a set of priorities and drives an outcome that is always relative and dynamic in terms of placement of technology. Such is the nature of the business and any comparative arguments in my view is not productive because a snap short in time is all it provides until the next phase. There is however an over arching argument that I can make for the F-35 that seriously challenge the French and in the longer term the Swedish in staying the course. The common denominator in this business is that the development cost curve is increasingly exponential in nature. In this respect, the F-35 has an edge simply because it has the volume to sustain a development path where economies of scale is the final arbiter in driving unit cost down.

You won't have to worry about costs. As long as China is a threat, India will spend money. The future development of Rafale will be jointly done by India and France, as is the case with FGFA between India and Russia.

Anyway, I'm not talking about what will happen in 2030, I'm talking about the next 10 years. And as far as that goes, the Rafale is very well funded by the French alone.

If and when there is a proven working product. The challenges are significant if not impossible especially against AESA. With LPI features they can emit multiple frequency simultaneously with continuous hopping based on some algorithm which would seriously challenge the propagation of mitigating signals within an acceptable pipeline delay. I acknowledge there are developments in parallel allay architecture that would enhance signal processing and data analysis but a working solution is very different from a theoretical model.

It's not really difficult to match different frequencies, you need the hardware capable of that and Spectra already has that. It has tens of thousands of correlators for the job. But, yeah, this is like a pushmepullyou kinda thing. You upgrade Spectra for active cancellation, the OPFOR makes a radar that's much more capable, then Spectra is upgraded again and so on. But passive stealth cannot be upgraded like that. That's why the Israelis want their jammer on the F-35.

 

[thunderchief]

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.

Sorry, I meant to say DRFM (Digital Radio Frequency Memory )

 

[Brumby]

You won't have to worry about costs. As long as China is a threat, India will spend money. The future development of Rafale will be jointly done by India and France,

They first have to put ink to paper. Negotiations I am afraid is not going too well at the moment.

It's not really difficult to match different frequencies, you need the hardware capable of that and Spectra already has that. It has tens of thousands of correlators for the job.

The issue as I have stated before is not against the more basic radar with set frequencies so that the process is simply about matching data bases and propagating from it. The challenge is with modern radar with their constant frequency changes and the need to propagate in real time. We are dealing with light speed and so the window is measured in nano secs. The cancellation in the form of degration to the back end of the pulse is a continuous activity and places significant demand on signal identification, analysis and generation. The only proof of concept is a working model. Do you have any evidence of that nature?

That's why the Israelis want their jammer on the F-35.

The reason the USN spending on the Growler and NGJM is a perfect fit for the F-35 in my view. Active cancellation works very well with LO.

 

[Skywatcher]

It doesn't matter. LM has been advertizing the same since the early 2000s, when it wasn't even a prototype.

By the 2000s, LM already had decades of experience in designing and building 5th gen fighters. Sukhoi doesn't even have a five years' worth, and the T-50 will be different from the FGFA as the Su-27 is from the Su-30 (or at least it should be, given how much Indian is paying for it).

 

[A Bar Brother]

They first have to put ink to paper. Negotiations I am afraid is not going too well at the moment.

Negotiations never go well in India. India took 3 years to sign the engine deal with GE for the F-414s. Rafale deal hasn't even been 3 years yet. As far as most tenders are concerned, the Rafale deal is progressing really well. It took 3 years for the Scorpene deal as well.

The issue as I have stated before is not against the more basic radar with set frequencies so that the process is simply about matching data bases and propagating from it. The challenge is with modern radar with their constant frequency changes and the need to propagate in real time. We are dealing with light speed and so the window is measured in nano secs. The cancellation in the form of degration to the back end of the pulse is a continuous activity and places significant demand on signal identification, analysis and generation. The only proof of concept is a working model. Do you have any evidence of that nature?

There are plenty of aspects with no evidence of it working as advertized on both the Rafale and F-35. We simply have to wait until more information is available. I mean, how many people knew about the NCTR technologies on the old F-15. Active cancellation is far too important a technology for it to be revealed publicly so early.

As far as evidence is concerned, I can throw that right back at you. Do you have evidence that the French have not already deployed active cancellation? The French have claimed the Spectra is capable of active cancellation. If you are willing to believe everything that LM says about the F-35, then why won't you believe everything that others say about their aircraft?

The reason the USN spending on the Growler and NGJM is a perfect fit for the F-35 in my view. Active cancellation works very well with LO.

The NGJ isn't an active cancellation device. Hostage says he wouldn't let any Growler close to any SAM site. He will use F-35s and F-22s there. That shows the NGJ isn't meant for first day of war.

And the NGJ itself has been delayed to the post 2030 world for the F-35. They say the integration costs are too high and hence the NGJ won't see itself on the F-35 until after 2030. For active cancellation, you need the relevant hardware for it. The F-35 doesn't yet carry such a capability. Active cancellation is highly likely to be a non-export grade technology for the Americans.

 

[A Bar Brother]

By the 2000s, LM already had decades of experience in designing and building 5th gen fighters. Sukhoi doesn't even have a five years' worth, and the T-50 will be different from the FGFA as the Su-27 is from the Su-30 (or at least it should be, given how much Indian is paying for it).

That would make the 6th gen projects more advanced.

The fact is the F-35 is supposed to be a numbers aircraft, it is not the best that America has to offer. There is a pretty big difference between how much the US knows about stealth, and how much they have decided to include in the F-35. The F-35 is at the level Congress approves for export. That's not the level of American stealth technology. So "everything" that has been the product of research since the '70s is NOT available on the F-35.

But the best of what Russia knows about stealth is on the T-50. As far as the Russians are concerned, they believe the FGFA matches or exceeds the F-22. Whether internet critics agree to that or not, that is not the point. I think the relevant article was already posted by thunderchief, where the chief designer of the PAKFA says his aircraft is more stealthy than the F-22. Whether it is the truth or propaganda, I don't know. All I know is both the Americans and Russians have made unverifiable claims. The only difference is while I take both with a pinch of salt, here even experienced members treat American claims as Gospel and Russian claims as rubbish.

Anyway, the Su-27, Su-30 and Su-30MKI are the same, but different aircraft. FGFA, and Stage-2 PAKFA are variants of the original T-50. There are pretty big differences between the Su-27 variants, like the Su-30, Su-30MKI, Su-33, Su-34 and Su-35. However the difference between the PAKFA Stage-1 to that of the FGFA and PAKFA Stage-2 is bound to be bigger that it was between a Su-27 and a Su-33 or a Su-35, primarily due to the engine.

 

[tphuang]

That would make the 6th gen projects more advanced.

The fact is the F-35 is supposed to be a numbers aircraft, it is not the best that America has to offer. There is a pretty big difference between how much the US knows about stealth, and how much they have decided to include in the F-35. The F-35 is at the level Congress approves for export. That's not the level of American stealth technology. So "everything" that has been the product of research since the '70s is NOT available on the F-35.

But the best of what Russia knows about stealth is on the T-50. As far as the Russians are concerned, they believe the FGFA matches or exceeds the F-22. Whether internet critics agree to that or not, that is not the point. I think the relevant article was already posted by thunderchief, where the chief designer of the PAKFA says his aircraft is more stealthy than the F-22. Whether it is the truth or propaganda, I don't know. All I know is both the Americans and Russians have made unverifiable claims. The only difference is while I take both with a pinch of salt, here even experienced members treat American claims as Gospel and Russian claims as rubbish.

Anyway, the Su-27, Su-30 and Su-30MKI are the same, but different aircraft. FGFA, and Stage-2 PAKFA are variants of the original T-50. There are pretty big differences between the Su-27 variants, like the Su-30, Su-30MKI, Su-33, Su-34 and Su-35. However the difference between the PAKFA Stage-1 to that of the FGFA and PAKFA Stage-2 is bound to be bigger that it was between a Su-27 and a Su-33 or a Su-35, primarily due to the engine.

Russians claim a lot of things, but it's quite clear T-50 is not optimized for stealth at this point. They have publicly stated where they think the RCS of their aircraft is and I can't disagree from that based on the current alignment of the aircraft. Even the frontal view is not that stealthy right now until they can fix up all the gaps and put in the radar blocking things (still don't know how well that works).

It took many years to go from Su-27 to Su-30 and then to Su-35. Even so, it's fundamentally the same aircraft. I don't see how you can go to the level of change you are using in your picture which would be a bigger change than China went through from 2001 to 2011. Change of engine will just make PAK-FA fully powered and probably have higher supersonic cruising speed and better manueverability.

Bringing this back to F-35, it's not just a numbers aircraft. It has the most advanced suite of sensors that's more integrated with each other and surrounding environment than any previous fighter jet. On top of that, it's almost impossible to see when adding all the jammers that will be alongside of it.

 

[Brumby]

There are plenty of aspects with no evidence of it working as advertized on both the Rafale and F-35. We simply have to wait until more information is available. I mean, how many people knew about the NCTR technologies on the old F-15. Active cancellation is far too important a technology for it to be revealed publicly so early.

As far as evidence is concerned, I can throw that right back at you. Do you have evidence that the French have not already deployed active cancellation? The French have claimed the Spectra is capable of active cancellation. If you are willing to believe everything that LM says about the F-35, then why won't you believe everything that others say about their aircraft?

Claims of SPECTRA having active cancellation goes back close to a decade and given expiry of such a lengthy period one would reasonably expect some shred of evidence of its application and assessment of its effectiveness. You are making the claim that it is a feature available with SPECTRA and I am simply asking for substantiation that it works as claimed. I am happy to leave it as unsubstantiated because I am not the one making the claim - you are. The onus is on you to advance the matter from a claim to substantiation and I am happy to leave it as unsubstantiated. Your ball.

The NGJ isn't an active cancellation device. Hostage says he wouldn't let any Growler close to any SAM site. He will use F-35s and F-22s there. That shows the NGJ isn't meant for first day of war.

And the NGJ itself has been delayed to the post 2030 world for the F-35. They say the integration costs are too high and hence the NGJ won't see itself on the F-35 until after 2030. For active cancellation, you need the relevant hardware for it. The F-35 doesn't yet carry such a capability. Active cancellation is highly likely to be a non-export grade technology for the Americans.

Active cancellation in my view is a form of jamming at a practical level as the aim is simply to degrade the pulse sufficiently to prevent track and for lock on.

NGJ provides stand-off jamming and I am referring to collaborative mission sets between F-35/EA-18G where I think they would complement. I am not talking about stand-in jamming integration of NGJM into the F-35. The integration is expected to be difficult because the original Prowler had a 4 men crew which subsequently required 2 men in the Growler. A F-35 is crewed by one and is probably a bride too far in terms of expectation.

 

[thunderchief]

Bringing this back to F-35, it's not just a numbers aircraft. It has the most advanced suite of sensors that's more integrated with each other and surrounding environment than any previous fighter jet. On top of that, it's almost impossible to see when adding all the jammers that will be alongside of it.

Well, not exactly . F-35 will be vulnerable to low-frequency radars and it is inherently difficult to jam those with equipment on-board small-size fighter . It would be also vulnerable to detection by continuously improving IR sensors, especially because of very powerful and hot engine .

By the time F-35 becomes operational we would have dangerous kill chain, consisting of low-frequency radars making a cube shaped kill-box with sides of approximately 0.5-1km , and modern, long-range IR missiles with focal-plane arrays searching that box . Lot will depend on DIRCM on one side, and various ECCM built in missiles on the other side .