US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
They needed special attention on A and C too because they had to make the bomb bays identical between A,B and C. It was detrimental for the A and C version because the F-35B have limititions because of the lift fan.
Here's the U.S.M.C. doing their thang again...
How come the Norwegian owners do anything with this shipyard for 2 decades?
Yeah that's the LSM I referred to earlier. Notice the USN is the acquisition office not the USMC due to the size of the ship. And from what I've read the USN ain't excited about being stuck with the job. In my time we dealt with both USMC and SOF -- both assholes -- but SOF had money.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
The A and C versions are rated for a number of weapon types in the internal bays the B is not. They made changes specifically to the B to reduce weight.
Yes an engine that was over 20 years old by the time of F35. Thus far the F135 isn’t showing reliability issues but maintenance chain issues.
Which won’t do dick. Those bands of radar don’t have the range or resolution. All you have is a so so track that could be the intruder or a flock of birds or a cloud. Farther F35 already has radar array in its wings.
No more so then you would expect from a fighter of its type. Remember this is a multirole machine.
F16 is one of the most acrobatic aircraft of the 4th generation. Reality check here BVR attack is a thing. The only thing that has stopped it in the past as ROE. The whole Topgun dogfight really is cool but we are in the missile age. TVC is fun but unnecessary. Canards do the same thing as the large tail of many fighters. The super maneuver doesn’t factor unless you are in close.
And you have to.
Here is the thing F35 is an information centric fighter. It’s not like past fighters. Where you had an handful of sensors running separately. Its sensors and weapons management are integrated through the flight computer. The USAF has said they did a poor job on management in this. Now they are changing their strategy on missions systems to a more open source approach. Well true you can’t plug in any old weapons systems an APS like capability has been implemented so if a new weapon is added to the Aps store it’s good to go. F35 upgrades aren’t just done by maintenance crews but software updates. Yes like a Tesla it does “over the air updates”. Finally even more modern F15EX and F16C block 70 are already getting new computers and new flight control software.
Does this sound familiar?
...
The DoD is basically decreasing its bargaining power because of the single source nature of the F135 contract.
You use the long wave radar to detect regions of interest, which you then focus your targeting radar onto. AESA radar on X-band can then focus the radar cones there and increase the chance of detection.
The MiG-29 had better aerobatic capabilities.
So why did the F-22 have it then? They just added it for kicks?
It just was not included in the F-35 for cost cutting.
Or in other words they don't do the same thing as the tail.
As does the Su-35 and a number of other modern fighters. It was impossible to do this in the first place in 1970s era designs because the computational power was simply not enough to integrate all those capabilities. The fact they had flight computers made with ICs at all was due to careful design optimization. Breaking the problems up into chunks that disparate custom hardware systems could solve.
I am not that much of a fan of over the air updates on combat aircraft. It just seems like a one way trip to getting your weapons platform hacked.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
The issue for the maintenance chain is they it’s not finished being built yet and Covid didn’t help on that.
Sure except the X band radar still can only operate in side its capability. The X band will still only see the intruder if it’s within the range of detection.
Until it’s armed. Once you start adding weapons, pods and drop tanks like all fourth generation fighters it becomes more and more sluggish. Besides the real limitations are on the pilots. F16s are already flying at the edge of human endurance.
No it wasn’t included as the F35 was optimized more for multiple role missions at lower altitude. It was looked at for F35 but it was ditched primarily as it wasn’t deemed necessary are would have added additional weight.
F22 was designed with TVC and its high performance due to a higher altitude more air to air mission base. It operates more like a fourth generation in many ways. With a more primitive system.
Yet neither J10 or Eurofighter have tails they have delta wings. TVC augments inputs form the control surfaces and though there have been demonstrators with both Canards and tails most choose one or the other.
Not to the same degree as F35 and F22 come with theses systems baked in. And F35 even more so. And with fifth generation fighters everything has to fit inside the mold lines. So bolting on pods just doesn’t work.
That depends where on how the update is delivered and the software involved.
This back-and-forth around the F-35 is kinda interesting but doesn't rebut my essential argument:
And that's what Bill Sweetman's short, readable, fact-filled book explained.
From my past perspective dealing with them, if the USMC wants an aircraft then buy something the Navy or Army have already fielded. They were a difficult customer with an empty wallet.
The F-35 acquisition program might not have succeeded but the rigid adherence to USMC STOVL requirements ensured its failure. The laws of physics guaranteed it.
And that's what Bill Sweetman's short, readable, fact-filled book explained.
From my past perspective dealing with them, if the USMC wants an aircraft then buy something the Navy or Army have already fielded. They were a difficult customer with an empty wallet.
It is perfectly doable to have a joint aircraft for the Air Force and Navy. There are good examples of this like the F-4 Phantom.
You just design the aircraft for the Naval requirement, and then you make a simplified version for the Air Force if required.
But putting the VTOL for the Marines in the same program was simply a step too far.
You just design the aircraft for the Naval requirement, and then you make a simplified version for the Air Force if required.
But putting the VTOL for the Marines in the same program was simply a step too far.