The F-35 Thread

[Buzpilot]

Northrop Grumman's F-35 DAS and Radar Demonstrate Ability to Detect, Track, Target Ballistic Missiles: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/northrop-grummans-f-35-das-and-radar-demonstrate-ability-to-detect-track-target-ballistic-missiles-2012-06-26

 

 

The FLIR video show Ocean City down right corner in the beginning, but it's really dark there, a fake simulator video?

The lights from launch site sure proves it's not in daylight.

Edited August 5, 2012 by Buzpilot

[OutOnTheOP]

Depending on what wavelength the DAS operates in, the city lights wouldn't even show up. I suspect it's mid- or far-IR spectrum (IE, thermals), and therefore is looking for heat, not light (because, really, how good is visible light detection for military operations?). The city wouldn't look much brighter than the background under thermals.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

What's the news here? That radar or is it EOS can track missiles? What is so special about it on this video?

 

[GGTharos]

Both. The aircraft can sense the launches and data-link them to defensive batteries, potentially providing even earlier warning of an attack.

 

It also allows the aircraft to find and destroy the launcher so it cannot be re-used.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Both. The aircraft can sense the launches and data-link them to defensive batteries, potentially providing even earlier warning of an attack.

 

It also allows the aircraft to find and destroy the launcher so it cannot be re-used.

 

But, what is the news about all of that? This kind of capability has been around for decades.

 

Reminder:

SAM = Stealth STOP!

[GGTharos]

Definitely not ... not on a fighter. In the gulf war, F-15E's had a lot of trouble finding launchers for example. That's new. You now have more platforms that can perform this function very accurately, not just an AWACS or other specialized aircraft.

 

But, what is the news about all of that? This kind of capability has been around for decades.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

This video is not showing searching for launchers. This video is showing tracking a missile from a known launcher position and F-35 tracking missiles after the launch.

 

BTW, fighters have had EOS for more then thirty years and radars for more them 50 years.

 

There is something else going on here. Probably a sales pitch trying to impress amateur, a tax payer ...

 

Don't get me wrong, I am sure the system is good and is up to the latest in technology, but it doesn't show anything new or anything that competitors couldn't do or don't have already. Again, I think the whole purpose of this video is a sales pitch to taxpayers.

 

Reminder:

SAM = Stealth STOP!

 

Definitely not ... not on a fighter. In the gulf war, F-15E's had a lot of trouble finding launchers for example. That's new. You now have more platforms that can perform this function very accurately, not just an AWACS or other specialized aircraft.

[mvsgas]

Sorry to interrupt your flirting with each other :D

click on image to enlarge

 

F-35 pit testing AMRAAM

 

AF-1 drops an AMRAAM missile. The foam in the pit is positioned in a wedge layout to absorb the impact of the weapon and prevent it from bouncing and damaging the weapons bay. If the weapon and its instrumentation have not been damaged during the drop, it can be reused in future ground releases. (U.S. Air Force photo by Tom Reynolds/Lockheed Martin)

 

F-35 pit test

 

(U.S. Air Force photo by Tom Reynolds/Lockheed Martin)

 

F-35 pit test

 

AF-1 drops a 2,000-lbs JDAM for stores static ejection testing. The dot stickers on the aircraft and weapon are part of a complex camera system that accurately measures and models the aircraft’s motion. A series of high speed cameras surround the F-35 and photograph each store release. (U.S. Air Force photo by Paul Weatherman/Lockheed Martin)

[GGTharos]

I really don't want to get into it, but if you really want to understand some of this, compare old radar and EO technology to what we have now, as well as the processing capabilities. They are nowhere near the same ... if that was the case, why didn't anyone come up with the great idea of fitting such systems onto fighters 50 years ago? It wasn't due to cost - expensive fighters were more acceptable then than they are now.

 

Heck, even most current fighters don't have a setup like the F-35 does.

 

BTW, fighters have had EOS for more then thirty years and radars for more them 50 years.

 

There is something else going on here. Probably a sales pitch trying to impress amateur, a tax payer ...

 

Don't get me wrong, I am sure the system is good and is up to the latest in technology, but it doesn't show anything new or anything that competitors couldn't do or don't have already. Again, I think the whole purpose of this video is a sales pitch to taxpayers.

[GGTharos]

Well, at least it was for something worthwhile - thanks for the pics! :D

 

Sorry to interrupt your flirting with each other :D

click on image to enlarge

[tflash]

What's the news here? That radar or is it EOS can track missiles? What is so special about it on this video?

 

Oh yes really? OK it seems a little unfair that F-35 flies with "labels on". Remember the arcade radar mode in Lockon? Dismissed by many as "unrealistic". Seems no longer the case then. APG-81 + DAS just beat it big time.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Oh yes really? OK it seems a little unfair that F-35 flies with "labels on". Remember the arcade radar mode in Lockon? Dismissed by many as "unrealistic". Seems no longer the case then. APG-81 + DAS just beat it big time.

Yeah, show this video on Belgium TV. This may convince some taxpayers that it is good to buy F-35's! Because there is no other airplane the world that can detect a missile launch, from a know position, and track it with its own radar/EOS. :)

 

Don't get me wrong, I want you to buy F-35. It is manufactured in my neighborhood, sort of. The more you buy the better is for me ...

[tflash]

The tests portayed by this video are about DAS detecting a rocket launch from an *unknown* position (of course the testers knew the position), where the processor transfers the location data to the radar, which then tracks it, and helps the DAS reacquire the missile once the heat signature is too low. This is the sensor fusion part. The tracked target is also *identified* as a TBM.

Taking into account that the DAS is 360° degree in field view, this means that this also works when the missile is launched somewhere behind the aircraft and outside its radar FOV.

The computer will relay the data and once the aircraft turns onto this target, the radar will start acquiring.

Honestly; Hajduk, the current F-16 AM MLU's from the BAF are not able to do this. So, yes, this might be a reason why the BAF is looking into the F-35. Maybe we can buy "one" :D

Edited August 8, 2012 by tflash

[aaron886]

EOS/DAS and so-called "sensor fusion" as displayed in the F-35 is a deceptively huge leap in fighter technology. It seems simple to us as we benefit from new computer interfacing technology every day, but the world of fighter aircraft has been lagging behind in many ways. If you talk to real fighter pilots about the F-35, they'll talk your ear off about sensors and pilot interfacing and how exciting it is. I know a few Canadian Hornet drivers who sold me on that aspect of the F-35 when I had a few doubts.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

EOS/DAS and so-called "sensor fusion" as displayed in the F-35 is a deceptively huge leap in fighter technology. It seems simple to us as we benefit from new computer interfacing technology every day, but the world of fighter aircraft has been lagging behind in many ways. If you talk to real fighter pilots about the F-35, they'll talk your ear off about sensors and pilot interfacing and how exciting it is. I know a few Canadian Hornet drivers who sold me on that aspect of the F-35 when I had a few doubts.

I know Aaron. I also like new stuff, toys with bells and whistles. And, in my opinion, F-35 is very, very good airplane for what it will be doing in the future. It is this video that did not impress me at all because it did not show anything so special. It just showed a standard system test. I don't know the test details, there could be something very cool about this test. But tracking a missile with the radar/EOS what is so special about that?

[GGTharos]

The fact that the following:

 

F-14 w/IRST+Radar

Su-27B w/IRST+Radar

MiG-29 w/IRST+Radar

F-16/18 w/Pod+Radar

 

can't do it - and by can't do it I mean detect, track, classify, geolocate and datalink it to the overall defense system; at the same time, it an do the same with a bunch of other things, be they airrborne or ground targets ... all from quite a bit of a distance. That's what's special about it - it is a new capability.

 

But tracking a missile with the radar/EOS what is so special about that?

[aaron886]

^ That about sums it up.

[mvsgas]

Program Status and weapons road map

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

You know, we can do this forever ... F16/18, MiG 29 (which one), Su 27B .... Can not detect flying missile? They can not detect IR signature of the ballistic missile launch because they are not designed for that purpose. And there is an F-35 that has EOS pointed down, and that's a big deal?

 

Then you list all these "fancy" capabilities such as "geolocate" and "datalink"? Well, these features would be impressive 20 or 30 years ago, but today my ASUS Infinity tablet knows its location within 20 or 30 feet. And Google knows about that too! Geolocate and datalink, wow, impressive ...

 

Never believe anything car salesmen tells you ....

 

Reminder:

SAM = Stealth STOP!

 

The fact that the following:

 

F-14 w/IRST+Radar

Su-27B w/IRST+Radar

MiG-29 w/IRST+Radar

F-16/18 w/Pod+Radar

 

can't do it - and by can't do it I mean detect, track, classify, geolocate and datalink it to the overall defense system; at the same time, it an do the same with a bunch of other things, be they airrborne or ground targets ... all from quite a bit of a distance. That's what's special about it - it is a new capability.

[Griffin]

Until any other fighter aircraft in the world can do that, it IS new and impressive, and certainly has not been around for decades.

[WildBillKelsoe]

 

imagine this gets endorsed to ED, and we have this and that

 

 

 

this is the epitome of flight sims and wet dream to every simmer out there...

[mvsgas]

For some reason it looked fake to me, for a second or two, doesn't it?

Jf5Kmliv4g4&feature=g-all-u

[aaron886]

You know, we can do this forever ... F16/18, MiG 29 (which one), Su 27B .... Can not detect flying missile? They can not detect IR signature of the ballistic missile launch because they are not designed for that purpose. And there is an F-35 that has EOS pointed down, and that's a big deal?

 

Then you list all these "fancy" capabilities such as "geolocate" and "datalink"? Well, these features would be impressive 20 or 30 years ago, but today my ASUS Infinity tablet knows its location within 20 or 30 feet. And Google knows about that too! Geolocate and datalink, wow, impressive ...

 

Never believe anything car salesmen tells you ....

 

Reminder:

SAM = Stealth STOP!

 

 

The way you're burying your head in the sand really impresses me. I guess you just don't have enough of an appreciation of the implications or for the challenges associated. Oh well!

 

Really though, every time you enter a discussion about the F-35 or F-22, I half expect you to start advocating a return to the wood and canvas biplane. :D

Edited August 12, 2012 by aaron886

[Vekkinho]

For some reason it looked fake to me, for a second or two, doesn't it?

Jf5Kmliv4g4&feature=g-all-u

 

Well...I can't say...I beileve it's real.

[Exorcet]

The F-16 doesn't beat the F-15 on sustained turns, especially not at high speed, which is why the F-15 is better for BVR engagements among other things.

 

http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/7035/f15str.png

 

http://forums.airforce.ru/attachments/holodnaya-voina/7667d1184402615-f-16c-sustained-turn0.gif/

 

 

http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/2996/200yh.jpg

 

You need to use the right chart.

 

EDIT: And the F-15 is clean and light vs a draggy and heavy 16.

 

 

I frankly don't know what the hell you're babbling about but given the list of mistakes so far it's probably wrong. The F-16 has a smaller wingspan, less of the mass is distributed as far away from the centre, so it can roll faster. As a result, it can change direction faster. It's the aerodynamic equivalent of having a small, light person, with a low centre of gravity. So whilst a taller person could run round a track faster, they might not make a better footballer (soccer).

You said consider span and roll, I did, the larger F-16 would have a lower roll rate but be equal in sustained turning.

 

And that's exactly why an F-16 might beat an F-15 in a dogfight, which isn't a one way turn.

Bit of a leap, especially since the 16 turns tighter.

 

 

 

 

 

And it does give info. on load on the page before the table!

I've dealt with the table.

 

 

 

So unless it specifies otherwise (e.g. the '1' and '2' notes), the above is the case.

Then why doesn't he say that? He does not say that the load is 50% fuel and weapons jettisoned, he says they vary but generally refer to a state around the mentioned condition.

 

And if the Typhoon was stealth.....

Add in CEASAR and the F-35 is a hard sell as a fighter. But the EF would probably gain weight in the process.

Edited February 4, 2013 by Exorcet