F-35 news roundup

[TaiidanTomcat]

2 hours ago, Murph said:

 

People forget, choose to ignore, or never knew that when the F-15A arrived at Langley in the 1970s, they would fly them down, pull the engines out, truck the engines back up to St Louis and put them in another airframe for delivery.  Wash, rinse, repeat.  Langley had a huge portion of the fleet initially sitting there without engines.  Meanwhile the F-16 was earning the Lawn Dart nickname, and "One a day in Tampa Bay" was an often heard saying.  And no, that wasn't referring to the B-26.

 

Regards,

Murph

 

I agree about the short memories with the Teen Series. There was even a joke in a Tomcat book when the test community was going crazy trying to get them into service and the old guys saying the F-4s and F-8s were "way worse" LOL 

 

Some LM film:

 

 

[murad]

ah, more numbers.

[Jonathan_Lotton]

14 hours ago, Murph said:

 

People forget, choose to ignore, or never knew that when the F-15A arrived at Langley in the 1970s, they would fly them down, pull the engines out, truck the engines back up to St Louis and put them in another airframe for delivery.  Wash, rinse, repeat.  Langley had a huge portion of the fleet initially sitting there without engines.  Meanwhile the F-16 was earning the Lawn Dart nickname, and "One a day in Tampa Bay" was an often heard saying.  And no, that wasn't referring to the B-26.

 

Regards,

Murph

 

 

How dare you bring facts and firsthand experience into this!

 

 

Edited May 10, 2017 by Jonathan_Lotton

[tosouthern66]

I read that Russia and China are developing low frequency radar systems which will be able to pick up the F-35. If that is the case then why waist the money on a program that's primary weapons won't be available till late in it's service life. By that time the F-35 will need replacing and the weapons will be some what useless. We should concentrate on long range stand off weapons and build more of the aircraft that are battle tested and proven. If I can find that report I'll post it, I found it the other day on my phone.

[Grey Ghost 531]

1 hour ago, tosouthern66 said:

I read that Russia and China are developing low frequency radar systems which will be able to pick up the F-35. If that is the case then why waist the money on a program that's primary weapons won't be available till late in it's service life. By that time the F-35 will need replacing and the weapons will be some what useless. We should concentrate on long range stand off weapons and build more of the aircraft that are battle tested and proven. If I can find that report I'll post it, I found it the other day on my phone.

 

 

Low frequency means long wavelength. Long wavelength means low resolution. The LF radar will detect a target but it will not locate the target. They'll know something's out there, somewhere. With bi-stable radar (separate transmit and receive stations) they'll do better, but it will take lots of computing power. It's possible to track stealthy targets, just MUCH harder. The post you saw was probably a Su fanboi site and to be judged for accuracy appropriately.

[Mr Matt Foley]

9 hours ago, Grey Ghost 531 said:

 

 

Low frequency means long wavelength. Long wavelength means low resolution. The LF radar will detect a target but it will not locate the target. They'll know something's out there, somewhere. With bi-stable radar (separate transmit and receive stations) they'll do better, but it will take lots of computing power. It's possible to track stealthy targets, just MUCH harder. The post you saw was probably a Su fanboi site and to be judged for accuracy appropriately.

 

Agreed, I seriously doubt this has not been thought of and countermeasures developed. Times change fast and just because we do not hear of it (because it is all classified) doesn't mean there is not activity. Su Fanboi's should worry about the delay in development of T-50 etc.

[habu2]

On 5/12/2017 at 6:56 AM, tosouthern66 said:

I read that Russia and China are developing low frequency radar systems which will be able to pick up the F-35.

 

I read the same thing about the F-117 back in the 90s, not exactly a "new" threat to stealth.

[11bee]

1 hour ago, habu2 said:

 

I read the same thing about the F-117 back in the 90s, not exactly a "new" threat to stealth.

 

But at the same time, there are some folks who say that was the very reason why the F-117 was all of a sudden retired, with no replacement on line.   Never gonna know for sure who has the upper hand until the jet goes up against a first rate opponent, which hopefully will never happen. 

 

 

Edited May 13, 2017 by 11bee

[Mr Matt Foley]

1 hour ago, 11bee said:

 

But at the same time, there are some folks who say that was the very reason why the F-117 was all of a sudden retired, with no replacement on line.   Never gonna know for sure who has the upper hand until the jet goes up against a first rate opponent, which hopefully will never happen. 

 

 

 

The differences in technology or generation of Stealth technology rather, is significant when you compare the F-117 to even the B-2 which was being manufactured at the same time. The reality is the F-117 was 1970's stealth technology.

[11bee]

3 hours ago, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

The differences in technology or generation of Stealth technology rather, is significant when you compare the F-117 to even the B-2 which was being manufactured at the same time. The reality is the F-117 was 1970's stealth technology.

Agree 100%. Just got to keep in mind that as our stuff improves, the bad guys aren't resting on their laurels either.   Not saying that they have the upper hand by any means, just that it's a continual effort by both sides to out-do the other    

[Mfezi]

On 2017/05/13 at 0:33 AM, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

Agreed, I seriously doubt this has not been thought of and countermeasures developed. Times change fast and just because we do not hear of it (because it is all classified) doesn't mean there is not activity. Su Fanboi's should worry about the delay in development of T-50 etc.

 

I don't work in the US defence industry, but I spend a lot of time in the middle East (mostly with countries the US regard as friendly). I wouldn't write off the new Russian radar and air defence systems that quickly - no-one else does. Just as one example: the Nebo-M radar system, of which components have apparently already been exported, includes a VHF-band AESA array and there is no doubt that it does reduce the effectiveness of LO type aircraft of certain sizes (which obviously does not mean they are negated - there is a long sliding scale between no stealth capability and invisible). Modern low frequency radars certainly are much better than earlier generation systems in locating and tracking targets, and they are virtually always paired with systems that work in other wavelengths to provide more accurate information once they know exactly where to look. Where many of these so-called "anti-stealth", low frequency radar systems were just vaporware when F-35 was conceived, we now see them not just in operation in Russia, but even being exported. And the many versions of the systems that come out on an annual basis tells you that they are continuously evolving and being improved upon.

 

There are many fanboys on both sides of the fence that often consist of people with little insight beyond what is written in the open press (and journalists and marketing departments are almost always fanboys of one side or the other), but there are also many professionals on both sides who understand each other's threats very well, and who are very serious and very creative about dealing with those threats. In the real world, neither side is just shrugging its shoulders at the other. The threats that the F-35 may face right now are already leaps and bounds ahead of what they were when the aircraft was first conceived, but of course the aircraft's own defensive systems are not standing still either. The game of threat and counter-threat will continue to evolve. There is a real problem though in the fact that "traditional" stealth design techniques are becoming more difficult to implement due to the fact that everyone stopped relying on only high frequency search and tracking radars. On the other side of the coin, providing effective air defence is always a problem since even without stealth, giving complete coverage of any given area is always extremely difficult. And it may not need a F-35 to take care of key elements in an air defence system first, without bothering with the older systems since the F-35 or similar aircraft can easily deal with them. Of course, you will first need to know where those key elements are located (and these days most of these systems are mobile), and so it goes on and on.

Edited May 14, 2017 by Mfezi

[Mr Matt Foley]

6 hours ago, Mfezi said:

 

I don't work in the US defence industry, but I spend a lot of time in the middle East (mostly with countries the US regard as friendly). I wouldn't write off the new Russian radar and air defence systems that quickly - no-one else does. Just as one example: the Nebo-M radar system, of which components have apparently already been exported, includes a VHF-band AESA array and there is no doubt that it does reduce the effectiveness of LO type aircraft of certain sizes (which obviously does not mean they are negated - there is a long sliding scale between no stealth capability and invisible). Modern low frequency radars certainly are much better than earlier generation systems in locating and tracking targets, and they are virtually always paired with systems that work in other wavelengths to provide more accurate information once they know exactly where to look. Where many of these so-called "anti-stealth", low frequency radar systems were just vaporware when F-35 was conceived, we now see them not just in operation in Russia, but even being exported. And the many versions of the systems that come out on an annual basis tells you that they are continuously evolving and being improved upon.

 

There are many fanboys on both sides of the fence that often consist of people with little insight beyond what is written in the open press (and journalists and marketing departments are almost always fanboys of one side or the other), but there are also many professionals on both sides who understand each other's threats very well, and who are very serious and very creative about dealing with those threats. In the real world, neither side is just shrugging its shoulders at the other. The threats that the F-35 may face right now are already leaps and bounds ahead of what they were when the aircraft was first conceived, but of course the aircraft's own defensive systems are not standing still either. The game of threat and counter-threat will continue to evolve. There is a real problem though in the fact that "traditional" stealth design techniques are becoming more difficult to implement due to the fact that everyone stopped relying on only high frequency search and tracking radars. On the other side of the coin, providing effective air defence is always a problem since even without stealth, giving complete coverage of any given area is always extremely difficult. And it may not need a F-35 to take care of key elements in an air defence system first, without bothering with the older systems since the F-35 or similar aircraft can easily deal with them. Of course, you will first need to know where those key elements are located (and these days most of these systems are mobile), and so it goes on and on.

 

Thanks for the post. Very well written and informative of what everyone should understand.

[Ken Cartwright]

I have no idea how accurate this is, but thought it might at least be an interesting read on the topic of F-35s vs. air defenses:

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-russia-china-radar-counter-stealth-2017-5

[TaiidanTomcat]

On 5/13/2017 at 10:04 AM, 11bee said:

 

But at the same time, there are some folks who say that was the very reason why the F-117 was all of a sudden retired, with no replacement on line.   Never gonna know for sure who has the upper hand until the jet goes up against a first rate opponent, which hopefully will never happen. 

 

 

 

"All of the sudden" 8 years later after Holloman AFB got F-22s to replace them?

 

http://www.holloman.af.mil/Article-Display/Article/318524/f-117a-nighthawk-to-be-honored-at-retirement-ceremony/

 

 

Edited May 16, 2017 by TaiidanTomcat

[TaiidanTomcat]

On 5/12/2017 at 5:56 AM, tosouthern66 said:

I read that Russia and China are developing low frequency radar systems which will be able to pick up the F-35. If that is the case then why waist the money on a program that's primary weapons won't be available till late in it's service life. By that time the F-35 will need replacing and the weapons will be some what useless. We should concentrate on long range stand off weapons and build more of the aircraft that are battle tested and proven. If I can find that report I'll post it, I found it the other day on my phone.

 

You've got it backwards. Stealth becomes MORE important as air defenses improve, not less. As the enemy raises the bar the older aircraft are more easily picked up and destroyed. Generally speaking stronger things handle hardship better than weaker things. Any environment that is dangerous for stealth aircraft is near suicidal for legacy fighters. It's that simple.

 

There is no amount of improved air defense that doesn't effect non stealth fighters to a larger degree, which is why low observability was invented and still rules the roost. That genie isn't going back into the bottle anymore than you will see jet turbines traded back for radials. Remember when the F-4 was having such a hard time we switched back to corsairs? Me neither. Same notion BTW. If a phantom was struggling a corsair was screwed. (Yes they still had prop jobs in vietnam, but look where they were used) 

 

And stand off munitions have a myriad of trade offs and complications in and of themselves. 

 

People act like the US hasn't been using stealth In combat for over 25 years and that russian/chinese radars and systems are so totally different that there can be no western comprehension of how they work. Pity those poor Americans who fail to comprehend long wave radar or the trade offs of stealth. It's the same notion with magical stealth finding IRST systems. If only the west had airborne IRST, or had heard of the infra red spectrum. Maybe someday these amatuers will crack open a book.

 

What I'm about to say is unpopular but nevertheless true: Whatever Russia has, we have too. And better versions of it. 

[TaiidanTomcat]

Lastly a quick remark on the F-35 and stealth. Stealth is the F-35s most obvious feature, and it's an easy club to beat it's competitors with (especially other western fighters in fighter selections) but stealth is not it's only feature, and the costs of 5th generation aircraft sensors pale in comparison to the cost of stealth. 50 percent of the F-22 cost according to Rand was sensors. Sensors that ensure 5th generation fighters see first/shoot first. 

[11bee]

1 hour ago, TaiidanTomcat said:

 

"All of the sudden" 8 years later after Holloman AFB got F-22s to replace them?

 

http://www.holloman.af.mil/Article-Display/Article/318524/f-117a-nighthawk-to-be-honored-at-retirement-ceremony/

 

 

They started shutting down the F-117 program in 2007.  Did the F-22 have an air to ground capability back then?

[Gordon Shumway]

43 minutes ago, TaiidanTomcat said:

Lastly a quick remark on the F-35 and stealth. Stealth is the F-35s most obvious feature, and it's an easy club to beat it's competitors with (especially other western fighters in fighter selections) but stealth is not it's only feature, and the costs of 5th generation aircraft sensors pale in comparison to the cost of stealth. 50 percent of the F-22 cost according to Rand was sensors. Sensors that ensure 5th generation fighters see first/shoot first. 

Yes, F-35 is more than stealthiness, it is a WEAPONS SYSTEM and not just another  combat jet to carry bombs, missiles and cannon shells. What makes F-35 KILLER is it's a complete package, this is why it must and will win and succeed in all  air arms that buys it. Let's hope Canada gets its head out of its a** to buy into F-35. But F-35 makes legacy  jets more valuable and viable as long as they work with it.

[TaiidanTomcat]

2 hours ago, 11bee said:

They started shutting down the F-117 program in 2007.  Did the F-22 have an air to ground capability back then?

 Came with F-22 IOC in 2005

[TaiidanTomcat]

https://m.imgur.com/ban0adR

[murad]

32 minutes ago, TaiidanTomcat said:

https://m.imgur.com/ban0adR

 

more numbers again. one problem i see with the sead part at least is that any dd rusian sam worth it's salt would require at least 2 good flights of f16s to do all the saturation as well as locating the real radar (decoys, triangulation, any ec aircraft the whole deal) and finally getting tru to even in a half assed iads environment. if that 4 f35s alone really can do the job just with their sensors and limited dead/sead capability then more power to them of course but as has been said earlier russians probably aren't standing still with their electronics and tactics.

[MarkW]

Y'all are assuming the F-35 is static as well, which is a major flaw in the argument.  The basic frequency response of the system is built in and won't change, that is correct.  BUT, and it's a BIIIIG BUT, the F-35 was never designed or anticipated to survive on LO shaping alone.  The already ridonculous EW suite has undergone a major refresh (for open source reporting look at what our Israeli friends wanted to bring to the program).  And it will continue to do so.  As computing horsepower increases, the system is getting updates both in the physical and the binary realms.  You don't build two dedicated reprogramming labs just to sit idle...and those are the US ones.

 

This is big boy cat and mouse, but more like cat and cat.

[MarkW]

8 hours ago, murad said:

...if that 4 f35s alone really can do the job just with their sensors and limited dead/sead capability

I'm curious as to what makes you think the DEAD/SEAD capability is "limited" considering it was one of the major design missions for the aircraft?  Or are you referring to the current IOC state vs the FOC state?

[murad]

10 minutes ago, MarkW said:

I'm curious as to what makes you think the DEAD/SEAD capability is "limited" considering it was one of the major design missions for the aircraft?  Or are you referring to the current IOC state vs the FOC state?

 

is there anything documented about an agm88 or anything similar with that particular job to be able to fitted onto/into and fired off an f35 so far? even if on paper how many and in what combo with other weapons?

[MarkW]

Aha.  You are assuming that would be the weapon of choice for the DEAD/SEAD mission.  That would also be an incorrect assumption.  The whole CONOPS, from takoff to pilots back home in their jammies, is very different from the current SEAD/DEAD paradigm.  That the F-35 has a limited SEAD/DEAD capability right now in IOC would be a clue as to what weapons they employ, but certainly not how.