Dragon029
Posts: 76
Joined: 10/31/2015
Status: offline
|
Sorry I missed the F-35 questions earlier; in future please feel free to PM me so that I get notified.
quote:
Do you know if the 6x 2000lb JDAM loadout will be an operational loadout? I.e. expected to be used in a shooting war.
As far as I'm aware the only bomb being certified for external carriage in Block 3F is the GBU-12 / GBU-49. The below slide was shown [presumably by the JPO, if not by one of the services] at the Defense News Conference 2017 that took place in September 2017, and is the most recent official 'document' I've seen on the matter:
Some have argued that the image has errors [that the GBU-51 isn't being integrated because the GBU-49 won tenders, that the AIM-120D and JSOW C-1 aren't being added until Block 4], but I don't know if they're right or not.
All 3 variants get external AIM-9X, GBU-12/49/51, internal AIM-120C-5/7/D AMRAAM, GBU-12/49/51.
F-35A & F-35C get GBU-31 (Mk-84 and BLU-109) JDAMs.
F-35B & F-35C get gun pod and GBU-32 (Mk-83 and BLU-110) JDAMs.
F-35A gets internal gun and GBU-39 SDB-1.
F-35C gets AGM-154C / AGM154C-1 JSOW.
quote:
It seems the F-35 has very limited weapon capabilities, and isn't much more than a 'modern' F-117, or a Blk 40 F-16? I.e. 2x internal JDAMs or up to 6x internal + external Paveway IIs, and a pair of AMRAAMs. Plus two Sidewinders.
As such, the aircraft in the database is seriously overrated, and we should whack 2/3rd of the loadouts?
Additional weapons may come online with software Block 4.
Most of the loadouts should be eliminated or somehow declared hypothetical.
As for Block 4, things are still fluid, with the new head of the JPO having been looking at restructuring Block 4 to try and ensure that it'll be achievable (he's voiced concerns / doubts about being able to meet the Block 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4 incremental approach where software / capability updates would be delivered every ~18 months or so. We'll hopefully hear what the plan is soon, but for what it's worth:
The USMC were pushing heavily for the GBU-53 SDB-II (and other CAS-related upgrades) to be integrated in Block 4.1: https://web.archive.org/web/20170704034633/http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/20170208-davis.html
Lockheed is trying to develop their "Sidekick" project which would allow 6x internal AMRAAM carriage: https://www.tu.no/artikler/kun-ett-kryssermissil-passer-i-buken-pa-f-35-det-lages-pa-kongsberg/412047
and there was intent for it to happen in Block 4 (likely towards the end): http://www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Pages/2017/March%202017/March%2028%202017/Let%E2%80%99s-Do-More-Shots.aspx
JASSM-ER didn't make the cut for Block 4, but was being considered for Block 5: http://aviationweek.com/technology/us-air-force-jassm-er-rolling-out-new-fighters-bombers
The Joint Strike Missile is also intended for Block 4 (with at least Norway and Australia as customers), though it wasn't clear when in Block 4 it'd be integrated.
The Meteor was also planned for Block 4 integration, but the UK MoD only began funding the modification of the missile (it'd have the same motor, same length, etc, just re-arranged fins) and its testing last year, meaning it probably would have arrived at the tail end of Block 4 (with 4.3 or 4.4).
In Block 4.2 the F-35 was also meant to have its EOTS upgraded to the Advanced EOTS (featuring [among other things] a larger aperture and therefore theoretically a longer IRST range), and there are other miscellaneous software and hardware updates involved with the different Block 4 increments.
quote:
I don't know how stealthyness works in thee engine, but I think that any of the external mounts will retard the stealthyness of the F-35, so that may dictate using stations 4,5,7, and 8 only, with a combined capacity of 5,700 lbs ... so that's like what?... 2x GBU-31s and 2x AIMs, or a combo of 4x GBU-38's (maybe 8, if they'd fit, but I've not seen any pictures) and 2x AIMs. This is also further reduced for STOVLs down to 3,700 lbs.
GBU-38 is not being integrated on the F-35; the only 500lb bombs being added are the Paveway family. Also, the F-35 is intended to have external carriage options for when stealth isn't required (which will be most of the time).
quote:
http://www.ausairpower.net/jsf.html
As to the JDAM, the CTOL and CV loadouts clearly show that it can support the GBU-31 with both the Mk84 and BLU-109 warheads. It'll have to be loaded in position 3 or 9
ausairpower.net is a decent resource for data on Russian radars and SAMs, but a very outdated and unreliable source for data on the F-35.
quote:
I think the F-35 in-engine has much higher performance than the airplane. Based on stories from 2013, range and acceleration were decreased as KPPs. Also, the dogfight with the F-16 suggested that energy-maneuverability is strongly limited, while instantaneous maneuverability is strong.
Range KPPs were not decreased, just the transonic acceleration requirement, which changed from (for the A/B/C variants) 55/65/65 seconds to 63/81/118 seconds for being able to accelerate from Mach 0.8 to Mach 1.2.
quote:
I'd also not use F-16.net, as that forum is totally in favor of the aircraft.
Don't blindly believe what users in F-16.net say, but don't not use it. Aus Air Power is a blog that judges the F-35 based on specifications they believe it to have (which are pessimistic and have been proven to be quite off the mark; APA's owners also had a financial interest in seeing Australia not procure the F-35, as they own a defence aerospace company and have previously tried to position themselves as an entity that could manage the procurement of alternate platforms like an upgraded F-111 or F-22). F-16.net has plenty of biased members, but it's a forum where judgements are made based on official or media reports. In terms of being able to find copies of or links to transcripts, documents and reports on the F-35, F-16.net is the best I've seen.
quote:
Also, no gun pods. Those aren't cleared yet AFAIK.
All gun testing (internal and podded) was completed by the first week of December last year.
< Message edited by Dragon029 -- 1/11/2018 4:03:12 PM >
|
Printable Version
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 
RE: Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread