No more problem cueing an IR-guided missile from inside the bay than there is cueing it to a target directly behind the launching aircraft, or too far away for the IR seeker to pick it up. That's the point of building in LOAL. And doesn't Asraam have it?
F-35 Multirole Joint Strike Fighter
- Thread starter SABRE
- Start date
- Status
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
LOAL means lock on after launch, and i do believe swerve is right, ASRAAM has it. AFAIK teh only A2A missiles cleared for internal lauch on the F35 at IOC are AIM 120 family and AIM 132 ASRAAM, primarily becaiuse it has this feature. At the moment, AIM 9X can only be fired of a rail, and therefore can not be carried internally. However it'll be 5 odd years before F35 reaches IOC and there are plenty of other things to do and plenty of time to design an AIM 9X block 2 which can be fired internally. Also as far as F35 only carrying AMRAAM's internally, i would have theought it would be pretty damn constricting to go into battle with no WVR missile??? I wouldnt want to head into harms way without at least one. IIRC a double ejector is being designed for the belly hardpoint that will allow an internal load of 6 AAM's, therefore 1 or 2 AIM9X/AIM132 could be carried without compromising the AIM 120 load. personally i hope provisions for WVR are being made because ignoring it could have serious consequenses for our pilots.
There wont be many disadvantages with only having the AMRAAM.
The AMRAAM can still engage targets 5 miles away and as they are fully active from launch so the pilot can continue to dogfight.
Though during vietnam the Phantoms had the same problem when they had no gun... Back then we thought dogfighting was a thing of the past... Having no short range missile isn't half as bad as no gun.
The AMRAAM can hit targets the gun cant hit and the gun can hit targets that are too close for the AMRAAM. There would be a zone between 1 and 2 miles where you'd wish to have a sidewinder..
The AMRAAM can still engage targets 5 miles away and as they are fully active from launch so the pilot can continue to dogfight.
Though during vietnam the Phantoms had the same problem when they had no gun... Back then we thought dogfighting was a thing of the past... Having no short range missile isn't half as bad as no gun.
The AMRAAM can hit targets the gun cant hit and the gun can hit targets that are too close for the AMRAAM. There would be a zone between 1 and 2 miles where you'd wish to have a sidewinder..
Scorpion82
New Member
Except for the missing HOBS capabilities...
Seriously the AMRAAM can be used at short distances and if I must decide between an AMRAAM or Sidewinder to be loaded I would go for the first one. But having SRAAMs is better at all.
actually the tests between the F4's and the Mig21 they had out at Groom Lake showed that the Phantom II only needed 600m to gain the energy and engagement advantage. Those tests resulted in Top Gun being established. (not Top Gun being established to deal with the Vietnam loss problems as is commonly promoted in some books)
The biggest issue was energy management. The gun argument has been simplified so much that its seen as the primary cause when it was only part of it. The USN also knew how much gap they had between the Migs gun ranges (again determined at Groom Lake) - so the Guns argument was also negated by the issue of energy comprehension and the fact that the early Sidewinders and Sparrows were godawful (1 in 11 failed to work and at least 25% fell off the rails or failed to ignite)
Lets also remember that the Russians decided that guns were obsolete before the americans, Kruschev thought that the launch of sputnik put the americans back into the stone age.
It resulted in 7 years of tactical madness due to people misunderstanding technology cause and effect....
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
AMRAAM can be used as an WVR missile, however your puing yourself at a dissadvantage by having an all AMRAAM load, especially since the other guy will have R73. The off broadsight capability in adition to its maneuverability and HMCS means your dead if you have to maneuver with the guy, and the only advandtage within 20-30km would be the slamers ECCM compared to R73's IRCM. There is a reason plenty of time and money was spent on missiles of the calibur of Python, AIM 132 and AIM9X, and a reason why all AMRAAM loads are not carried. In the WVR engagement envilope R73, Python, ASRAAM and AIM9X are all more capable than AMRAAM.
The value lost in not having a capability is subjective, and depends on the other guys capability. The inability to enguage someone at a minimum range without a gun when the other guy can, is no worse than not being able to take an off broadsight shot when your both maneuvering when the other guy can.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
A Defense Technology Blog
Six-Shooting Lightning
Posted by Bill Sweetman at 11/8/2007 1:28 AM
The Joint Strike Fighter could be upgraded to carry up to six internal AIM-120 AMRAAM Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles, according to a Lockheed Martin executive. "Our spiral development program includes the ability to carry up to six internal AMRAAMs", G. Richard Cathers, senior manager of Lockheed Martin's strategic studies group, told the IQPC Fighter Conference in London on Wednesday. "It's a capability second only to the F-22."
Cathers added that the JSF's air-combat capability "has not been advertised as it could or should have been", partly because "at the same time as we are developing the F-35, we and the USAF have wanted to expand the F-22 program." Apparently, the USAF has not wanted to advertise the JSF's air-to-air capability, concerned that it would weaken the case for acquiring more than the 183 F-22s authorized today.
The four added internal AMRAAMs would be carried in place of internal bombs.
It's not clear, however, whether the short-take-off, vertical landing F-35B variant, which has smaller weapon bays, would be able to carry the added weapons.
An executive for a competing fighter program, speaking at the conference, said that the six-missile capability would be a major improvement for the JSF. Until now, competitors have criticised the JSF because it carries only two AAMs - supporting only a single engagement - in stealth mode.
Good news I expect for those overly concerned about the issue...
Six-Shooting Lightning
Posted by Bill Sweetman at 11/8/2007 1:28 AM
The Joint Strike Fighter could be upgraded to carry up to six internal AIM-120 AMRAAM Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles, according to a Lockheed Martin executive. "Our spiral development program includes the ability to carry up to six internal AMRAAMs", G. Richard Cathers, senior manager of Lockheed Martin's strategic studies group, told the IQPC Fighter Conference in London on Wednesday. "It's a capability second only to the F-22."
Cathers added that the JSF's air-combat capability "has not been advertised as it could or should have been", partly because "at the same time as we are developing the F-35, we and the USAF have wanted to expand the F-22 program." Apparently, the USAF has not wanted to advertise the JSF's air-to-air capability, concerned that it would weaken the case for acquiring more than the 183 F-22s authorized today.
The four added internal AMRAAMs would be carried in place of internal bombs.
It's not clear, however, whether the short-take-off, vertical landing F-35B variant, which has smaller weapon bays, would be able to carry the added weapons.
An executive for a competing fighter program, speaking at the conference, said that the six-missile capability would be a major improvement for the JSF. Until now, competitors have criticised the JSF because it carries only two AAMs - supporting only a single engagement - in stealth mode.
Good news I expect for those overly concerned about the issue...
the tornado f3 has semi recessed amraams but doesnt'punch them off',it utilises a mechanism designed by fraser nash(used to make the rotating machine gun pods on second world war allied bombers) which moves the missile into the airstream then releases them.
of course it would,however engagements still do take place at visual range when the the gun still has its uses.ideally and esp with the more advanced nations,aew cover should reduce the likelihood of such an engagement developing but as with the falklands war and also localised conflicts such as the etriea/ethiopian wars,close range air combat comes to the fore.
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/D...stics/NewCombatHelmetIsAVisionOfTheFuture.htm
New combat helmet is a vision of the future
The developmental pilot helmet for the highly advanced F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is currently being evaluated by defence scientists at Boscombe Down in Wiltshire.
In 2001 the Government selected the Joint Strike Fighter to meet the requirement for a stealthy multi-role fighter to operate from the future aircraft carriers, replacing the Harriers.
Unlike modern fast jet aircraft the Joint Strike Fighter, which is planned to replace the famous Harrier, does not have a ‘traditional’ head-up display – instead the computerised symbology is displayed directly onto the pilot’s visors.
This Helmet Mounted Display System provides the pilot with cues for flying, navigating and fighting the aircraft. It will even superimpose infra-red imagery onto the visor which allows the pilot to ‘look through’ the cockpit floor at night and see the world below.
Royal Air Force Squadron Leader Rob Harrison, who was one of the pilots who took part in the subjective assessment tests, flying in a Hawk aircraft at Boscombe Down said:
The highly advanced Joint Strike Fighter, which is being built by Lockheed Martin, is planned to replace the RAF and RN’s Harriers.
A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on the next phase of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme was signed on 12 December 2006 by then Minister of State for Defence Procurement, Lord Drayson, following a meeting with US Deputy Secretary of Defence, Gordon England, in Washington DC.
____________________________________________________________
http://crave.cnet.com/8301-1_105-9817743-1.html
In addition to keeping pilots on top of navigation, weapons and other aircraft, the Helmet Mounted Display System will superimpose a binocular-wide field-of-view, infrared image of the world below, allowing the pilot to "look through" the cockpit floor at night. This will let a pilot turn in any direction and still be able to see a virtual heads-up display, replacing the information that is currently seen only at the front of the cockpit.
New combat helmet is a vision of the future
The developmental pilot helmet for the highly advanced F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is currently being evaluated by defence scientists at Boscombe Down in Wiltshire.
In 2001 the Government selected the Joint Strike Fighter to meet the requirement for a stealthy multi-role fighter to operate from the future aircraft carriers, replacing the Harriers.
Unlike modern fast jet aircraft the Joint Strike Fighter, which is planned to replace the famous Harrier, does not have a ‘traditional’ head-up display – instead the computerised symbology is displayed directly onto the pilot’s visors.
This Helmet Mounted Display System provides the pilot with cues for flying, navigating and fighting the aircraft. It will even superimpose infra-red imagery onto the visor which allows the pilot to ‘look through’ the cockpit floor at night and see the world below.
Royal Air Force Squadron Leader Rob Harrison, who was one of the pilots who took part in the subjective assessment tests, flying in a Hawk aircraft at Boscombe Down said:
"It cannot be stressed how important this sort of evaluation is to the Joint Strike Fighter Programme. The helmet is a critical piece of equipment and simply has to work."
The helmet programme is being evaluated by the MOD’s DE&S Joint Combat Aircraft Integrated Project Team along with the RAF’s Centre for Aviation Medicine. The developmental head gear is manufactured by Vision Systems International and Helmet Integrated Systems Limited.
The highly advanced Joint Strike Fighter, which is being built by Lockheed Martin, is planned to replace the RAF and RN’s Harriers.
A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on the next phase of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme was signed on 12 December 2006 by then Minister of State for Defence Procurement, Lord Drayson, following a meeting with US Deputy Secretary of Defence, Gordon England, in Washington DC.
____________________________________________________________
http://crave.cnet.com/8301-1_105-9817743-1.html
In addition to keeping pilots on top of navigation, weapons and other aircraft, the Helmet Mounted Display System will superimpose a binocular-wide field-of-view, infrared image of the world below, allowing the pilot to "look through" the cockpit floor at night. This will let a pilot turn in any direction and still be able to see a virtual heads-up display, replacing the information that is currently seen only at the front of the cockpit.
FutureTank
Banned Member
This is one of the technologies shared with the F-22 and is a decade long development from Israel (one of the reasons Israel is in the F-35 development).
Israeli is not part of the JSF consortium. In fact there are concerns about tech sharing with her and she's been locked out due to a number of concerns about leakage
That may change later on, but she certainly does not have access to this program as of now - thats been publicly stated (lthough the ugly reasons have been left out.)
Last edited:
FutureTank
Banned Member
Not part of consortium, but part of development. This was reported middle of last year I think, including on DefenceTalk.
I'd seriously question the accuracy and currency of that. Israel has been locked out of tech sharing - and she needs to get approval from the only other Tier1 partner AFAIK for the Americans to share some of the jewels.
There is still a strong undercurrent about what the Israelis should be allowed to get access to after the China tech transfer fracas....
You sure its not a Debka claim?
I might wait and see if AGRA and Unicorn see this and wait for their input...
FutureTank
Banned Member
A casual search will show a report in Jerusalem Post for 2006. Even Wikipedia has it linked.
I have heard this in other forums, and at least one former engineer with Elbit suggested a stream of Israelis going to and from various JSF connected facilities.
The helmet was a joint development project since the 90s and well before the China fracas (which has now been terminated btw). In fact I believe same technology is used in the Superbugs, so RAAF will see if before they receive F-35s at least in part.
I'm not talking about the Helmet. I'm talking about project participation.
Thats because I know that they have been locked out of some things already. They're not allowed anywhere near some of the JSF work being done in Oz. I assume that they're restricted with the others. They're certainly getting locked doors on some of the US side.
But, I'll wait for AGRA or Unicorn. I'd trust the other sources mentioned as much as I'd trust the Guardian or Pravda.
Elbit is also the manufacturer of the current JHMCS in the HUG 2.2 F/A-18s so the RAAF are using it now. Playing the FLIR footage in the visor is a new feature though.
The weight of these helmets is a minor problem. I wore one for about half an hour while doing functionals and it gave me a sore neck. I guess aircrew do special exercises to build up their neck muscles but I do know it is an issue that has been raised. I predict that in the not to distant future the average fighter jock will have a neck similar to a South African front rower.
Barra
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
The helmet is not shared with F-22 either.
The F-22 operates NO helmet mounted sighting system whatsoever...
- Status