Will latest F-35 problems push Norway towards a European solution?

[JohanGrön]

Addendum:

"G-35 Lightning II" ??!!

http://www.p4.no/story.aspx?id=287856

New skunkworks plane for Norway perhaps :unknown

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

I'll do a complete reply when I'm more up to it... a bit lazy/tired right now.

But wrt your last paragraph, yes I know the Cobra doesn't require TVC - it was a metaphor. I was just highlighting that you're not gonna outmaneuver a M3-4+/60g/HOBS/IIR (and multisensor) missile, cued by HMCS/DAS, which will act as a fully integrated defensive/offensive system. On top of this the F-35 will also have the EOTS.

If you, say, compare this to the avionics of the PAK-FA which are supposedly going to be migrated from the SU-35 (at best "4.5 gen" federated), and that the jet has to have the provision for the arrays and computational power, then I say that it does not seem to be in the cards for the PAK-FA.

Which makes me conclude that F-16/F-18 maneuverability is more than adequate and supermaneuverability and TVC is a waste of money, except for post-stall maneuvering like landing on very short runways and at high altitude maneuvering (which is why a maritimised Typhoon would probably feature TVC; to control sink rate and diminish landing speed, and for maneuvering at very high altitude were control surfaces have less authority - this is why the F-22A has TVC).

AvWeek blog on EO-DAS.

NG EO-DAS promo video.

Personally I think the over-the-shoulder shots in the video is a bit over the top, but it does drive home the point.

LO later.

I agree WRT TVC and air combat maneuvering. The whole point is to get your weapons system in a position to acquire and successfully engage the target, so how do you do it? Move the whole platform or gimble the missile seeker and give it LOAL capability combined with a 360 degree IIR sensor sweet? I know which one will be able to engage the threat quicker. Unless your gonna go to guns then TVC wont be massively useful against a platform like the F-35, and even if it does get to that range the energy maneuver potential is more important.

 

[swerve]

The yanks are probably about to devaluate the dollar. To deal with debts and shore up intl competitiveness.

They can't. All they can do is lower interest rates, & sell dollars.

A lower dollar would reduce the foreign currency value of debts, but not the dollar value, & the USA pays in dollars. The only way to reduce the real value - i.e. relative to US earnings, tax receipts, etc - would be to push up US inflation. Pushing it up far enough to deflate debts significantly would be . . . . . interesting.

 

[stigmata]

I'd say frightful, rather then interesting.

Countries has historically dealt with massive dept by:
1:Raise taxes- to pay bills
2rint money like weimar Germany after ww1
3:Sell off national assets (telecommunications, water systems, transport systems, real estate, etc.)
4:Repudiate dept, as Russia 1917
5:Resort to plunder- by launching wars to accuire wealth (Roman empire, spanish empire,(Aztec gold), nazi empire, Japanese empire.)

Empires however, are dispositioned to choose the latter.

There are two major concerns:
1: Is the world ready to decouple with US economy ?
2: What solution will a US gouvernment opt for ?
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RhnHo3RDfg&feature=related"]YouTube - The Ultimate American Dollar Collapse[/ame]

 

[Grand Danois]

They can't. All they can do is lower interest rates, & sell dollars.

A lower dollar would reduce the foreign currency value of debts, but not the dollar value, & the USA pays in dollars. The only way to reduce the real value - i.e. relative to US earnings, tax receipts, etc - would be to push up US inflation. Pushing it up far enough to deflate debts significantly would be . . . . . interesting.

Mmmm. Yes. Significantly may be the operative word. I do expect US inflation to increase, though. Btw, I have been following the collapse of the Icelandic banking sector with interest the past 24h. They're in the bind partially due to explosion of foreign debt & payments due to deflation of the ISK. And the value of their outward FDI assets (financed by loans and with a historic yield of 7.5%) has depreciated as they're in property, retail and banking... So they've de facto nationalised banks, trusts and pension funds and started liquidating en masse. And are also banking on a 4 bn EUR loan from Russia.

So a weak currency is no fun.

 

[Grand Danois]

I'd say frightful, rather then interesting.

Countries has historically dealt with massive dept by:
1:Raise taxes- to pay bills
2rint money like weimar Germany after ww1
3:Sell off national assets (telecommunications, water systems, transport systems, real estate, etc.)
4:Repudiate dept, as Russia 1917
5:Resort to plunder- by launching wars to accuire wealth (Roman empire, spanish empire,(Aztec gold), nazi empire, Japanese empire.)

Empires however, are dispositioned to choose the latter.

There are two major concerns:
1: Is the world ready to decouple with US economy ?
2: What solution will a US gouvernment opt for ?
YouTube - The Ultimate American Dollar Collapse

Hoping for the US econ to tank enough for the JSF programme to take a hit is in the dept of wishful thinking, as far as I am concerned.

 

[Grand Danois]

What problems could there be to mount those sensors on a, say Typhoon ?

• Space in the right places for sensors and cryogenics.
  
• Power and more space for computers, cooling etc.

In short: internal real estate & power.

 

[Grand Danois]

So you think nothing of the sort is in the works for the PAK-FA? Keep in mind that the Su-35BM has not even yet been decided on in terms of avionics. And it's only the test-bed for 5th gen. avionics, not necessarily the final form. Finally given then time between now and when the PAK-FA is scheduled for production, means that many changes are likely to come to it. The only thing really tested next year will be the airframe and engines. And even those are likely to be modified. I would be (I try to avoid it admittedly) more conservative in terms of trying to predict the future.

From my perspective it's not about being conservative as to what other "potential threat" fighters may come up with. It's rather that the entry level benchmark has already been set with a system like DAS. It may be that dedicated space is set aside on the PAK-FA for a future DAS-type system. I do not know. I do have the distinct impression that Russian IIR technology is on the wrong side of the curve and I'm hesistant to think that they've got anything like it in the makings.

VLO. I don't expect the PAK-FA to feature F-35 class VLO. It's a matter of experience. The US has had multiple generations of platforms deployed with shaping, materials, IR suppression and overall concepts. They have vast experience from labs and actual testing. They've had feedback on maintenance, operational use, production tecnology, etc... In other words a massive portfolio of applied and production technology, which coupled with a mass of actual experience melds into a complete concept of practical use of VLO translated into platform design, tactical employment, maintenance regime and production technology.

This is lightyears beyond knowing basic formulae and materials science, coupled with lab technology and limited field use.

So for a "first attempt" at a manned VLO fighter, I am not holding my breath. The Russian engineers may be good...

I expect "sensible" VLO from the PAK-FA. But as witrh everything else - time will tell.

EDIT: By the way, this article mentions a new avionics complex for the Su-35BM. It only mentions it in passing towards the end, but it would be interesting to see more.

http://arms-tass.su/?page=article&aid=60828&cid=24

Anyways, thanks for your reply and sorry to derail this. One final comment, the PAK-FA isn't the only competitor. I mentioned it because I know quiet a bit about it, but isn't the Gripen NG a 5th gen. platform? And of course we have the Chinese J-XX.

Thx for link. Had to mangle it by systran. I'm not really going into a discussion of generations. My use is for comprehension use and to save me typing longer posts than I would want to.

 

[Grand Danois]

I agree WRT TVC and air combat maneuvering. The whole point is to get your weapons system in a position to acquire and successfully engage the target, so how do you do it? Move the whole platform or gimble the missile seeker and give it LOAL capability combined with a 360 degree IIR sensor sweet? I know which one will be able to engage the threat quicker. Unless your gonna go to guns then TVC wont be massively useful against a platform like the F-35, and even if it does get to that range the energy maneuver potential is more important.

The relevance of the gun is really if missile combat becomes unviable. It could be some time in the future that missiles could be shot down by DEWs. But this would not make the gun relevant, as fighters would now have a pointable death by flash weapon...

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

The relevance of the gun is really if missile combat becomes unviable. It could be some time in the future that missiles could be shot down by DEWs. But this would not make the gun relevant, as fighters would now have a pointable death by flash weapon...

AFAIK most DEW are not LOS limited. All you need (for a laser based system) is a targeting prism at the front of the platform. The fact that \\ the "projectile" (beam) travels at the speed of light means the weapon will be incredibly accurate. Thus the "illuminating" platform will not have to maneuver at all to engage the threat, and when DEW replaces the missile as the primary A2A weapon, it will make air combat maneuvering even less relevant than in the current day of HOBS, IIR heaters & HMCS.

 

[Aussie Digger]

VLO. I don't expect the PAK-FA to feature F-35 class VLO. It's a matter of experience. The US has had multiple generations of platforms deployed with shaping, materials, IR suppression and overall concepts. They have vast experience from labs and actual testing. They've had feedback on maintenance, operational use, production tecnology, etc... In other words a massive portfolio of applied and production technology, which coupled with a mass of actual experience melds into a complete concept of practical use of VLO translated into platform design, tactical employment, maintenance regime and production technology.

This is lightyears beyond knowing basic formulae and materials science, coupled with lab technology and limited field use.

So for a "first attempt" at a manned VLO fighter, I am not holding my breath. The Russian engineers may be good...

I expect "sensible" VLO from the PAK-FA. But as witrh everything else - time will tell.

In support of same:

F-117: Lockheed Martin.

F-22: Lockheed Martin.

F-35: Lockheed Martin.

Sukhoi: Nil.

:nutkick

 

[Grand Danois]

There seems to be some uncertainty on the DAS' offensive capabilities and in-service date, so here are some facts:

Friday, August 1, 2008
Industry Scan
‘Game-Changing’ EO DAS Nears Action on Joint Strike Fighter

As a fifth-generation, multirole fighter, the F-35 Lightning II brings a lot to the table in terms of stealth, lethality and survivability. One "transformational" system that is quietly nearing flight on the aircraft is the Electro-Optical Distributed Aperture System (EO DAS).

Designated AN/AAQ-37, the EO DAS is comprised of six infrared sensors, flush-mounted around the aircraft to afford 360-degree, spherical coverage — in mathematical terms "4 pi steradian." The sensor array will provide the F-35 pilot with missile-warning, situational awareness and navigation FLIR, operating simultaneously, in one package. Integrated via the mission computer, the system will support target detection and identification functions of the aircraft’s Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) and AN/APG-81 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar.

Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems Division is supplying both the EO DAS and AN/APG-81 radar for the F-35, or Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). The company in late June invited Avionics to its facilities in Linthicum, Md., near Baltimore-Washington International Airport, to discuss the status of the two core systems.

With the short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) variant of the fighter having just taken wing ( see page 11) and with two F-35s now racking up flight hours, much of the discussion focused on the lesser reported EO DAS.

"Most people think of us as the radar company [but] this is the real game-changer for the F-35 that separates it from the F-22 and the F-18," said Dave Bouchard, director of JSF Programs. "The F-22 has a very basic missile launch detection system; this is a significant game-changing capability."

Said Pete Bartos, marketing director for Combat Avionics Systems, "People really don’t get what DAS does. It’s just one of those unknown, very core pieces of the JSF that, by the way, no other airplane in the world has."

Development of the system started in 2002, based on earlier technology. The program included flights of a F-16 equipped with a DAS sensor in a centerline pod to record data in a dynamic fighter environment. Live missile testing was conducted to collect data and validate models. The first flight of an EO DAS on Northrop Grumman’s BAC 1-11 testbed, initially fitted with three sensors, took place in November 2005. [it's already here, not 10 years away, GD]

Data collected during flight tests has been used to develop and optimize algorithms that process sensor data — where the real functionality of the system lies, Bouchard said. "In the algorithms, we seamlessly stitch together two or three cameras depending on the field of regard. Our requirement is to have seamlessly stitched, near 20/20 visual acuity," he said. Extremely fast update rates are required to prevent latency of the DAS imagery, which will be projected onto the pilot’s helmet-mounted display. "It has to be updated fast enough so the eye can’t tell it’s a video image as opposed to the real image," he said.

The Netherlands, a JSF program partner, has contributed to the EO DAS development. Northrop Grumman in 2003 contracted with the country’s Organization for Applied Scientific Research, Physics and Electronics Laboratory to provide signal-conditioning algorithms to enhance the clarity of DAS imagery. Thales Cryogenics, of Eindhoven, The Netherlands, is providing cryogenic coolers for the infrared detectors.

At this writing, Northrop Grumman’s BAC 1-11, mounted now with a full set of six sensors[it's already here, not 10 years away, GD], had flown more than 100 hours with the EO DAS [it's already here, not 10 years away, GD]. The time flown is more impressive, Bartos said, when considering that DAS sensors collect a terabyte per hour of data. That information is archived by the company to check system performance. However, the baseline F-35 has no data storage mechanism, and using the system to track a missile, for example, "will be like taking a sip out of a fire hydrant," he said.

The company had delivered three sets of EO DAS sensors to JSF prime contractor Lockheed Martin for its mission systems integration lab in Fort Worth, for the Cooperative Avionics Test Bed (CATBird) aircraft, and for BF-4, the first F-35 slated to fly with the system [it's already here, not 10 years away, GD]. Bouchard said CATBird, a modified Boeing 737, will start flying with mission systems hardware this fall, including the AESA radar. The EO DAS "is about nine months to the right of radar," he said, putting its first flight on CATBird in latter 2009 and on F-35 in 2010 [it's already here, not 10 years away, GD].

In addition, Northrop Grumman had been awarded two contracts for Low-Rate Initial Production of the EO DAS — the first for two shipsets of six sensors each; the second for 12 shipsets. The first production delivery is slated for the end of the year [it's already here, not 10 years away, GD].

The executives rolled a video that had been prepared for the Farnborough Airshow with previously unreleased EO DAS imagery. The narrator sings the praises of the system’s many capabilities, which include missile warning and launch-site detection, continuous tracking and ID correlation during aerial combat, day and night vision around the aircraft, including through the floor, and high off-boresight target designation.

"In the age of high off-boresight weaponry and highly maneuverable aircraft, hesitation means defeat," intones the narrator. "... With DAS, maneuverability is irrelevant. Instead of mutual kills, the F-35 simply exits the fight, and lets its missiles do the turning." — Bill Carey

http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/categories/military/24687.html

 

[stigmata]

[it's already here, not 10 years away, GD].

I lost you there, what are you referring to ?

Btw, you miss-interpreted my post, i'm not "Hoping for the US econ to tank enough for the JSF programme to take a hit", i worry how my economy is going to be affected, and how i can protect myself. ie buy gold or euro or rupees ???

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

continuous tracking and ID correlation during aerial combat, day and night vision around the aircraft, including through the floor, and high off-boresight target designation.

"In the age of high off-boresight weaponry and highly maneuverable aircraft, hesitation means defeat," intones the narrator. "... With DAS, maneuverability is irrelevant. Instead of mutual kills, the F-35 simply exits the fight, and lets its missiles do the turning." — Bill Carey

http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/categories/military/24687.html

Combine that with a LOAL capable missile providing a 360 degree engagement envelope (aka AIM-132) and you can see why LM didn't bother with TVC on the F-35. If you're not planning on routinely operating at extreme altitude TVC essentially becomes a marketing tool, unless of course you don't have a sensor missile combination like DAS/AIM-132/AIM-9X.

 

[stigmata]

I think we got carried away a bit too far here.

The first 4-7 seconds are thrust - the rest of the flight including manouvre is based on energy.

like jet fighter combat - energy is the key to engagement. if the engagement loop is too long, if the red platform has superior flight behaviour under power, if red team has better energy management, then any missile going terminal running on energy will be at risk.

all the fancy stats in the world don't change that simple but significant impediment.

it's an energy war in the end

Not much to add actually, DAS is still an impressive system tho

 

[harryriedl]

Combine that with a LOAL capable missile providing a 360 degree engagement envelope (aka AIM-132) and you can see why LM didn't bother with TVC on the F-35. If you're not planning on routinely operating at extreme altitude TVC essentially becomes a marketing tool, unless of course you don't have a sensor missile combination like DAS/AIM-132/AIM-9X.

DAS sounds a bit like AEGIS of the air. with the integration of all the sensors into an intergreated whole

 

[energo]

TVC. It's an "diminishing returns", supermaneuverability item. In the face of HOBS, agile and fast IRIS-T/ASRAAM/AIM-9X with a near BVR NEZ, combined with HMCS, a jet featuring TVC gets shot down just as easily as a jet that doesn't. What matters is who sees who first and who can react to it first.

The F-22 uses TVC for efficient maneuvering at extreme altitudes, not for doing "cobras".

The future might lie in a relatively new concept called Fluidic Thrust Vectoring (FTV). By subtly changing the air-flow inside the nozzle or tailpipe the exhaust can be deflected to provide thrust vectoring control. It's less complex, lighter, cheaper, more durable and stealthy compared to a mechanical system.

http://www.billcrowther.net/research/Flow_control/FTV/FTV.html

Ultimately the concept might even replace aerodynamic control surfaces such as flaps, ailerons etc.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/emergingtech/index.php?p=196


Regards,
B. Bolsøy
Oslo

 

[Feanor]

I lost you there, what are you referring to ?

Btw, you miss-interpreted my post, i'm not "Hoping for the US econ to tank enough for the JSF programme to take a hit", i worry how my economy is going to be affected, and how i can protect myself. ie buy gold or euro or rupees ???

Gold is always safe. Try maybe diamonds. They never lose that much in value.

 

[swerve]

Gold is always safe.

Yep. $850/oz in January 1980, $300/oz in January 1985. Very safe. nfloorl:

 

[Grand Danois]

I lost you there, what are you referring to ?

Yes, it doesn't make sense and was inappropiate of me. If you'll allow for another comment that will lack context, I'd want to point out that the only two posters which have been banned in context of the JSF/Gripen topics, have been critical of the Gripen. I'm not going to reveal which poster nicks though.

Btw, you miss-interpreted my post, i'm not "Hoping for the US econ to tank enough for the JSF programme to take a hit", i worry how my economy is going to be affected, and how i can protect myself. ie buy gold or euro or rupees ???

OK. It's just that this is an aerospace thread after all. I wouldn't want to give you any advice on what to invest in, but I would myself stay away from investing in Zimbabwe dollars.