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

Status
Not open for further replies.

energo

Member
And since those eyeballs are IR sensors like IRST, they are also looking through a straw i take it ? ;)
Not entirely. The six cameras are fused together into a seemless image with full spherical (4pi) coverage. There is no mechanical steering of the sensor head, so there is no delay, no response time and - thus - the DAS never looses track of a target. Even multiple targets in any sector around the aircraft.


Regards,
B. Bolsøy
Oslo
 

stigmata

New Member
energo said:
There is no mechanical steering of the sensor head
Then i take it there is no zoom capability either, unlike the IRST.
Makes sense, coz it would spoil the whole purpose of a missile launch detector
 

energo

Member
Then i take it there is no zoom capability either, unlike the IRST.
Makes sense, coz it would spoil the whole purpose of a missile launch detector
Digital zoom, although it would be limited by the resolution of the array. Originally a 1024x1024 arrays was prospected, but 2048x2048 FPAs are readily available today and FPAs in "the megapixles range" has been mentioned in various F-35 conjecture.

Regards,
B. Bolsøy
Oslo
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
So then, the million dollar question (nobody has yet anwsered my original one, I hope someone can) is, can the DAS feed targetting data to missiles for A2A?
 

energo

Member
So then, the million dollar question (nobody has yet anwsered my original one, I hope someone can) is, can the DAS feed targetting data to missiles for A2A?
Before launch, yes. After launch the radar command link will provide mid course updates to a suitable missile. In the future the MADL datalink is also a likely candidate for missile guidance.

Regards,
B. Bolsøy
Oslo
 

Grand Danois

Entertainer
More on the DAS:

Saturday, October 1, 2005
F-35 Integrated Sensor Suite: Lethal Combination
The integration of multiple advanced sensors and the fused data they produce gives the Joint Strike Fighter pilot unprecedented situational awareness in the combat area and stand-off lethality against enemy targets.
David Jensen

...

AESA Radar

...


EOTS

...

The DAS

Like EOTS, the F-35's distributed aperture system is incorporated in the fuselage design and does not require a pod. Six IR cameras--Porter calls them situation awareness "eyeballs" that create a flying "Imax"--are embedded in the aircraft, positioned to provide full spherical imagery around the aircraft.

The IR sensors form an integrated detector assembly inside the IR camera. The sensors form a total, passive picture around the aircraft, with "all of the information all the time," according to Porter. They give the F-35 pilot missile approach warning, countermeasures deployment, passive air-to-air radar, off-axis targeting for air-to-air missiles, and wide field-of-view day/night pilot vision. With off-axis targeting the pilot can assign a display of interest to the HMD and point his head to the intended target, designate and shoot. Providing through-the-cockpit-floor viewing, the DAS even assists the pilot in landing the aircraft. It can be used for after-dark, bomb damage indication (BDI), too, offering the pilot an alternative to using night vision goggles for damage assessment.

Also in the SDD phase, the DAS is being flight tested on an Air Force F-16 at Edwards AFB, Calif.

Each of the F-35's sensors provides powerful situation awareness and targeting information, but their integration to form a single, fused image makes them even more powerful, while not burdening the pilot with information overload. Each sensor has its own processor to automatically determine the appropriate modes, acquire targeting data, and deliver the imaging data over a Fibre Channel backbone bus within the integrated core processor (ICP), where it is fused to present a clear, comprehensive picture of the target and its setting.

To analyze and prioritize the incoming targeting data, the ICP uses algorithms dedicated to the various tasks: air-to-air, air-to-ground and the target identification received from the CNI suite. And these algorithms are distinct from those used to fuse other onboard data, for example, the GPS and inertial nav data for a comprehensive navigation picture.

The fused targeting data can be overlayed onto a battlefield situation display that the F-35 pilot has uplinked from a ground base or another aircraft. The intent of these features is to produce battle scene awareness to support an observe, orient, decide and act (OODA) sequence for F-35 pilots.

In a typical scenario the pilot would first detect a beyond-eyesight target in a predominantly radar image on the MFD. As the target gets closer, the EOTS imagery automatically creates a clearer picture of the target on the MFD. At this point the pilot assesses an operational picture of the battle space, evaluates the threat responses and rapidly plans a route to secure minimum exposure and maximum weapon effectiveness, and determines the best choice of weapon.

Once he has made his decision to attack the target, the pilot would switch from the head-down to the head-up display in his helmet-mounted visor. "You look at the two displays like wearing bifocals," says a Northrop offical. In addition to presenting a center cross that locks onto the target for a point-and-shoot capability, the HMD also presents the status of available weapons, a symbol for IFF and indication of the target's range, closure and velocity. With most of the target detection and presentation achieved automatically, the OODA process, from acquisition to destruction, can be done within the few minutes that Gen. Jumper set as a goal for engagement.

All told, the targeting sensors and processors make the F-35 not just a combat aircraft firing weapons, but a first-day-of-the-war, multimission aircraft able to perform autonomously, cooperatively or remotely, using information from offboard sources. In a cooperative mission, for example, the F-35's ICP would package and format targeting data to form a waveform for delivery by the CNI to a ground base or other aircraft via Link 16 or an internal data link.

The suppliers of the radar, EOTS, DAS and other systems are performing much of the F-35's software development and integration work--as much as 40 percent, a Lockheed Martin official estimates. The mission software (ultimately, an estimated 4.5 million lines of code written in C/C++) is still under development and will be completed in increments. The integrated core processor is in development, and integration testing will begin in the first quarter of 2006.

F-35's CNI Suite

...

In-Flight Reconfiguration

...

http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/categories/military/1145.html
 

zeven

New Member
LITENING Pod + a IRST system will do what EOTS is planned to do and then some. The EOTS has a rather limited field of view. EO DAS is as in the words of JSF chief test pilot Beesely "basically missile launch detectors" but will also provide a synthetic IR view of the world. Most likely very nice for night flying.

Gripen will add 360 degree MWS/LWS to the EWS-39 for missile launch and other threat detection. So with that clear, that leaves the 360 synthetic IR image of the DAS, and well with IRST/LDP/HMD the visual IR coverage should generally speaking be good in forward/up/down/side aspects but blind to the rear.

Maybe it's a good idea to add something there but I am not sure about its usefulness on Gripen (not saying its otherwise not useful) as the EWS-39 would give threat detection at a likely greater range and not as subject to bursts of light or other heat interruptions.
 

zeven

New Member
Well, of DAS is "just" a MAW, then why go build a far more expensive & complex system than e.g. MAW-300 ?

http://www.saabgroup.com/en/Product...tegoryId=272&ProductGroupId=371&ProductId=700
why dont you tell me how much the system costs compared to MAW-300.
i really cant se what makes the EO DAS so world beating compared to the competions solutions...

and i just quoted LM chief test pilot. i guess he knows what he talks about. ask him..

Ps.
SAAB working on an entirely new system for Gripen NG.
according to Gripen Demo News
 

Grand Danois

Entertainer
why dont you tell me how much the system costs compared to MAW-300. and please tell me what the complexity with the system really is, what make it world beating and way superior to similar sensors?? the only huge difference is still superior night vision and no blind spots.
It's an IIR 360 dg system vs an UV 360 dg system - kinda tells you a lot of potential application and complexity involved.

and i just quoted LM chief test pilot. i guess he knows what he talks about. but if you think you know more, take the debate with him..
Is Beesely responsible for envelope expansion or avionics integration?
 

zeven

New Member
It's an IIR 360 dg system vs an UV 360 dg system - kinda tells you a lot of potential application and complexity involved.



Is Beesely responsible for envelope expansion or avionics integration?
no true, hes not.. but i do believe him. hes experienced and probably know more than we on this forum does.

however.
FOW 360 degrees aint sometihing world beating in it self. i do agree it has advantages ofcourse, i never said it was a bad thing to have. but from an operational point of view, it doesnt make it superior to the competion solutions.
 

Grand Danois

Entertainer
no true, hes not.. but i do believe him. hes experienced and probably know more than we on this forum does.

however.
FOW 360 degrees aint sometihing world beating in it self. i do agree it has advantages ofcourse, i never said it was a bad thing to have. but from an operational point of view, it doesnt make it superior to the competion solutions.
Actually the MAW is a Missile Approach Warner, as the name indicates. It uses the UV part of the spectrum because it offers reliable detection with low false alarm rates of missiles. It's shorter ranged than IR due to propagation, but this is of little consequence in this role.

So for the task of detecting approaching missiles, the JAS team selected the best solution.

IIR has to do more processing to reject false alarms, however it can be used as an navigational aid and as part of the offensive a-a and a-g suite. It can also detect aaa firing.

Btw, wrt UV and multimode seekers. Certain IR missiles double up by using the UV shadow of the aircraft as well, e.g. the Stinger.

Good luck with Portugal tonight. We'll have Malta visiting. ;)
 
Last edited:

energo

Member
Actually the MAW is a Missile Approach Warner, as the name indicate. It uses the UV part of the spectrum because it offer reliable detection with low false return rates of missiles. It is shorter ranged than IR due to propagation, but this is of little consequence in this role.

So for the task of detecting approaching missiles, the JAS team selected the best solution.

IIR has to do more processing to reject false returns, however it can be used as an navigational aid and as part of the offensive a-a and a-g suite. It can also detect aaa firing.
Also, an UV-detector is mostly usefull for detecting the missile fumes/exhaust which means that it is only usefull in the boost-stage of the launch. An IR-detector, however, can also detect the warm tailpipe after the booster has burned out and, thus, is usefull throughout the launch envelope.


Regards,
B. Bolsøy
Oslo
 

zeven

New Member
Actually the MAW is a Missile Approach Warner, as the name indicates. It uses the UV part of the spectrum because it offers reliable detection with low false alarm rates of missiles. It's shorter ranged than IR due to propagation, but this is of little consequence in this role.

So for the task of detecting approaching missiles, the JAS team selected the best solution.

IIR has to do more processing to reject false alarms, however it can be used as an navigational aid and as part of the offensive a-a and a-g suite. It can also detect aaa firing.

Btw, wrt UV and multimode seekers. Certain IR missiles double up by using the UV shadow of the aircraft as well, e.g. the Stinger.

Good luck with Portugal tonight. We'll have Malta visiting. ;)
haha..

damn we sucks big time now..

This Time Denmark will go all the way and Sweden fail.
denmark wins 3-0
Sweden will lose, 0-2

:(

back to topic.

true EO DAS is very usefull, but sill not world beating, and other sensors are equally good to meet future needs and present requirements.
 

zeven

New Member
I want to make something clear,

Debates like this, often turns into a "pissing contest" unfortunately.

anway, is no doubt in my mind, F-35 will be "top dog" for the next decades to come. and i'm huge fan of the platform., more than i can say about LM, (cant stand them, but thats a different story)

But because of F-35 existence, doesnt make Gripen less capable, for both future and present threats. Gripen has showed itself over and over again under various of exercises.

both Gripen NG and F-35 will be state of the art platforms. both with advantages and disadvantages, Remeber "stealth" is just one way to increase survivablity.

and i believe Gripen deserves more credit than it gets.
 

stigmata

New Member
I'm getting the impression the main difference is the ground mapping ability of the DAS.
So i take it MAW would have to be complemented by a litening pod to equal DAS.
Does anyone have a picture taken by DAS ?

It's obviously preferable (and cheaper?) by an attack aircraft to have it inbuilt. What does a litening pod cost ? and what resolution does it have? does it have IR ?

Edit: Or, can IRST be used for ground mapping ?
 
Last edited:

energo

Member
I'm getting the impression the main difference is the ground mapping ability of the DAS.
So i take it MAW would have to be complemented by a lightening pod to equal DAS.
Does anyone have a picture taken by DAS ?

It's obviously preferable (and cheaper?) by an attack aircraft to have it inbuilt. What does a lightening pod cost ? and what resolution does it have? does it have IR ?

Edit: Or, can IRST be used for ground mapping ?
Just to clearify: the DAS-system is like a combined MAW/IRST with the added - and unique - video streaming functionality. And there are six of them around the aircraft as opposed to just one IRST on other aircraft.

The DAS will be closely coupled with the EOTS and both systems will aid in air-to-air and air-to-surface operation as well as navigation and BDA (battle damage assesment).

The EOTS is basically a latest generation navigation and targeting pod, but without the terrain follwing radar, internal navigation, cooling and auxiliary power systems. Terrain following is instead handled by interleaving AESA-radar modes. The EOTS has several sensors: a FLIR camera, optical CCD camera, a combined laser range finder and laser designator and a laser spot tracker (laser sensor). Resolution is 1024x1024 and weight of the system is under 200 pounds, or half that of the Litening pod.

According to Wikipedia the unit cost of a Litening pod is around 1.4 million USD.


Regards,
B. Bolsøy
Oslo
 

Grand Danois

Entertainer
haha..

damn we sucks big time now..

This Time Denmark will go all the way and Sweden fail.
denmark wins 3-0
Sweden will lose, 0-2

:(

back to topic.

true EO DAS is very usefull, but sill not world beating, and other sensors are equally good to meet future needs and present requirements.
You was spot on wrt DK-Malta; the Swedes had a draw with Portugal. That result is also very nice for Denmark. :D

I want to make something clear,

Debates like this, often turns into a "pissing contest" unfortunately.

anway, is no doubt in my mind, F-35 will be "top dog" for the next decades to come. and i'm huge fan of the platform., more than i can say about LM, (cant stand them, but thats a different story)

But because of F-35 existence, doesnt make Gripen less capable, for both future and present threats. Gripen has showed itself over and over again under various of exercises.

both Gripen NG and F-35 will be state of the art platforms. both with advantages and disadvantages, Remeber "stealth" is just one way to increase survivablity.

and i believe Gripen deserves more credit than it gets.
Generally agree to above. I'm also prone to falling into the of "defending" the F-35, because I think it gets a lot of undeserving press. And by doing so, it inadvertently looks as if I'm out to slag the Gripen.

The caveat is that stealth is not a stand-alone-feature: stealth is used as a piece of a fully developed doctrine, where stealth is but part. All those other ways of increasing survivability also apply to stealth jets.

From a wider perspective, I do see these discussions as symptomatic for a situation where the role of avionics and signature management is vastly overriding the value of classic virtues like raw performance and agility.

And underway, it's lost that we're talking about different concepts and philosophies...
 

Grand Danois

Entertainer
Also, an UV-detector is mostly usefull for detecting the missile fumes/exhaust which means that it is only usefull in the boost-stage of the launch. An IR-detector, however, can also detect the warm tailpipe after the booster has burned out and, thus, is usefull throughout the launch envelope.


Regards,
B. Bolsøy
Oslo
This is correct. However, the UV system has the advantage of being less demanding in almost every respect, so using an IIR system for threat axis determination alone is perhaps excessive?
 

Grand Danois

Entertainer
I'm getting the impression the main difference is the ground mapping ability of the DAS.
So i take it MAW would have to be complemented by a litening pod to equal DAS.
Does anyone have a picture taken by DAS ?

It's obviously preferable (and cheaper?) by an attack aircraft to have it inbuilt. What does a litening pod cost ? and what resolution does it have? does it have IR ?

Edit: Or, can IRST be used for ground mapping ?
There are examples of the SAR modes of the AN/APG-81 and imagery from the EOTS and DAS in this PDF:

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2007targets/Day1/Davisday1.pdf

I wouldn't say that this is authoritative on image quality. But personally I'd highlight the automatic target cueing, the bullet points on DAS and the criteria for ranges.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top