F-35 Multirole Joint Strike Fighter

[gf0012-aust]

Too often the "5th Gen" term are invented by some Advertising press people working for different Aviation company without it has much substance, like its throw around for good measures..
And of course get picked up by people in the Aviation comunity like its suddenly 'carwed into stone' the holy truth.

Don't confuse internet chat with facts though.

the reality is that we've used 5th gen as a terminology for over 12 years - in fact the first ref I saw to its use was in internal documentation in the mid 90's - well before it gained currency in internet forums (which didn't exist in strength either)

it gets thrown around internally because it means something

I don't give 2 hoots what the broader internet community think of it because it has relevance in the context of my working environment.

and in the C4ISR and EW community it is a holy truth because it is a game changer -anyone who thinks that retro fitting EW and LO constructs onto 4th gen assets gains equivalency needs a reality check

 

[BDRebel]

Because

Why not? The terms are used to differentiate between different levels of aircraft performance, aerodynamics, stealth, and even technology and avionics.

Why are people over stating the terms 4th and 5th Gen all the time when debating systems.. its annoying.

As for ECM gear, some Air Forces continue the ECM developing road map.
Well, here is an brand new 4th gen if you like.. with a brand new ECM suite.
The L265 Khibiny-M electronic-warfare self-defense system. Mounted on the wing tip stations.

 

[Haavarla]

Different levels..
Isolated, there are systems on 4th Gen fighters that have the same level or even better than on any 5th Gen Fighter.

Aerodynamics.. i guess you mean VLO measures?
Its more about requirements and purpose upon designing a fighter.
Hense very difficult to just slam an 4th or 5th gen stamp on it..

 

[SpudmanWP]

It's actually very simple:
Integrated avionics, fbw, multi-mission, etc = 4th gen
Add VLO = 5th gen.

Like it or know, that what it takes.

The term "generation" is used for a reason. There has to be something major that distinguishes its generation from the previous. There has to be a leap in capability from the previous. For 5th gen this is VLO.

 

[Haavarla]

It sounds like the RMP APG-82(V)1 AESA radar will be on par or better vs The AN/APG-77 when it comes to a multitude of functions.

They are designed and constructed differently and from different production date.
But regardless, which one will have the best multirole capability?

Can anyone claim the F-22 Radar is an 5th Gen Radar, while the APG-82(V)1 is not due to its beeing stuck on the F-15E and not F-22 or F35?

So we are back to Platforms design layout and RCS.

 

[SpudmanWP]

You're making the mistake of trying to put "gen" classifications to the individual components instead of the plane as a whole. Before you say it; no, VLO is not a component but a basic design criteria. In other words a component can be retrofitted to an existing plane while a "design" cannot.

btw, Since the -77 was designed from scratch to be a A2A radar for an A2A fighter (F-22 with VERY limited A2G) and the -81 was adapted from an existing multi-mode radar (the -79) for a multi-role fighter (F-15E), it obviously would have better multi-mode functions.

 

[gf0012-aust]

5th gen has always been about VLO and EW system capability designed and built into the platform from inception

its irrelevant how anyone wants to redefine it to make a case for 4th gen assets being competitive. AirForces were using the term well before some bright spark decided to start the mythology that it was Lockmart

no doubt - even though 6th gen aircraft concepts are already appearing in future planning constructs some will blame that term on manufacturers marketing as well - when its not.

so let me start clearing the air on 6th gen assets now, its around C5, EW and ISR integration, hypersonics have not yet come into it, but the prev 3 have - and not retro fitted but built in.

I know its popular to blame manufacturers for marketing "5th gen" as a way to diminish the construct (and usually to try and promote some other platform as being just as competitive) - but the reality is that it wasn't Lockmart or Cessna or Massey Ferguson or Belarus who triggered the definition

I recall some traffic sent from me to Dryden re definitions of the generations of aircraft and IIRC they referred to capability separation from a 1990's document

 

[SpudmanWP]

F-35 completes first airborne weapons separation | NAVAIR - U.S. Navy Naval Air Systems Command - Navy and Marine Corps Aviation Research, Development, Acquisition, Test and Evaluation

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbSinROAtHI&feature=player_embedded"]F-35B First Aerial Weapons Release - YouTube[/nomedia]

View attachment 5484

NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. – The F-35 Lightning II accomplished a significant test milestone Aug. 8 when the aircraft successfully released a weapon in flight.

BF-3, a short take-off and vertical landing F-35 variant, released an inert 1,000-pound GBU-32 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) separation weapon over water in an Atlantic test range while traveling at 400 knots at an altitude of 4,200 feet.

“While this weapons separation test is just one event in a series of hundreds of flights and thousands of test points that we are executing this year, it does represent a significant entry into a new phase of testing for the F-35 program,” said Navy Capt. Erik Etz, director of test for F-35 naval variants. “Today’s release of a JDAM was the result of extraordinary effort by our team of maintainers, engineers, pilots and others who consistently work long hours to deliver F-35 warfighting capability to the U.S. services and our international partners.”

The release was the first time for any version of the F-35 to conduct an airborne weapon separation, as well as the first from an internal weapons bay for a fighter aircraft designated for the U.S. Marine Corps, the United Kingdom and Italy.
The milestone marks the start of validating the F-35’s capability to employ precision weapons and allow pilots to engage the enemy on the ground and in the air.

“[Using an internal weapons bay] speaks to how much capability the JSF is going to bring to the troops,” said Dan Levin, Lockheed Martin test pilot for the mission. “Stealth, fifth-generation avionics and precision weapons … coupled with the flexible mission capability of the short take-off and vertical landing F-35B is going to be huge for our warfighters.”

An aerial weapons separation test checks for proper release of the weapon from its carriage system and trajectory away from the aircraft. It is the culmination of a significant number of prerequisite tests, including ground fit checks, ground pit drops and aerial captive carriage and environment flights to ensure the system is working properly before expanding the test envelope in the air.

Aircraft and land-based test monitoring systems collected data from the successful separation, which is in review at the F-35 integrated test force at Naval Air Station Patuxent River.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Can anyone claim the F-22 Radar is an 5th Gen Radar, while the APG-82(V)1 is not due to its beeing stuck on the F-15E and not F-22 or F35?

Yes! The radar itself may be comparable but radar’s haven’t been standalone devices on aircraft since the third generation. The radar provides information to the aircraft’s processing system which then provides information to the aircrew. The processing system is far superior in the F-22 and F-35 to the F-15E. These fifth generation aircraft are able to get a lot more out of the same radar sensitivity than an older aircraft.

So we are back to Platforms design layout and RCS.

No you’re just doing your best to generate an argument that is independent of actual weapon system capabilities. The whole point of fifth generation aircraft (and fourth generation for that matter) is to build into the platform huge advantages in tactical awareness for the pilot over their adversaries. This is done primarily through stealth and much better situational awareness through on-board sensors, networking and information processing. Since tactical considerations are by far the major input into air battle success from Snoopy and the Red Baron through to today it’s not such a bad idea.

 

[Air Force Brat]

F-35 completes first airborne weapons separation | NAVAIR - U.S. Navy Naval Air Systems Command - Navy and Marine Corps Aviation Research, Development, Acquisition, Test and Evaluation



View attachment 5484

Thanks for posting that Spud, I just read that in my AFM daily report, interesting that they used the B, maybe sending us a message that they are fully commited to the B. I will watch the Youtube vid here in a little bit. Some time back I read on flight global that the Marines had sent a major to do some exchange work with an Air Force F-22 squadron to assimilate and be able to teach LO tactics to Marine squadrons bringing on the F-35B, noting that there are some "tricks of the trade" for maximizing your LO aircraft Ops in a tactical sense.

 

[SpudmanWP]

The B was used likely due to the B going IOC first. An F-35B was also the first to get the Blk2A upgrade.

 

[Air Force Brat]

The B was used likely due to the B going IOC first. An F-35B was also the first to get the Blk2A upgrade.

Thats interesting as well, your just a wealth of information, I think its interesting that the major flew the F-22 for nearly four years, and he is well versed in the Air Force mission, he is basically the Marines point man on teaching stealth ops to the Marine F-35B pilots. I believe in the past many were somewhat reluctant to employ BVR tactics, as we all really want to have a look at the bad guy before dispatching him, but that would tend to negate our LO advantage. The B is supposedly much easier to fly than the Harrier, one of the test pilots noting that you needed to be an octopus to fly the AV8B, stated that in contrast the F-35B was much less demanding.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Thats interesting as well, your just a wealth of information, I think its interesting that the major flew the F-22 for nearly four years, and he is well versed in the Air Force mission, he is basically the Marines point man on teaching stealth ops to the Marine F-35B pilots. I believe in the past many were somewhat reluctant to employ BVR tactics, as we all really want to have a look at the bad guy before dispatching him, but that would tend to negate our LO advantage. The B is supposedly much easier to fly than the Harrier, one of the test pilots noting that you needed to be an octopus to fly the AV8B, stated that in contrast the F-35B was much less demanding.

On a similar note, todays AFM Daily Report notes that RAAF Flt. Lt. Mark Biele is an F-22 IP on exchange with the 90 FS at JB Elmendorf-Richardson AFB, Alaska. Biele will likely aid the RAAF in standing up Australia's F-35 program after his 3 years as an exchange pilot. He will train, fly, and fight alongside his mates in the USAF, he is also IP rated in the F-22 and will be training USAF pilots as they transition and maintain proficiency in the Raptor. I only wish some of the Raptor critics could spend a few minutes with Lt Biele, then you would likely be singing a different song, but this is a further reminder that the US is firmly commited to our F-35 partners and to the F-35.

 

[fretburner]

Is this chart accurate? F-35 Weapons The F-35, in ALL variants, can carry sidewinders only externally? What if the enemy is able to sneak up on them while going on a bombing mission where stealth is required? The -A can use their guns, but the C's, would basically would just to run away and hope his buddies would get the sneaky enemy first?

 

[SpudmanWP]

Those are the weapons that will be available at IOC. Newer weapons will also come online every two years thereafter as new Software Blocks come online. Also, as UIA (Universal Armaments Interface) matures and applies to more and more weapon types, additional weapons can be used on the F-35 without the need to upgrade the F-35 prior to its usage.

btw, Internal AMRAAMs can be used just fine in WVR. Besides, you cannot "sneek up" on a F-35 as EODAS/ESM would pick u=you up longe before you got into WVR.

General UAI information

http://www.mputtre.com/id11.html

 

[colay]

Is this chart accurate? F-35 Weapons The F-35, in ALL variants, can carry sidewinders only externally? What if the enemy is able to sneak up on them while going on a bombing mission where stealth is required? The -A can use their guns, but the C's, would basically would just to run away and hope his buddies would get the sneaky enemy first?

The issue with Sidewinder appears to be that it is rail-launched and weapons carried in the internal bays use a pneumatic ejector. So far there has been no requirement for the internal carriage of the missile. The UK, AFAIK, will require 2 X ASRAAM carried internally and 2 on external pylons vs. the original plan for 4 missiles internally. Perhaps,the same mechanism developed for,ASRAAM could be applied to Sidewinder in the future if there is a need.

 

[ADMk2]

Is this chart accurate? F-35 Weapons The F-35, in ALL variants, can carry sidewinders only externally? What if the enemy is able to sneak up on them while going on a bombing mission where stealth is required? The -A can use their guns, but the C's, would basically would just to run away and hope his buddies would get the sneaky enemy first?

Well they DO carry AMRAAM you know? Even on strike missions. Apparently that weapon is reasonably successful in air combat...

They can't carry AIM-9X Block 1 because lock on after launch isn't a capability that weapon features, unlike ASRAAM and AIM-9X Block II.

I'll suggest both ASRAAM and AIM-9X Block II will be close to the top of the list of additional weapons needing integration if they aren't done under Block III, which let us not forget is the designated INITIAL operating capability level for the F-35.

Not the FULL operating capability...

Can anyone else name another fighter that has a comparable weapons capability of: 25mm gun, AIM-120 AMRAAM, AIM-9X Sidewinder, AIM-132 ASRAAM, Mk 82, 83, 84, BLU-109, 110, 111, Paveway II GBU-12, Paveway IV, GBU-31,32,38 JDAM, AGM-154A/C JSOW and Small Diameter Bomb I on it's very FIRST day of operational service?

Not to mention the targetting and fire control capability to actually self-guide all that stuff?

I'm struggling to think of one...

 

[StobieWan]

Not sure but I think that's a few more weapons than Tiffy can carry now

 

[colay]

They can't carry AIM-9X Block 1 because lock on after launch isn't a capability that weapon features, unlike ASRAAM and AIM-9 hyX Block II.
...

I'm not sure the lack of LOAL is the issue. The challenge appears to be in extending the missile out of the weapons bay, hence the missile trapeze that AFAIK is being developed for ASRAAM. I. assume that the -9X (or even earlier variants) could be launched the same way. Anyway, that's how I understand it. It may be something similar to the contraption on the F-22 used to launch AIM-9Ms.

 

[ADMk2]

I'm not sure the lack of LOAL is the issue. The challenge appears to be in extending the missile out of the weapons bay, hence the missile trapeze that AFAIK is being developed for ASRAAM. I. assume that the -9X (or even earlier variants) could be launched the same way. Anyway, that's how I understand it. It may be something similar to the contraption on the F-22 used to launch AIM-9Ms.

The F-22's extend the Sidewinder outside it's bay, precisely because that missile can't lock onto a target after it has been launched. It has to sit out in the wind until it's locked on and can then be fired, just like the -9x variant. It is rail launched true, not ejected, but the F-35 has two internal rails...

Ejecting that missile isn't the problem. AIM-9x Block II is supposed to see the capability to lock on after it has been launched introduced, which should resolve the issue with F-22 and F-35, though it will of course still have to be integrated on each platform.