F-35 Joint Strike Fighter News, Videos and pics Thread


Brumby

Major
Well., so everyone can know, as of last week, here are the total deliveries and aircraft built for the various countries to date. This includes aircraft flying in their nation and those testing in the US but are built and flying:

USAF - 226
USMC - 105
USN - 52

Total of 381 for the United States so far

United Kingdom - 18
Japan - 16
Netherlands - 10
Norway - 22
Italy - 13
Turkey - 6
Israel - 21
Australia - 18
Korea - 16

That's 140 more for nine countries currently

That's a total of 521 aircraft already built and flying around the world.
Jeff,

I think you are running a bit ahead of the curve on production numbers. The 521 airframes will likely be the number flying if you include Lot 11 production run but that won't happen entirely until end Dec 2019. Until then the number is closer to around 360 plus by my count. Additionally of the 360 plus flying, 108 are not up to the 3F standard and would require various retrofit which unfortunately are unfunded and given the politics may not happen. That will be a shame..
 

Brumby

Major
An article from Avionics International describing data fusion with the F-35.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


What is noteworthy is a description of the fusion protocol between an individual F-35 and a F-35 sensor formation through a tiering architecture. This is the first time I have seen such description in any public literature.

What the F-35 sends out to the network is only its Tier 1 data, though, or information it has observed and measured with its own sensors. That way, each jet is only feeding the network with first-hand, reliable information so the others, and the network as a whole, can be the source of new Tier 3 data without being muddied by compounding rumor data that may or may not have been reliable.
The tier approach provides some clarity in how data integrity are maintained between an individual F-35 and a formation when it comes to COP. The article talks about a "network" that generates the Tier 3 data without explaining "who" or "what" is this in reference to. The only platform within this network that has data fusion capability would be a F-35. I would speculate that a lead/designated F-35 would be responsible for it. If this is the direction it also means that there is a switch to flip the fusion battlespace presentation between Tier 1 and Tier 3.
 

Jura

General
An article from Avionics International describing data fusion with the F-35.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
sounds like an ad


What is noteworthy is a description of the fusion protocol between an individual F-35 and a F-35 sensor formation through a tiering architecture. This is the first time I have seen such description in any public literature.



The tier approach provides some clarity in how data integrity are maintained between an individual F-35 and a formation when it comes to COP. The article talks about a "network" that generates the Tier 3 data without explaining "who" or "what" is this in reference to. The only platform within this network that has data fusion capability would be a F-35. I would speculate that a lead/designated F-35 would be responsible for it. If this is the direction it also means that there is a switch to flip the fusion battlespace presentation between Tier 1 and Tier 3.
how do they segregate into "Tiers"?

plus, what would happen if wrong info went into their "Tier 1"?

and Brumby something from real world for you:
FY18 DOD PROGRAMS
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Brumby

Major
how do they segregate into "Tiers"?

plus, what would happen if wrong info went into their "Tier 1"?
The sensor fusion architecture of the F-35 is based on centrally fusing the data. This means that after the respective sensors e.g. EOTS, EODAS, AN/APG-81 and AN/ASQ 239 have vacuumed the raw data, they are not processed at the sensor nodes but instead channeled to the fusion engine (core processor). The threat picture and tracking data are build based on the fusion of all available raw data. The fusion process is driven by a set of algorithms and the reason for the millions of line of codes. The outcome of the battlespace picture is the tier 1 data. If certain sensor data is corrupted by noise from electronic counter measures, the idea of fusing all raw data derived from source helps to isolate bad data from individual sensor. In a sensor formation of typically four F-35’s, each will derive its own tier 1 battlespace presentation. When the tier 1 data is then shared within the formation, this is when the tier 3 battlespace picture is made available. Once at tier 3 layer, all the F-35’s will share a common operating picture (COP) of the battlespace and if there are any link back to C2, the same COP will be available.
 

Jura

General
Feb 1, 2019
Apr 26, 2018
and
Germany officially knocks F-35 out of competition to replace Tornado
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
now whining
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

German F-35 decision sacrifices NATO capability for Franco-German industrial cooperation
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

While the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to remove the Lockheed Martin F-35 from consideration as a replacement for 90 aging Tornado fighters solidifies Franco-German industrial cooperation, it could come at the expense of making Germany’s Luftwaffe a less capable air force until at least 2040, when a new advanced Franco-German fighter becomes available.

The decision also places German domestic political considerations ahead of Germany’s leadership role in NATO. This would be understandable for a nation that does not perceive a significant military threat from Russia, but it is disturbing for those who emphasize the need to maximize NATO’s deterrent posture in the East. The decision should be reconsidered.
  • After removing the F-35 (and also the older F-15) from consideration, Germany now has three choices. It can augment its planned 177 Eurofighter Typhoon fleet with up to 90 additional Typhoons adapted for suppression of enemy air defense and electronic warfare missions. That fleet of some 267 Typhoons would simplify servicing and training, but it could also ground the entire German fighter fleet should major structural problems appear in the aircraft. The Typhoon has had considerable readiness problems: Germany would be putting all of its fighter eggs in one basket.
  • Germany could alternatively buy 90 Boeing F-18s (Super Hornets and Growlers), which is still under active German consideration. That decision would provide better air-to-ground and electronic-warfare capabilities for Germany than the additional Typhoons. But it would still leave Germany behind without a fifth-generation fighter as other allies move onto the future of air power.
  • Or Germany could buy some mix of additional Typhoons and F-18s. Today, Germany flies no U.S.-built aircraft, and some observers are betting against the F-18 for that reason.
These three remaining alternatives are all second best from the perspective of maximizing Germany’s air power and its leadership among NATO air forces.

Operationally, the F-35 is by far the best airplane in this mix. It has stealth and battle-management capabilities that are a generation ahead of the Typhoon or F-18. It is a force multiplier that enhances the capabilities of lesser allied aircraft. If the Luftwaffe needs to penetrate heavy air defenses in a future fight, their pilots would be more secure in the F-35. The Luftwaffe without F-35s would be hard-pressed to fight alone in a contested air environment.

Currently eight NATO nations have agreed to purchase the F-35. Those nations will have highly interoperable fifth-generation aircraft. They will provide for the elite fighters in future NATO air-superiority and defense-suppression missions. Without the F-35, Germany will be absent from that elite group, and German pilots would probably be given only secondary missions.

The F-35 also has advantages to perform Germany’s NATO nuclear mission. The ability of the F-35 to penetrate and survive these missions is superior. The F-35 would have been nuclear-certified prior to delivery. Certification for the Typhoon and F-18s would take additional time, money and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. The default position, therefore, might be further life extensions for the old Tornados and further degradation of NATO’s nuclear deterrence.

It is no wonder that the chief of the German Luftwaffe
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for the F-35. He was silenced and retired early.

So why did German political leaders make this decision?

Money alone is not the answer. While the F-35 is a much better plane, its costs are coming down considerably to the point where they would be about as much as a Typhoon. The Typhoon would, of course, have local labor benefits.

Nor is availability the answer. Lockheed has told the Germans that they could have their first F-35 three years after a contract is signed.

The answer is more political and industrial.

The Merkel government rules by grand coalition, with Social Democrats holding key positions in the Federal Foreign Office and the Finance Ministry. The Social Democrats tend to resist greater defense spending and have a more benign view of Russia’s intentions. Many resist Germany’s nuclear mission. And no one in the coalition wants to reward U.S. President Donald Trump.

More important, France and Germany are drawing closer together on defense policy in the wake of Brexit and President Trump’s criticisms of NATO. The recently signed Aachen Treaty
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to new levels of cooperation in defense and foreign policy.

A center piece of this reinforced Franco-German defense cooperation is an agreement reached last summer to jointly design and produce a next-generation fighter by 2040. Dassault and Airbus plan to leverage their current Rafale and Typhoon aircraft as a bridge to this new joint aircraft. Paris fears that a German purchase of the F-35, especially in large numbers, could undercut the need for the next-gen fighter and harm European capabilities to produce advanced fighters. They have let Berlin know this.

A strong Franco-German engine at the heart of European defense is to be encouraged. But it should not come at the expense of optimal NATO air power and deterrence. Nor should it come at the expense of broader NATO solidarity.

Germany should reconsider its F-35 decision and purchase at least enough F-35s to retain its leadership position in European air power and its familiarity with fifth-generation aircraft technology. Its European allies, who will also be negatively impacted, should weigh in. Failing this, a purchase of the F-18 would be a second-best option.
 

Jura

General
Mar 31, 2017
interestingly Heritage Foundation Defense Budget Proposal Calls for Cuts to Air Force’s F-35 Acquisitions
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Conservative group recommends $632 billion NDAA
John Venable gets my Of the year award for the surest method of driving up costs and killing capability. Stoopid, Stoopid, Stoopid! From the Heritage Foundation?
funny what he says now:
The Air Force Wants to Buy More F-15X Jets, and It’s a Huge Mistake
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



(back then
"John Venable, a senior research fellow for defense policy at the Heritage Foundation who helped craft the proposal, told reporters during a private breakfast Tuesday morning that the decrease in the Air Force's purchase plan for F-35As would free up money for different acquisition programs within the service.")
 

Jura

General
at what point in:
The sensor fusion architecture of the F-35 is based on centrally fusing the data. This means that after the respective sensors e.g. EOTS, EODAS, AN/APG-81 and AN/ASQ 239 have vacuumed the raw data, they are not processed at the sensor nodes but instead channeled to the fusion engine (core processor). The threat picture and tracking data are build based on the fusion of all available raw data. The fusion process is driven by a set of algorithms and the reason for the millions of line of codes. The outcome of the battlespace picture is the tier 1 data. If certain sensor data is corrupted by noise from electronic counter measures, the idea of fusing all raw data derived from source helps to isolate bad data from individual sensor. In a sensor formation of typically four F-35’s, each will derive its own tier 1 battlespace presentation. When the tier 1 data is then shared within the formation, this is when the tier 3 battlespace picture is made available. Once at tier 3 layer, all the F-35’s will share a common operating picture (COP) of the battlespace and if there are any link back to C2, the same COP will be available.
would Mission Data Files come into play?
 

Top