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


Tetrach

Junior Member
Registered Member
Actually, as dumb as I am I forgot that the F-35B is VTOL so the actual procedure might be different for landing. At the same time it's probably still revelant. The question is getting even more difficult to answer !
 

Brumby

Major
Actually, as dumb as I am I forgot that the F-35B is VTOL so the actual procedure might be different for landing. At the same time it's probably still revelant. The question is getting even more difficult to answer !
Hey, got a quick question.

In the French Navy, the Rafale-M is only allowed to take one heavy cruise missile (SCALP-NG) at a time/mission, under it's belly, as a precaution: it can technically takes more SCALPs under its wings but if one fails to launch then it would make the aircraft instable and extremely difficult to land on the carrier.

Considering that this basic rule of gravity applies to the F-35B too and that security measures are the same for all western nations, it should also be able to take only one missile under its belly, but this hard-point only allows a 1000lb weapon and the LRASM is 2500lb.

Does it mean that the F-35B can't take any LRASM ? I know the missile is not even in active service but still, for the future it would really be a pain in the ass. It would only be able to take the JSM which is not that scary tbh.
All carrier planes have bring back weight limitations including for the Chinese. As to the Rafae M and the stability issue associated with SCALP, do you have a reference source as this is rather unique?

The F-35B is known to have a 5000 lbs recovery weight limit based on VL but can increase by another 2000 to 4000 lbs using SRVL.

The LRASM IIRC has gone IOC with the F-18 this month. There are no immediate plans that I know of to mate the F-35 to the LRASM. The reason is obvious because the LRASM is long range and VLO is not critical at such weapons release distance.

Finally I question why you consider the JSM to be less than capable. It has stealth design and in a low to low flight profile is deadly against any adversary. The USN has very healthy respect for sea skimmers and generally consider them to be more deadly than ABSM because you can't stop what you can't see..
 

Tetrach

Junior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"As a reminder, unlike Rafales Air here can take SCALP-EG under the wings, the Rafale M only take one copy for safety reasons. Indeed, during the mission, if thé first SCALP-EG is fired but nothing the second one (due to technica problem, the presence of civilians on the area, etc ...), it would create too much imbalance when landing the Rafale M. They therefore only carry one single SCALP-EG under the belly, instead of the air-sea missile Exocet, for example"

I'm probably wrong but I don't think it has to do with the recovery weight limit during vertical landing.

The JSM has a 125kg warhead.. Even the harpoon has a bigger warhead and faced really difficult times sinking old lybian or iranian frigates and corvettes.

 

Brumby

Major
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"As a reminder, unlike Rafales Air here can take SCALP-EG under the wings, the Rafale M only take one copy for safety reasons. Indeed, during the mission, if thé first SCALP-EG is fired but nothing the second one (due to technica problem, the presence of civilians on the area, etc ...), it would create too much imbalance when landing the Rafale M. They therefore only carry one single SCALP-EG under the belly, instead of the air-sea missile Exocet, for example"

I'm probably wrong but I don't think it has to do with the recovery weight limit during vertical landing.

The JSM has a 125kg warhead.. Even the harpoon has a bigger warhead and faced really difficult times sinking old lybian or iranian frigates and corvettes.
Thanks for that specific piece of info on the Rafale M. In the case of the Rafale M it is not only about recovery weight but also weight distribution. Recovery weight consideration is central to carrier aviation because of the different variable conditions of weather and sea states that may be prevalent during an aircraft recovery. An aircraft carrier is subject to conditions of pitch, roll, yaw and heave and weight distribution of the returning aircraft (as with the Rafale M) becomes a risk factor.

upload_2019-10-1_11-49-38.png


The prevailing sea state has a direct bearing on recovery load. Extensive simulation was conducted on SRVL recovery weight under different sea states. In the event of sea state 6, the options narrow significantly.

upload_2019-10-1_11-53-53.png
 

Brumby

Major
Mar 24, 2019
now
Stealthy no more? A German radar vendor says it tracked the F-35 jet in 2018 — from a pony farm
By:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

September 29 at 8:00 PM
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
It is an attractive headline for the general uninformed public but offers little practical value as a detection tool. The biggest hole in the whole story is that the F-35 presence is a priori and so the search window is specific and narrow. Extend that to open airspace and you will have an entirely different set of results. A needle in a haystack would be an overstatement.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Mar 24, 2019
now
Stealthy no more? A German radar vendor says it tracked the F-35 jet in 2018 — from a pony farm
By:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

September 29 at 8:00 PM
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
It’s quite the click bait headline.
story claims that they tracked it for 150Km or 93 miles. Using a passive detection sensor.
Okay questions kids. Was the F35 in question operating in “Stealth mode” or just navigating? Remember VLO aircraft flying in day to day operations don’t operate by the same rules as “Stealth mode”. They also sport reflectors and objects to ruin there VLO signatures so as to be nice and give ATC something to direct.
the answer is navigation. As such this is a bit invalidated. Next up the range given 93 miles. That’s actually pretty good but is it earth shattering? No.
And as stated in the story it’s not enough to complete a kill chain. It’s early warning at best.
 
Yesterday at 7:23 PM
Mar 24, 2019
now
Stealthy no more? A German radar vendor says it tracked the F-35 jet in 2018 — from a pony farm
By:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

September 29 at 8:00 PM
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and here's the link to
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
No, Passive Radar Isn't Going To Make Stealth Technology Obsolete Anytime Soon

While passive radars will become increasingly valuable pieces of advanced air defense ecosystems, they don't invalidate stealth technology.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


thought he'd ridicule some more
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
He doesn’t ridicule he points out the facts.
Passive detection isn’t F35’s Kryptonite.
The system is highly dependent on a number of factors to try and locate a object trying to hide especially the active transmissions around it. Like trying to play hide and go seek at night using street lamps.
The Street lamps are in this case Radio, TV, ATC, CB and cell phone transmissions. Has such depending on where you are you have a easier or harder time. A Major city center like Beijing Or Moscow would have a massive sweep of light to pick from as transmissions blast from every source imaginable. But a more rural area generally is more sparse.
they also had the F35 them selves working for them in the case of the German “demonstration” as the F35 had to be in communication with ATC. Broadcasting on open frequencies the same ones the passive sensor uses. The radar was also likely in a navigation mode broadcasting on a fixed “safe” range.
He also points out that they may have tracked them but they couldn’t target them. The Passive Radar is at best an early warning radar meant to try and tell Radar based anti air where to point the dish in hopes of attack but there is no guarantee of getting a lock. IE Completing that kill chain.
And the range they tracked them for was fairly short. 93 miles is a long way to walk but a Short way to fly. Systems like the S400 objective is to range out and dominate the sky for 245 miles around. They tracked it for 93 miles any air defense system such a system could have pointed at the F35 would have been inside the kill box of the weapons of the F35. To attack F35 a system connected to the passive sensor like say a S300 would have to beam its active radar. And presumably be closer to the F35 giving away its position to try and lock on. Doing so though the F35 has the options. Avoid or stomp.
 

Top