OTH can't do a 3D track, it has to work co-operatively with other tracking systems
F-35 Program - General Discussion
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
^Yup, that's why I was only discussing the azimuth component... 3D would require azimuth and angular elevation components (plus the usual range axis).
---
(As a technical aside, altho just as an estimation mechanism for relative altitude changes, there is a technique w/ skywave oth systems using the doppler variations in multipath effects on a target to allow for relative altitude estimation: http://asp.eurasipjournals.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/1687-6180-2013-100. Not quite there yet but give the engineering time. This is skywave propagation tho, so not the same as the surface wave prop used by the russian system.)
---
(As a technical aside, altho just as an estimation mechanism for relative altitude changes, there is a technique w/ skywave oth systems using the doppler variations in multipath effects on a target to allow for relative altitude estimation: http://asp.eurasipjournals.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/1687-6180-2013-100. Not quite there yet but give the engineering time. This is skywave propagation tho, so not the same as the surface wave prop used by the russian system.)
Last edited:
OTH works fine with surface ships and land tracking - not so much for air. the ionosphere is just too erratic to determine altitude. so you might be able to find a co-ord - but the aircraft is sitting in a 50,000m column. despite all the claims made about OTH or bi-stats detecting "stealth" - it doesn't work as a universal and consistent tool. eg detecting a JSF, xb47, b2, yf-23, f-22 etc... won't work against all platforms' ie the same system won't necessarily be able to detect all of the above in identical loc circumstances
the US is however working with Aust on using JORN as a track manager....
the US is however working with Aust on using JORN as a track manager....
Video taken at RAF Fairford on Wednesday 6/7/2016 of RAF F35B practising display for RIAT 2016. Video is of arrivals for that day and for this post starts at 28:05 for the F35B flight and hover display.
Pratt & Whitney are proposing a Block 1 Upgrade to the F135 engine of F35. If the proposal is accepted and funding approved for the 2019 program, then the first Block 1 Upgrade F135 engines could be delivered in 2023.
Meanwhile Pratt & Whitney are also working on a long term upgrade project for the F135 engine that uses adaptive cycle technology. They are in discussions with LockMart because the new engine will be dimensionally larger than the current one. GE have also been included in the adaptive cycle engine program.
Meanwhile Pratt & Whitney are also working on a long term upgrade project for the F135 engine that uses adaptive cycle technology. They are in discussions with LockMart because the new engine will be dimensionally larger than the current one. GE have also been included in the adaptive cycle engine program.
Boagrius
Well-Known Member
Just a little more on this - looks like Barracuda may well include a broad spectrum jamming capability over and above what is provided by the APG81:Here is the best article I've read on the F-35's EW capabilities and about the most you're going to get from open source...
Avionics Magazine :: F-35 Electronic Warfare Suite: More Than Self-Protection
I don't believe the F-35 carries a dedicated self-protection jammer, if that is what you are asking, but then again it may...
BAE Systems Inches Out In Public On Electronic Warfare « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary
“While F-35 is capable of stand-off jamming for other aircraft — providing 10 times the effective radiated power of any legacy fighter — F-35s can also operate in closer proximity to the threat (‘stand-in’) to provide jamming power many multiples that of any legacy fighter.”
From BAE: “Always active, AN/ASQ-239 provides all-aspect, broadband protection, allowing the F-35 to reach well-defended targets and suppress enemy radars. The system stands alone in its ability to operate in signal-dense environments, providing the aircraft with radio-frequency and infrared countermeasures, and rapid response capabilities.”
Boagrius
Well-Known Member
Sorry all but this was too good to pass up. In a rare moment of masochistic curiosity I was reading a recent F35 article from War Is Boring. Apparently they queried the USAF on the meaning of the recently released graphic describing the (flawless) performance of the F35 against F15E aggressors. This is what they got in response:
https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/2000/1*k1M2QcbCyqE4j4AJPJytRg.jpeg
:lol2 :haha :rotfl
Also featured:
Ops executed OCA-SEAD, AI, DCA and CAS missions, employed 16x inert GBU-12s and integrated in LFE's with F15E's (with ZERO F35 losses). The scenarios were robust and one experienced former F16 pilot stated, "we would never have survived that in a Viper".
https://www.scribd.com/document/318463329/Records-Responsive-to-FOIA-2016-03480-F
https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/2000/1*k1M2QcbCyqE4j4AJPJytRg.jpeg
:lol2 :haha :rotfl
Also featured:
Ops executed OCA-SEAD, AI, DCA and CAS missions, employed 16x inert GBU-12s and integrated in LFE's with F15E's (with ZERO F35 losses). The scenarios were robust and one experienced former F16 pilot stated, "we would never have survived that in a Viper".
https://www.scribd.com/document/318463329/Records-Responsive-to-FOIA-2016-03480-F
Last edited:
So in a nutshell the F-35s took off, flew to the target, destroyed the target and engaged IADS and CAP on their terms, before returning to base without loss.
The thought comes to mind that comparing the F-35 to the F-16 is like comparing the Mosquito (or perhaps even the B-57G Canberra) to the Fairey Battle.
The thought comes to mind that comparing the F-35 to the F-16 is like comparing the Mosquito (or perhaps even the B-57G Canberra) to the Fairey Battle.
Yep that will be him. Ranting about UAV / UAS being infinitely greater than manned fighters and going on and on about 'poles' (his term for missiles, apparently).
Boagrius
Well-Known Member
I hope he's talking about missiles :lol2
If I recall correctly he was still going on about saturating the battlespace with super-MALD decoys armed with warheads, as per years ago on this very site. Such an unusual poster - I had nothing to do with him personally as he was rather before my time, sometimes one could see a glimmer of something worth considering in his posts but then he'd continue for another half dozen paragraphs and by the end you'd have no idea what he was talking about. Huge fan of self-invented jargon, that one.
He used to do it to imply knowledge and experience and to intimidate those will less subject matter experience. poor form ....
pity, as when he drove within socially acceptable lanes he was ok to have a discussion with. problem was that when he got on his high horse he lost all credibility
Yep, that's him. Whatever else he might have been, he was a hell of a typist as I recall. He used to bang out 1000 word plus replies, in the virtual blink of an eye...
Boagrius
Well-Known Member
I think I have encountered him before on other fora (eg. on YouTube under the rather ominous moniker "Mists & Shadows") and this is precisely the impression I got. Vast tracts of jargon interspersed with references to very specific but spurious historical systems/events. Very much meant to insinuate a high level of knowledge and experience on the subject matter that probably wasn't there(?). Totally undermined by the inability to use paragraphs or make a salient point though... Seemed to disappear once he realised I could still understand and respond to what he was saying.
It is looking like that the F35A is close to achieving IOC with the USAF. Apparently even with the current strictures placed on it, its CAS abilities are as good as the F16s were two years ago. The paperwork is now with the AOC Air Combat Command, Gen 'Hawk' Carlisle, for his approval.
theres close to 200 in service now - but some numpty will still be saying that the lines should close
https://news.usni.org/2016/07/29/f-35b-tactics-evolving#more-20947
note that freeplay was involved - ie unscripted re response constraints for red and blue but actually weighted to red team because blue fielded a numerical 1/3rd of the typical flight component to prosecute - but note no spawning involved for blue team and red team was amped up to cause pressure
it will be interesting to see future "Pitch Black" and modified Blue Flag exercises in the near future
note that freeplay was involved - ie unscripted re response constraints for red and blue but actually weighted to red team because blue fielded a numerical 1/3rd of the typical flight component to prosecute - but note no spawning involved for blue team and red team was amped up to cause pressure
it will be interesting to see future "Pitch Black" and modified Blue Flag exercises in the near future