Is there anything in the public domain dealing with JSF and UAS
interoperability?
F-35 Multirole Joint Strike Fighter
- Thread starter SABRE
- Start date
- Status
interoperability?
There hasn't been a description of the avionics, sensors or avionics included on the Cuda missile, other than the fact that it's primary guidance sensor is intended to be an active radar seeker and it is not intended to have a radar proximity fuse or a usual A2A missile warhead, given HTK technology is to be included.
A few hints here and there have suggested it may have a MMW seeker (ala - SDB II and JAGM for air to surface work) and I'll be astonished if the standard GPS / INS package and 2 way data-link systems aren't included, but there's nothing to support that so far. The mock-ups seen publicly so far haven't included the antenna's necessary to suggest anything about this paper weapon.
NCADE is intended to be an AMRAAM missile body with an AIM-9X sourced IR seeker.Well, I don't know of anything publicly available, but depending on how far along the project got before they were cancelled I guess there's a possibility CUDA might use some elements developed for the JDRADM. As far as NCADE goes I'm not sure what that would provide as I believe it was intended as an anti-ballistic missile but there could be some technology crossover somewhere. And I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's some elements of commonality between AMRAAM-D and CUDA electronics, though this is all guesswork on my behalf, I think we'll probably be waiting for some time before we can be sure of anything to do with CUDA's performance characteristics let alone onboard electronics. It's certainly an interesting weapon though. I might hassle one of the F-22 pilots about it at Avalon later this week and see if they've heard much about it, although I'm sure I'll get about the same response from them as I did last time when I asked them about their datalink limitations...
Not sure what elements of the AMRAAM seeker package will carry-over though GPS/INS and the data-link is a certainty...
not that I'm aware of. It has come up as a discussion point at various UAS Conferences but I don't think that too much detail has hit the public domain
the push towards manned aircraft being able to manage a hive has long been discussed and it usually revolves around specialised platforms such as ewarfare/elint - something that JSF is also able to participate in as well as manage to a degree in its own right.
eg, a bit like a super "wild weasel"
Air Force Brat
Member
Now that is amusing Volkadav, you must have been pretty deep into that jug when this thought struck you, I can remember as a child longing for the day that Northrupp would build the XP-530, it was a number of years before it became the YF-17, as an Air Force proposal, the Navy later adopted it with significant changes as the F-18. The last time the USN came up with an Air Superiority Fighter was the F-14 Tomcat, I don't recall hearing of Any eminant 6th gen Air Superiority Fighter by the USN, for that matter the USAF is still drawing six gens on paper napkins. The Raptor is our Big Bird of the moment, and achieved IOC in 2005, less than 10 years ago, the DNA pool for a replacement is very thin and undernourished at present, and the USN is going to be busy working on sustainment for the 11 carrier battle groups and accessories, their last priority is an aircraft to replace the Raptor, being rather involved as they have been pipe-dreaming about their little UCAV the XB-47. My point is the F-22 is what we will employ in the foreseeable future, it will be brought up to speed in order to integrate with other weapons systems, and the F-22 is the leader in that particular realm of developement, with the F-35 springboarding off what we have learned with the Raptor and enjoying the benefits of a tactical pairing with the F-22, not vica-versa. Cheers Brat
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Short of a complete avionics rebuild, there are whole areas of avionics development where the F-22 is behind the F-35. Inclusion of the UAI in the F-35 comes to mind as immediate example. Such a development is a bit more than 'springboarding' off work done for the F-22.
Also if one looks at fighter development and usage, being multi-role gets more utilization than air superiority. Once air dominance has been established, there is not much need for air superiority fighters aloft. Having something which can be used to take control of the air, then conduct strike missions once control has been established is IMO much more useful.
There are certainly areas where the F-22 is more appropriate than the JSF, but I suspect as time progresses the F-35 will more often be the useful aircraft. Remember, this is not just about the capabilities of the individual platform, but what (and where) the platforms brings to and takes from the whole system/force construct. In this case, the sensor fit out, data fusion and display, and datalinks to send/receive information on the F-35 appears set to surpass the F-22 by a fair margin.
-Cheers
Air Force Brat
Member
I am fairly certain that you are right about that colay, but the impetus to upgrade our F-22 to a follow on six gen is far more likely to be AF driven rather than Naval driven. In fact the Navy was highly "encouraged to engage the F-22, and adapt is as a follow on to the F-14, which had the capability to engage six targets at approx 100 miles with the Phoenix missle, they declined for many reasons. The AF had exactly O blues suits on the Pentagon Joint Chiefs from 2006 to 2010, that lack of a cogent voice is what ultimately doomed the F-22, not an Air Force dissatisfaction with that aircraft, Gen Norton Schwartz admitted that they simply did not have the political capital to save the F-22, in spite of a belief in and desire to do so. Cheers Brat
Well what I was thinking about was this:
Boeing displays concepts for F/A-18E/F replacement
Whether we get to see something from it or not, who knows.
Boeing displays concepts for F/A-18E/F replacement
Whether we get to see something from it or not, who knows.
Not to be outdone, LMA has come up with it's own eye candy.
Lockheed reveals bold technology plans with 6th-gen fighter concept
I recall reading the AF and Navy preliminary requirements and they seemed to have quite a lot of overlap.
Last edited:
not that long ago there was all the feverish public chatter (countering JSF) that there would be no more manned fighter aircraft developed.....
who would have guessed that the bloggers and magazine commentariat would be wrong
who would have guessed that the bloggers and magazine commentariat would be wrong
Well if you look at the YF-22 as being a modern day equivalent to the YF-12 and consider that if the F-12 had been put into production it likely would have been built in similarly small numbers and as hideously expensive and difficult to maintain and upgrade as the F-22. It would have had a quite limited life as more versatile and affordable platforms became viable. Another example that comes to mind is the B-58, a bomber I know but an outstanding design with outstanding performance that died an early death due to operating costs and the availability of more affordable and capable alternatives.not that long ago there was all the feverish public chatter (countering JSF) that there would be no more manned fighter aircraft developed.....
who would have guessed that the bloggers and magazine commentariat would be wrong
There is very definitely a place for a new more affordable more flexible platform designed and built on the lessons learnt with the F-35 to replace the 4.5 Gen fighters still being built today.
F-35's are back in the air after it was concluded that after a detailed study that engine blade crack was an 'isolated incident'.
Engine Investigation Clears F-35 To Return To Flight
As a side note, LM awarded the contract for LRIP VIII including:
Lockheed awarded $334 million contract for F-35 long lead items
Engine Investigation Clears F-35 To Return To Flight
Found a fault, grounded as a precaution, conducted a study to understand why it happened, solved + back in the air & business as usual. Reading some of the output of some websites you'd think the bloody thing disassembled itself in flight
As a side note, LM awarded the contract for LRIP VIII including:
- 19 F35A - USAF
- 6 F35B - USMC
- 4 F35C - USN
- 4 F35B - UK
- 2 F35A - Norway
Lockheed awarded $334 million contract for F-35 long lead items
It's taken me a while but I've realised that it's best to ignore them. The same hysterical nonsense will be spilling from those sites in 10 years time.Reading some of the output of some websites you'd think the bloody thing disassembled itself in flight
It isn't so much what they actually say that's so irritating, more the way that they seem so confident what they have to say is correct when it just isn't. Probably wouldn't be happy until we go back to the Sopwith Camel and be done with it.
Still, good to see the procedures they've got for this sort of thing working well. There's been 2 reports about the F35's grounding in the Telegraph here in the UK, i'd be willing to put money on there being no reports about how it was a isolated problem and isn't particularly a major problem to the fleet.
I'm glad to see the UK getting the foot in the door with a couple more examples. Should nudge the total number of airframes over the 6 I think are planned to remain in the US so could a pair from LRIP 8 maybe be the ones heading over to the UK later in the decade?
Still, good to see the procedures they've got for this sort of thing working well. There's been 2 reports about the F35's grounding in the Telegraph here in the UK, i'd be willing to put money on there being no reports about how it was a isolated problem and isn't particularly a major problem to the fleet.
I'm glad to see the UK getting the foot in the door with a couple more examples. Should nudge the total number of airframes over the 6 I think are planned to remain in the US so could a pair from LRIP 8 maybe be the ones heading over to the UK later in the decade?
The magic of the internet. /smirk
I'm always tempted to ask the more vociferous commentariate the following:
when did you last work on a modern weapons project - and if you did was it at a meaningful level?
when did you last hold clearances which enable you to comment about capability issues when you cannot know about the minutiae unless you've been exposed to privileged material - and if you have been then some follow on logic about breaches follows closely behind
have you seen the actual assessment results from the eval teams? cref prev
do you understand future constructs which are about cementing systems capability and not focused on goliath killing platform models - the goliath killer is the system - not the platform
usually they come back with the internet is king and they can only comment about whats in the public domain - which is a weak as pi$$ response because some of them are ex service and know full well that publicly released material often has no relationship to the classified material
you don't need to hold clearances to pass meaningful comment, and holding clearances doesn't follow on that you're blessed with insight - but somewhere in the middle and leaning heavily to the right of that the weighting about value add commentary as opposed to barely veiled apoplectic hysteria should cause pause.
funnily enough I'm a convert... I was ambivalent/anti-JSF a few years back (the usual issues of absolute platform performance, range, single engines etc....)
funny how you can change your mind when you get to see the cold hard capability facts /grin
Ha,- Sopwith Camel - ha.
Only a fool would invest time and money in developing such an obviously totally outclassed aircraft like this.
The Fokker DH - 27's, 30's, 34's and 35's render your Sopwith Camel obsolete.
Extensive simulations based on the stakes changing snakes and ladders war game, have shown that of 100 Sopwiths sent out against these F#kkers, only 37 returned.
I fear you have been sold a Pup.
Ha
Ha
Well, this is funny and all but I actually wonder how some of their statistics are made. I bet they set a scenario where the F-35 is at a distinct disadvantage and place one F-35 vs one AC of their choice. Then, they see, well, the F-35 got shot down so, if one Su-xx shoots one F-35, then 100 Su-xx shoot 100 F-35s. Ergo, the F-35 sucks. Then, they publish an article and go to work for Air-power Australia.
the road runner
Active Member
Easy, JSF fly's around with no weapons ,is low on fuel ,has no support,pilot is having a heart attack,and superman is flying aggressor lighting up JSF with lasers firing from his eye's.
Any free thinker can see how JSF is jumped on in the press,ABC program was a joke and the poor punter out in the world think's the Press is always correct in what they print.
yeah. What is sad in a way is that if they want to attack the JSF program, they shouldn't attack the performance part of it. Attacking the financial cost of the project and, calling for someone to step up and assume this massive slide of costs (especially in such times as they are) would be much more effective. Attacking the performance of a machine that, let's be realistic, places many scientific novels one the shelve technology wise, is a dumb thing. And note that i'm not a professional in the area. Just reading info available publicly on the systems of the air-plane is like, nerd porn.
- Status