Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 38 of 38 FirstFirst ... 283435363738
Results 1,111 to 1,123 of 1123

Thread: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread

  1. #1111
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,188
    3 F-35's just landed in Israel..#904, #905, #907

    https://www.pscp.tv/IAFsite/1gqGvbvnQPBGB?t=236
    Last edited by bring_it_on; 23rd April 2017 at 14:07.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  2. #1112
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,860
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas10 View Post
    Well if you have powerful modules GaN modules & big aperture and you know where to look in the first place, + no need to track/search/GMTT/GMTI/SAR at the same time?, + have LBand radars giving a hand?

    How many modules do you need then?
    _ Leading edge L band isn't a radar
    _ N036 doesn't have GaN, even if it do the gain of side array still very low due to size
    At the moment AESA operate in several mode simultaneously by interleave between them rather than dividing the arrays, so not having to do SAR, GMTI means you can operate at higher PRF, but for long range the maximum PRF is already limited due to range ambigus.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas10 View Post
    Besides keep in mind that with 60° coverage on each side, there will be some overlapping from 45° to 60° from flight axis. Which means that you get 1500+ + ~400 TRMs.

    Nic
    The front radar pointed up ,while the side array pointed down. Very little overlap area.

  3. #1113
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    808
    Is it just me or PAK-FA thread became F-35 thread and F-35 thread became PAK-FA thread ?
    It start to get annoying.
    Last edited by moon_light; 23rd April 2017 at 15:37.

  4. #1114
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,188


    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  5. #1115
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    302
    Good links bring it on. Along with recent arrival of the three new aircraft, this article suggests that an Israeli F-35A was part of the recent attack on Syria. Perhaps the second time they have used the F-35 in a combat strike? Although the article is rather vague, and indicates a "missile" attack, it also references "bombing". If it was indeed a missile strike perhaps the F-35 was part of the raid, but not the shooter, or IAF has found a quicker way to integrate ground attack missiles.

    http://www.bignewsnetwork.com/news/2...tacks-on-syria

  6. #1116
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,713
    Quote Originally Posted by ActionJackson
    T-50 radar is slightly smaller by a few cm.
    If the difference is so slight, I don't see how you can state that it is smaller with any confidence at all, given that the precise dimensions of either have not been published to my knowledge. It could easily be the other way round - but then a 50 to 100 element difference between two >1500 TRM radars (<7%) ought to be quite negligible in and of itself (at least that's the idea behind graceful degradation).

    Quote Originally Posted by ActionJackson
    Not sure about the usefulness of tiny cheek arrays post 2020. The only use cases would be following missile shots against large aircraft at medium range and maybe for guiding antimissile missiles against incoming amraams.

    The tiny 300 element arrays will be totally useless against front and rear aspects of real stealth aircraft, and not much use against side aspects.
    It's 400 elements - in this case a 25% difference and therefore very much more significant. Range may be very modest against the best aspects of the most stealthy targets, but 1) it'll still outperform the APG-81 at 90° off the nose, which will be approaching zero and 2) even post 2020 the vast majority of air forces will be operating 4th generation fighters. Over the course of its 40 year career, not even 10% of the F-15's victories have been against fighters that were at least nominally peers (invariably operated by air forces which were not in terms of training, force multipliers and maintenance).

    Orders of magnitude play into aspects other that stealth...

  7. #1117
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,195
    (CNN)The US Air Force is sending its newest fighter jets to Russia's doorstep as part of a program set up after Russia annexed Crimea from the Ukraine in 2014, a US official tells CNN.

    F-35A stealth Joint Strike Fighters will fly from the United Kingdom to NATO-ally Estonia in the coming days, the official said.
    Full story: http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/25/po...rs-to-estonia/

    Interesting... AFAIK there are 8 F-35A in the UK?

  8. #1118
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,175
    New GAO report (or was it already posted?)

    https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/684207.pdf

  9. #1119
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,188
    Yes 8..sketchy reports..but 2-4 will be spending a few weeks in Estonia.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  10. #1120
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    5,665
    Interesting. A first chance for VKS to sniff the electrons from F-35 over Baltic sea
    Thanks

  11. #1121
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,323
    New GAO report (or was it already posted?)

    https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/684207.pdf
    No, parts have. The full report only came out yesterday. The news articles pretty much summed it up. GAO is reporting 1.7 billion and 12 months to complete testing, JPO is saying 532 million (or something close) and five month delay. That has been reported since last year.

    More interesting (to me) was the graph on F-35 production ramp up. Unfortunately, GAO is absolutely correct on this point, the delays to the F-35 and pushing the production ramp up to the right has resulted in a FRP F-35 procurement timeline that will now have to compete with the B-21, KC-46A, and so on. Of course, the GAO recommendation is to push procurement further right (not a viable option considering the above).

    Report has a different look this time.
    Last edited by FBW; 25th April 2017 at 13:04.

  12. #1122
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    39

  13. #1123
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,188
    GAO is reporting 1.7 billion and 12 months to complete testing, JPO is saying 532 million (or something close) and five month delay. That has been reported since last year.

    More interesting (to me) was the graph on F-35 production ramp up. Unfortunately, GAO is absolutely correct on this point, the delays to the F-35 and pushing the production ramp up to the right has resulted in a FRP F-35 procurement timeline that will now have to compete with the B-21, KC-46A, and so on. Of course, the GAO recommendation is to push procurement further right (not a viable option considering the above).
    Time is money so that is where this variance comes from since the GAO's worst case scenario projects having to fund the team for a full 12 months while Frank Kendall reviewed the program earlier this year and asked the JPO to plan to extend it through the end of May next year owing largely to delivering the full SDD 3F capability on the STOVL variant (I had posted his letter to Chairman SASC here earlier this year, detailing his review of data from all OSD organizations).

    On the cost front, the program/DOD estimate $532 Million additional funding (over previous estimates), $165 Million of which is on account of additional requirements that were not present during the 2011 baseline (smaller ALIS footprint, and cyber security enhancements and testing demanded of the program), $100 Million is the amount the DOD decided to take out of SDD to fund other non program priorities (thank the BCA). The remaining $267 Million is the cost related to technical challenges encountered during the post 2011 development of hardware and software.

    As per their last estimate, they, even with the $532 Million added to the final amount are within the 2011 APB range of cost target. In 2011 when the program was re-baselined the program submitted a cost-to-complete SDD target of $13.9 Billion (Objective with 50% probability) and $15.1 Billion (Threshold). With the $267 Million added to the previous estimate on cost-to-completion, they are still quite close to the Objective set back in 2011. That would put them at $14.1 Billion leaving a fair bit of wiggle room in case there are further cost increases at the home stretch.

    As for moving everything to the right there are two forces at play here. One is obviously the delay in SDD causing FRP to move to the right and another is the BCA and the sequester it triggered. It is not a coincidence that almost all major Air Force programs have a huge spike in funding (procurement) right after the budget caps expire. That has and will create an acquisition bow-wave that they are now trying to address by increasing spending gradually. That is obviously easier said that done since as long as the BCA is in place any budget (defense or otherwise) that goes past the caps requires 60 votes in the Senate which you won't get unless you provide an equal margin on the non-defense side (which would then go up against the OMB director and the Fiscal hawks that only want to allow defense spending increases if even that).
    Last edited by bring_it_on; 26th April 2017 at 09:54.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 17 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 16 guests)

  1. Austin

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES