Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 497

Thread: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,969

    F-35 By the Numbers (Feb 2018)

    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,987
    Quote Originally Posted by bring_it_on
    15 Extended Range - AARGM rounds to be procured in FY19 for EMD, Dev. and Operational Test and Evaluation. OE to begin in Q4 2020, while IOT&E in 2022. Low Rate Production set to begin in 2022. JSM, Meteor, Spear3, SOM-J, SDBII, AARGM-ER and SiAW all new weapons waiting in line for F-35 integration in the early-mid 2020s. Majority of these would be developed to be compatible with UAI.
    I think SiAW likely for later, we haven't seen the mock up of it yet

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    12,132
    I think SiAW likely for later, we haven't seen the mock up of it yet
    SIAW is an FY18 new start so very little information is currently available. Based on what is available, the AOA for the program is expected to be completed by this September-October of this year, and the program is expected to go through Milestone-A in about a year after that. From the FYDP, one can see that funding reaches triple digit millions a year starting FY21 (late 2020 and beyond) so it is possible that by 2023-2025 we will begin to see some level of integration or flight testing of the weapon on the F-35. It is going to be a UAI compatible weapon. Unlike the SDB-II for example, which had the F-15E as the primary threshold platform for integration and F-35 integration would happen later post IOC, the SIAW appears to have the F-35 and the B-21 as its primary intended carriers. In the absence of a full schedule, which we will get next year once the AOA is complete, I'm assuming a 4-6 year period b/w Milestone-A and C if it is something based on existing technology or about a 2-3 year period on top of that it if it is based on something new.
    Last edited by bring_it_on; 24th February 2018 at 13:40.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    12,132

  5. #35
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,834
    Quote Originally Posted by SpudmanWP View Post
    What's happening at 1:08? What's "Thor"? Paint?

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    12,132
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  7. #37
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,834
    Thanks.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,969

    F-35 and Super Hornet Back on the Table for Canada

    by David Donald - February 26, 2018, 4:58 AM

    Following the relaunch on Dec. 12, 2017 of its Future Fighter Capability Project (FFCP) to replace the CF-188 (F/A-18A/B) Hornet, the Canadian government has issued a list of eligible suppliers. While the inclusion of the three “Euro-canards”—Dassault Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon and Saab Gripen E/F—is no surprise, the inclusion of both Boeing and Lockheed Martin indicates a softening of policy toward the U.S. fighters, both of which have been the subject of considerable controversy in Canada.

    ...

    In the meantime, FFCP continues with the F-35 and Super Hornet back in the running. An element of the request—presumably aimed at Boeing—notes: “The evaluation of bids will also include an assessment of bidders’ impact on Canada’s economic interests. When bids are assessed, any bidder that is responsible for harm to Canada’s economic interests will be at a distinct disadvantage.”

    A full RFP for the government-to-government deal is expected in spring 2019, with contract award scheduled for 2021/22. First deliveries are slated for 2025, with initial operational capability a year later. Full operational capability is scheduled for 2031.
    More at the Jump
    https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-n...k-table-canada
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,969

    UK government addresses F-35 concerns, states continued commitment to programme

    UK government addresses F-35 concerns, states continued commitment to programme
    Gareth Jennings, London - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly
    26 February 2018

    The UK government has responded to a parliamentary report that was highly critical of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme, saying that it remains committed to delivering the capability on time and within budget.

    In its response to the December 2017 report titled Unclear for take-off? F-35 Procurement , the government on 26 February clarified a number of the concerns raised with the aircraft’s next-generation Multifunctional Advanced Data Link (MADL); the capacity of the internet broadband fitted to the Queen Elizabeth-class (QEC) aircraft carriers; the reported cyber vulnerabilities of the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS); a lack of information on the current or the final costs of the programme; as well as software and hardware development problems.

    In the original report published on 10 December 2017, the Parliamentary Defence Committee noted a lack of transparency in the F-35 programme in general and inadequate responses to a critical article published in The Times earlier in the year in particular, both of which could risk undermining public confidence in the project that is critical to the future of the UK defence.

    The government said MADL is just one of a number of solutions that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) is actively pursuing as it looks to improve the interoperability between defence and security systems across the air, land, sea, and cyber domains, and for the F-35 to share data covertly across the battlespace in particular. “The MoD has undertaken a series of trials of communication nodes between the Link 16 format and the MADL format using F-35 and [Eurofighter] Typhoon aircraft [.…] The MoD, alongside the US services and industry partners will continue to explore the value of exchanging data through the classified series of Babel Fish trials,” the government said.
    (318 of 1219 words)
    http://www.janes.com/article/78168/u...t-to-programme
    Sorry for the paywall
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,969

    Turkey mulls purchase of US’s F35-B for future airplane carrier

    SEVİL ERKUŞ/WASHINGTON
    February 26 2018 17:41:00

    Amid plans to upgrade its naval air forces with light and full-equipped aircraft carriers over the next decade, Turkey is now considering procuring new generation F-35B fighter aircrafts with the qualifications of short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL), as part of the ongoing Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program.

    As part of the U.S. Defense Department’s JSF program along with a number of prominent NATO allies including the United Kingdom, Italy and the Netherlands, the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) has been planning to upgrade its air force fleets with 100 F-35 aircrafts to be jointly produced under this program.

    F-35A aircrafts have the Conventional Take Off & Landing (CTOL) qualifications and will therefore be used to replace the Turkish Air Forces’ F-16 fleets in the next two decades. F-35B fighters, however, are planned to be procured in line with Ankara’s growing interest in strengthening its naval forces, mainly for overseas operations.

    To this end, the country’s work on building its largest amphibious assault ship (LHD), also known as a light aircraft carrier, TCG Anadolu, are continuing amid plans to be launched by 2021. Over the next decade, Turkey also plans to build its first full-equipped aircraft carrier. Both aircraft carriers will be home to F35B aircrafts.

    Turkey is currently in the process of setting up two large military bases, one in Qatar and the other in Somalia. Turkey has been trying to reinforce its naval forces through a project that aims to build new assault ships and submarines through the use of national resources.

    Where the future of naval aviation begins

    Along with a group of international reporters, the Hürriyet Daily News visited the Naval Air Station (NAS) Patuxent River, a U.S. military facility where F-35 aircrafts are being tested.

    NAS Patuxent River is considered to be where the future of Naval Aviation begins. It hosts more than 50 tenant activities, including the Naval Air Systems Command and the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division.

    The F35Bs are launched into the skies from a ski-jump as part of a test program before being deployed to the aircraft carriers on which they will serve.



    "F35s easy to aviate"


    According to Andrew Mack, the F-35 ITF chief test engineer, aviating F35 warrior aircrafts are safe and easy thanks to modern software.

    “These aircrafts are very safe. They are also easy to fly thanks computerized qualifications. F16 pilots still need four weeks in class and two weeks flying training. But half-an-hour simulation is enough to land this aircraft vertically,” Mack said.

    “In flight tests we have a lot of unique things that are able to create a safe envelope for the pilot to operate and utilize the air plane. It requires a lot of unique instrumentation … The recovery for any kind of out-of-control situation is the same. The pilot can let go and the jet recovers on its own. The engine has performed remarkably during all of its tests,” he added.

    Asked about the Pentagon’s suspension of testing last year after problems about pilot awareness, pilot safety and oxidation, Mack said it was about “a lot of on-board oxygen generating systems.”

    “It did touch our program for a while in terms of an investigation that had to be done. The same issued also touched other planes with on-board oxygen generating systems. The mystery is still not completely solved but we are confident about the safety of the aircraft and the indications that exist if there is an anomaly,” he added.
    http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/tur...carrier-127943

    cached version:
    https://webcache.googleusercontent.c...&ct=clnk&gl=us
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,969

    Source: Japan's Largest Warship Was Designed as an Aircraft Carrier

    By Franz-Stefan Gady
    February 27, 2018

    Blueprints reveal that Japan’s latest class of helicopter destroyers has been designed to operate the F-35B.

    The Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force’s (JMSDF) largest warship, the so-called helicopter destroyer JS Izumo, the lead ship of the Izumo-class, along with its sister ship, JS Kaga, have already been designed to operate short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) fighters such as Lockheed Martin’s F-35B, retired JMSDF sources told Japan’s Asahi Shimbun newspaper last week.

    While Japan’s Ministry of Defense (MoD) has repeatedly denied plans to retrofit the Izumo-class into full-fledged aircraft carriers–euphemistically classified as helicopter destroyers by the JMSDF to downplay the ships’ offensive warfighting capabilities– a JMSDF executive said that a consensus was privately reached at the inception of the Izumo project that the warships should be designed allowing for a future conversion into a F-35B-carrying naval platform.

    “It is only reasonable to design (the Izumo) with the prospect of possible changes of the circumstances in the decades ahead,” the JMSDF executive said. “We viewed that whether the Izumo should be actually refitted could be decided by the government.” Indeed, it is unsurprising that consideration was given to operate the F-35B–the U.S. Marine Corps variant of F-35 Joint Strike Fighter capable of vertical or short takeoffs and vertical landings without requiring a catapult launcher—from the Izumo’s flight deck, as the ministry has repeatedly expressed interest in acquiring the aircraft over the years.

    MoD sources have only recently reiterated the MoDs interest in procuring F-35Bs for service aboard the Izumo-class and from airfields on Japanese-held islands skirting the East China Sea. Modifications on the Izumo-class, among other things, would require the installation of a ski-jump. Contrary to earlier reports, the JMSDF executive claims that the flight deck has already been coated with paint that can withstand the exhaust heat generated during F-35B landings and takeoffs. Additionally, the aircraft elevators connecting the flight deck with the hangar was reportedly specifically designed to accommodate the F-35B.

    The Izumo-class is the biggest class of surface warship to be operated by the JMSDF since the end of World War II. While it is a multi-purpose warship, the Izumo-class’ biggest comparative advantage to other vessels in the JMSDFs surface fleet is its sophisticated anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capability. For example, Izumo-class ships can operate a large number of Japan’s most advanced sub-hunting helicopter. “The ship is designed to accommodate up to 14 helicopters (seven Mitsubishi-built SH-60k ASW helicopters and seven Agusta Westland MCM-101 mine countermeasure helicopters), five of which can simultaneously take off and land, given the Izumo’s large flight deck and five landing spots,” I explained previously.

    Should the Izumo-class undergo a retrofit to accommodate the F-35B, the ships’ ASW capabilities would be somewhat curtailed, as numerous defense analysts have pointed out. The Izumo-class conversion debate in Japan occurs in the context of an increasing vulnerability of Japanese airbases to Chinese and North Korean cruise and ballistic missile strikes. F-35Bs operating from Izumo-class carriers would at least theoretically increase the chances of Japanese airpower surviving a possible Chinese or North Korean first strike in the event of a military conflict.
    https://thediplomat.com/2018/02/sour...craft-carrier/
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,666
    LRIP10 fly away F-35B cost assessed by Uk mindef : 123 millions $ each .
    http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevi...ten/74078.html
    Last edited by halloweene; 26th February 2018 at 21:51.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    5,335
    And 105M$ in 2022... Tomorrow. A formidable stealth fighter able to land anywhere as easily as parking a Cadillac in downtown Paris.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,666
    landing anywhere? (aka where there is a many tons specific mat?) and 105 projected (hoped). True, only issue is that if it can land anyqhere it cant go anywhere if it takes off =from anywhere neither due to low endurance (B model)

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,969
    As long as it can take off, mid-air refueling will allow it to fly anywhere.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  16. #46
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    191
    As long as you're not worried about the long-term prospects of the concrete you're landing on I fail to see why an F-35B couldn't operate without those heat-resistant mats for some time.

  17. #47
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    12,132
    LRIP10 fly away F-35B cost assessed by Uk mindef : 123 millions $ each .
    http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevi...ten/74078.html
    The number has been know for a while.

    https://www.f35.com/news/detail/agre...rogram-history

    and 105 projected (hoped)
    True. People seem to forget that even at LRIP-10, which saw 90 aircraft ordered, the program is still in Low-Rate production relative to its full-rate ramp up. The next order bump is significant and there will likely be one more bump before "true" (with US involvement) Multi-Year contracts and Full rate production kicks in. So while that $105 Million is still a desired/hoped/aspirational goal there is quite a bit of EOS still to be realized in the program. There is a reason why they are aiming for a particular price target by 2020 - it is because they expect to see multi year orders, assured timely contract formalization by then. JPO is aiming for same year contract completion (order year vs signed year) by LRIP-12. Right now, negotiations for lots primarily funded in FY17 are stretching into FY18.

    LRIP-11 is more than 50% larger in terms of total aircraft (140 vs 90), and it should be signed in the next few months.
    Last edited by bring_it_on; 27th February 2018 at 13:09.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  18. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,983
    F-35B rocks.. a truly unique bird..

  19. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    12,132
    Budget request includes funding profile for new F-35 Block 4 strategy


    The Defense Department's fiscal year 2019 budget request includes funding for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program's new Follow-On Modernization plan, dubbed Continuous Capability Development and Delivery, but it is unclear whether the projection incorporates a new cost estimate for the effort.

    The Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps each reference the new strategy, which Inside Defense first reported last September. C2D2 is meant to change the way the program develops and delivers new software capabilities and to create a bridge between the final version of Block 3F software that will be delivered during the system development and demonstration phase and the first iteration of Block 4 software. That bridge phase will allow the program to fix any known Block 3F deficiencies -- as well as any discovered during operational test -- and insert new capabilities prior to the release of the next software block.

    The JPO has been working with the Office of the Secretary of Defense to nail down the details of the program's C2D2 strategy, including cost and schedule. Although the recent budget request highlights the new strategy, it's unclear whether the request includes an approved cost estimate. However, there is some variation between what the services projected they would need for FOM in their FY-18 budget requests and what they are asking for in the FY-19 request for C2D2.

    In FY-18, the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps projected they would need a combined $3.1 billion for FOM between fiscal years 2019 and 2022. In the services' FY-19 request, the projection for those years grows to by about $56 million.

    That $56 million change reflects some shifts in funding over that four-year period, with the biggest change in projection appearing in FY-19. The three services projected in their FY-18 requests they would need a combined $915 million in FY-19. In their FY-19 requests, the services ask for $68 million more.

    The request does not justify the difference in detail, but notes that FY-19 funding would support C2D2 contract development, a preliminary design review for the first iteration of Block 4 software and a system requirements review for the second iteration of Block 4 software.

    FY-19 funds will also support the execution of a third technology refresh, TR-3, which will update the system so that it can support Block 4 capabilities. In FY-19, the program plans to move closer to a critical design review of some subsystems and will prototype TR-3 software. The program also plans to stand up an initial TR-3 lab in FY-19.


    Other FY-19 C2D2 activities include continued development and flight testing of future F-35 capabilities. Budget documents note the program will transfer its integrated test requirements to C2D2 as the system development and demonstration phase closes out.
    The difference in the 2 estimates is 1.8% which could very well be due to a change in schedule (added time to address all C2D2 tasks) or simply pursuing more capability upfront. It is also quite likely that they simply have better estimates on what it will take (time and money) to execute on the strategy given that it was an open secret that the FY18 simply used placeholder $$ amounts for FY spending until the administration got a full year to work out details on its budgeting and security strategy over the FYDP.
    Last edited by bring_it_on; 27th February 2018 at 12:57.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  20. #50
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    12,132
    From earlier this month :

    Expanded training enables combat success


    The 33rd Fighter Wing is hosting a large force exercise here January 29 through February 9, 2018.

    The exercise is an opportunistic expansion of the wing's Lightning Top-Off Course, a program for new F-35A pilots to hone their skills ahead of reporting to their operational unit. This expanded course shortens the timeline to get pilots mission qualified (MQ) without sacrificing quality training during a time when pilot shortages are being felt across the Air Force.

    "There are inherent challenges when our fighter pilot manning is stretched thin and we attempt to strike a perfect equilibrium between pilot production and pilot absorption. Because the operational F-35 community is still relatively small, yet growing rapidly, when we forecast this getting out of balance we need to move rapidly and take steps to minimize the impacts on the warfighters," said Colonel Paul Moga, 33 FW commander.

    "Expanding LiTOC from its typical academic and simulator training to actual live-fly missions enables us to better meet the needs of our customer-the CAF. This exercise utilizes extra sorties that were carved out months ago and gives pilots more realistic, high-end combat training before they arrive to their squadrons," Moga said. And, because this was planned so far in advance, there is no impact to the wing's more routine program flying training production timelines.

    The exercise was developed specifically for pilots reporting to Hill AFB, the nation's only operational F-35A unit.

    "Historically, after pilots finished their formal training unit syllabus they still needed mission qualification training after reporting to their operational squadron, which could take up to three months and 12 flights," said Major Brian Burgoon, 33nd Wing weapons officer. "Through this expanded LiTOC, the pilots are getting six of those 12 flights, easing the burden of MQ training and taking some of the pressure off of our only operational F-35 wing."

    This two-week exercise will include aircraft from 10 units throughout the southeast from U.S. Navy and Air Force active and reserve components.
    ------


    JASDF - Misawa F-35A -

    Last edited by bring_it_on; 27th February 2018 at 12:59.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  21. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,666
    F-35B rocks.. a truly unique bird..
    agree.

  22. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Eastern Switzerland
    Posts
    2,249
    Quote Originally Posted by F/A-XX View Post
    As long as you're not worried about the long-term prospects of the concrete you're landing on I fail to see why an F-35B couldn't operate without those heat-resistant mats for some time.
    Because there's a chance the hot main engine could rip up the concrete? Loose pieces of concrete are a problem STOVL or not.
    How can less be more? It's impossible. More is more.
    Yngwie Malmsteen

  23. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,969
    There is little or no chance of that as the USMC has already used the F-35B in "austere" environments on non-prepped surfaces (ie no matting). Besides, the F-35's STOVL fan prevents anything dislodged from the engine excuse from reaching the inlet.

    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  24. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    5,303
    For decades, the Marines have used rolling vertical landings to keep the harrier's engine inlet ahead of the debris kicked up by the exhaust plume.
    That landing technique should work for F-35B too.

  25. #55
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    12,132
    Type 4 Close Air Support - Marine Corps Gazette; Maj Stephen T. Davis; Vol. 2 March,2018

    With the integration of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), the Marine Corps is taking its first steps toward an ability to make decisions on the battlefield at a rate faster than a human can think. In an effort to outpace the enemy, the Marine Corps' maneuver warfare philosophy focuses on decentralized execution.1 The Marine Corps, along with our sister Services, is making technological advancements that will soon yield the opportunity to extend decentralized execution to an automatic weapons system (AWS) using artificial intelligence (AI). Current CAS (close air support) doctrine and definitions do not account for this. In order to prepare for the capabilities of the JSF and the future coupling of AWS using AI, the Joint Staff must modify current CAS doctrine and definitions.

    The JSF has capabilities that far exceed that of the legacy aircraft the Marine Corps has previously worked with. It possesses the AN/AAQ-37 Distributed Aperture System (DAS), a system capable of providing the pilot 360 degrees of situational awareness through six electro-optical sensors.2 During testing, the DAS demonstrated the ability to locate hostile fire when İt geo-located tanks firing during an exercise at a significant operational distance.3 The DAS enhances the JSF s ability to process this information and hand it off to other ground forces or aircraft autonomously without requiring an additional workload from the pilot.4

    The JSF demonstrated the capability to hand target information off to a fires platform located beyond the horizon in the summer of 2016, when a simulated naval vessel shot an SM-6 missile and destroyed a target using information passed from theJSF7 The SM-6 İs not an AWS, but the JSF s ability to autonomously hand targeting information off foreshadows the potential to conduct CAS using airborne semi-automatic or AWS with AI technology. Decentralizing execution by using the JSF in concert with AWS and AI would provide an even larger temporal advantage over the enemy.

    The DOD spent over $72 billion on research and development İn 2016, more than double what Apple, Intel, and Google spent combined İn 2015.6 That kind of research and development has led to the creation of Pertix, an autonomous drone utilizing AI to carry out missions programmed prior to flight.7 Missions programmed in drones like these could enable AI to patrol the battlefield and seek out certain types of targets, such as a T-14 Armata Main Battle Tank. AI possesses the ability to recognize images faster and. better than a human.8 Using tools like these could supplement the JSF's ability to detect targets at range. Drones utilizing AI would be able to patrol the battlefield and positively identify threats using image recognition. The JSF, acting as an airborne server, would then be able to push targeting data to airborne AWS in the area. A modified MQ-9 Reaper could loiter autonomously until tasked by JSF targeting data. This would drastically reduce the time it takes to pass aircrew a game plan, nine-line, correlate aircrew, integrate, clear, and employ fires. With this type of technology, İt may be possible to conduct CAS at a rate much faster than today.

    Ground forces and aircrew conduct an overwhelming majority of CAS missions under positive control, always placing a human in the decision-making process. This İs for good measure, but İt İs unlikely that İt will forever be the most efficient way to conduct CAS. It could be possible to conduct CAS without positive control. Looking at previous Marine Corps doctrine, reasonable assurance could be an option if the supported ground commander, terminal controller, and the aircrew could ensure that each mission would not adversely affect ground crew. Reasonable assurance does not appear to be emergency CAS and may be Marine Corps specific, as there is no mention of this İn Joint Publication 3-09-3, Close Air Support. Switching to the use of reasonable assurance would be a mental hurdle for the combat arms community, but this İs the doctrine that AWS and AI would operate under when İn the CAS arena.

    There are three types of controls during the conduct of CAS. Tactical risk assessment determines which type of control should be used; this does not mean one type of control İs riskier than the other.10 Type 1 requires the joint terminal air controller (JTAC) or forward air controller (FAC) to control each individual attack as well as visually acquire both the target and employing aircraft.11 Type 2 requires the JTAC/ FAC to acquire the target either visually or by using some type of realtime targeting information from another platform and control each attack, but this relieves them of the requirement to visually acquire the employing aircraft.12 After visually correlating the target to both the JTAC/FAC and the aircrew, Type 3 İs a control method that allows multiple engagements of targets during a certain window of time without the requirement of the JTAC/ FAC to visually acquire the attacking aircraft.13 These are the only ways to control attacking aircraft during the conduct of CAS, and every one of them requires a human to correlate, integrate, clear, and employ fires on a target. While each type of control may have a different level of tactical risk associated with it, each attempts to maximize fires and minimize friendly fratricide or collateral damage. Type 4 control does not currently exist, but the coupling of AWS and AI during the conduct of CAS will require a new control method.

    When discussing the use of the reasonable assurance method of CAS, you 11 find that most ground commanders, terminal air controllers, and aircrew are reluctant to operate in that realm because of the perception that it may involve a higher level of risk. Today, there are multiple ways to mitigate risk with fires. One common method to mitigate risk İs to release highly precise weapons on extremely accurate target coordinates. Today, when placing coordinates into a GPS/INS weapon, there is a category of target location error (TLE) tied to them. The lowest level of TLE İs the most accurate and the most desired. This provides commanders, terminal air controllers, and aircrew the added sense of comfort that they are mitigating risk by ensuring that precision and accuracy are coupled. AI may become the new type of accuracy that different categories of TLE have previously been during risk mitigation. This is going to be grounds for Type 4 CAS; that is correlation, integration, clearance, and fires conducted by AWS and AI. Technology is advancing in a direction and at a pace that the idea of decentralizing execution to the level that allows AWS to engage targets in close proximity to friendly forces while using AI to integrate and clear fires will someday be possible, requiring a change in doctrine. It requires a change in doctrine because, tactical risk permitting, the human will no longer be in the decision-making process.

    One counterargument is that DOD policy does not currently allow the use of AWS on the battlefield. In an effort to reduce failures that lead to unintended engagements, DOD policy assigns responsibilities for the use of semi-autonomous systems and AWS. ^ The directive currently requires commanders or operators to be involved at the appropriate levels to exercise human judgment during the use of force. ^ This directive isn't İn place to prevent Services from exploring and creating new doctrine. AWS employing on targets will happen sometime İn the future. This same directive opens up the potential to expand on AWS capabilities. It states that as systems continue to be developed,

    they will go through extensive hardware and software verification and validation while requiring new training, doctrine, and tactics, techniques, and procedures to be implemented.

    The Army is also looking at funding long-term plans that support remote autonomous systems as a means of fire and. maneuver.1-7 This counterargument is built on a policy that is in place because the ethical question of whether we should allow an AWS to kill a human hasn't been answered. Just because policy doesn't allow something to be applied today, doesn't mean the exploration and development of doctrine should wait. As the Marine Corps Operating Concept states, "A military that is slow to exploit technological advances and adapt new ways of fighting opens itself up to catastrophic defeat."18

    A second counterargument, and one that would be on the minds of most within the combat arms community, is that AI will never exceed the human capability to safely track all friendly forces during the conduct of CAS or prevent AWS from engaging unintended targets. This is a valid counterargument, but the idea of a human being able to maintain full situational awareness at all times and prevent unintended engagements İs difficult İn reality. Even with advancements İn technology, this reality has unfortunately presented itself in blue-on-blue engagements on the modern-day battlefield. ^ The Army has recently replaced Blue Force Tracker and fielded a new system called the Joint Battle Command-Platform Family of Systems (JBC-P FoS).20 This system will not only be used by the Army but also down to the squad level in the Marine Corps.21 Building on the capabilities of systems like these and coupling them with AI could provide a level of situational awareness never seen before. When considering the ability of friendly forces equipped with JBC maneuvering about the battlefield, AI platforms like Pertix providing positive identification, and JSF sharing organic information to airborne AWS, the idea of Type 4 CAS becomes more realistic. Danger close Type 4 CAS may not be a possibility İn urban locations like Ramadı or Fallujah, but İt most certainly can be an option in rural and open areas like the Chosin Reservoir or Khe Sanh.

    The concept of employing AWS and AI on the enemy could begin with deep air support and work its way closer to ground forces. In the beginning, it may even be limited to tactical equipment only. When this capability reaches the ground forces, the current doctrine will not support İt. As it İs now, CAS doctrine may become the limiting factor with future technology. Current CAS doctrine requires humans to correlate, integrate, clear, and employ fires on the enemy. One way to control CAS, such as the proposed Type 4, would not be the only way to conduct CAS. Type 4 will simply be an additional type of control, tactical risk permitting, that allows the correlation, integration, clearance, and employment of fires by AWS and AI during the conduct of CAS. In an effort to outpace the enemy with decentralized execution, a change to CAS doctrine and definitions İs in order if the Services want to capitalize on the capabilities of AWS and AI on the modern-day battlefield.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  26. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    5,303
    USAF F-35As are still at Kadena.
    Last edited by djcross; 28th February 2018 at 19:24.

  27. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Eastern Switzerland
    Posts
    2,249
    Quote Originally Posted by djcross View Post
    For decades, the Marines have used rolling vertical landings to keep the harrier's engine inlet ahead of the debris kicked up by the exhaust plume.
    That landing technique should work for F-35B too.
    Debris here mainly referring to dust and dirt I suppose. Compared to the Harrier, F-35s exhaust is:
    - more powerful
    - hotter
    - closer to the ground
    Hence the possibility of ripping up concrete and not just blowing up some dust. While the first F-35 will do fine with a rolling landing, you'd have to clean the pad afterwards and check for concrete FOD. I'm just speculating of course but I wouldn't be surprised if there won't be STOVL ops from unprepared areas.
    How can less be more? It's impossible. More is more.
    Yngwie Malmsteen

  28. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,969
    The front fan is cold and in an RVL, the rear is pointing back slightly.

    This was explained in a vid a while back. I'll try to find it.

    Last edited by SpudmanWP; 28th February 2018 at 23:08.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  29. #59
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    12,132
    Land- and Aircraft Carrier-Based F-35C Jet Blast Deflector Noise Testing - Anthony R. Pilon, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company

    Measurements of the noise generated by supersonic, impinging jets from full scale,
    high performance tactical aircraft engines are discussed. The supersonic jet studied is the
    exhaust from an F-35C, the Naval variant of the Joint Strike Fighter currently undergoing
    System Design and Development in the United States. The jet impinges on a Jet Blast
    Deflector – a surface angled behind the aircraft to deflect the exhaust up and away from
    personnel and other aircraft on the deck of an aircraft carrier. Data from land-based
    measurements with a large microphone array are compared with measurements from a
    limited array on the deck of an aircraft carrier.
    Last edited by bring_it_on; 1st March 2018 at 11:33.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  30. #60
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    12,132
    ^ Updated the link..should work now..
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

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