Forum: F-35 Variants and Missions

Certainly longer than the C. APG-82 is a very impressive radar set and will give the F-15E an outstanding BVR capability. I'm with you, southernphantom, I'm very fond of our beloved mudhen, though that two seat F-35 photoshop job looks pretty sexy. I want one! Thumb

F-16.net Sponsor

My favorite version is the F-35C.

southernphantom wrote:

I'm holding out for the two-seater. Gotta have a stealth Growler/Beagle Wink

I think the naming convention should more follow:

(base models)
F-35A = Single-seat USAF model with internal gun; main export version (F-28A Lightning II)
F-35B = Single-seat USMC model; STOVL version (F-26A Diplomat)
F-35C = Single-seat USN model with big wing and retractable refueling probe; CATOBAR version (F-25A Wildcat II)

(USAF variants)
F-35D* = Two-seater based off F-35A (F-28B Lightning II)
F-35E = Single-seat based off F-35A but with TVC and optimized for supercruise; Air Superiority version (F-28C Lightning II)
F-35G = Two-seater based off F-35E; EW version (F-28G Lightning II)
F-35L = Two-seater based off F-35A with stretched fuselage and optimized for supercruise; Long-Range Strike version (F-28E Lightning II)

(USN variants)
F-35D* = Two-seater based off F-35C (F-25B Wildcat II)
F-35F = Single-seat based off F-35C but with internal gun, TVC, and optimized for supercruise; Air Superiority version (F-25C Wildcat II)
F-35H = Two-seater based off F-35C with stretched fuselage and optimized for supercruise; Long-Range Strike version (F-25D Wildcat II)

(USMC variants)
F-35M = Two-seater based off F-35B (F-26B Diplomat)

(USN variants)
F-35I = Israel's F-35A (F-28I Lightning II)
F-35J = Japan's F-35A (F-28J Lightning II)
F-35K = South Korea's F-35A (F-28K Lightning II)
F-35S = Singapore's F-35A (F-28S Lightning II)

* Launched as simply a two-seat F-35 program; USAF and USN are two-seaters of their respective programs

(Bolded Designations based on the redesignation of F/A-18E as the F-24A Super Hornet, F/A-18F as the F-24B Super Hornet, and F/A-18G as the F-24G Growler)

Can't use the Wildcat II moniker - that would be an insult to Grumman Smile

stereospace wrote:

All it needs now is two engines. Twisted Evil

Considering all of the Pre-JAST trade studies one conclusion I can draw is that the Pentagon was looking for a strictly single-engine design regardless of any circumstances.

As for the F-35 replacing the Strike Eagle, that should have been the F/B-22's job. Anyway if the F-15E is to be replaced it will be done many years from now and only partially by the F-35 IIRC.

maus92 wrote:

Can't use the Wildcat II moniker - that would be an insult to Grumman Smile

It's an insult to the Navy to use an Air Force moniker for their plane.

stereospace wrote:

All it needs now is two engines. Twisted Evil

I'm with you on the two engines and two seats. Two 50k engines! It would run out of fuel in about 2 min. in A/B, but she'd be fun.

Now to the topic... The A!. It has a gun and a big one. If you've ever heard of the F-4 Phantom II you want a gun.

TSFG

You can put a gun on the other variants in the form of a pod. The pentagon just felt that the USAF is the only branch that needs a fighter with a gun built in as the F-35A may need it for personal defense when bandits close in too much. The other two don't need a cannon as it isn't quite as relevant to their mission profile.

tacf-x wrote:

You can put a gun on the other variants in the form of a pod. The pentagon just felt that the USAF is the only branch that needs a fighter with a gun built in as the F-35A may need it for personal defense when bandits close in too much. The other two don't need a cannon as it isn't quite as relevant to their mission profile.

I know your 100% right. Just like having a side arm for that one time you didn't and it bit you. I'm sure most pilots flying over 100's of miles of water would like the fuel it add too. I've just heard F-22 pilots say they're glad the 22 has a gun and the 35 has less missiles. But your right, the cannon isn't as relevant to their mission profiles.

A littile off topic. I'd like to see the gun pods as a stealthy fuel tank or weapons pod. But what do I know.

TSFG

It was not the DoD, but the services themselves that said the extra fuel is worth more than an internal gun.

My favorite option for the centerline position would be a stealthy mini-NGJ jammer pod.

SpudmanWP wrote:

It was not the DoD, but the services themselves that said the extra fuel is worth more than an internal gun.

My favorite option for the centerline position would be a stealthy mini-NGJ jammer pod.

I match you mini-NGJ and raise you a 360 deg. AESA with built in jammer. Laughing

TSFG

360 AESA would need a bit more power than a RAT can provide.

I'm thinking the Jammer would use a phased array antenna anyway just like the ECM fairings on the Typhoon.

Well yeah, that's why I said mini-NGJ as the NGJ is AESA based. I thought TSFG meant 360 AESA radar Smile

The B gets my vote.. awesome.

SpudmanWP wrote:

Well yeah, that's why I said mini-NGJ as the NGJ is AESA based. I thought TSFG meant 360 AESA radar Smile

I ment one or both, but power would be a limiting factor. I didn't know if you could use the AESA in the NGJ as radar a as well. I would love to have 360 jamming though. You could jam something behind or to your side. I guess we'll see.

TSFG

Forum: F-35 Variants and Missions

Favorite F-35 variant