Forum: F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

It depends on mission requirements. If you cannot get within 900km safely, then the JASSM (max 2-4 per F-35) is your only option. However, if you can safely get within 450km of the target, then something like the JSOW-ER may be a better option as you can get from 6-10 on a single F-35.

F-16.net Sponsor

g3143 wrote:

Will the LRASM fit in the F-35's weapons bays?

LRASM-A is based on JASSM so probably no. LRASM-B . . .Don't know. Probably no also. (They're blowing the dust off the 35 year old ASALM for that and it's about JASSM size.)

SpudmanWP wrote:

If you cannot get within 900km safely, then the JASSM (max 2-4 per F-35) is your only option.

And you don't need to carry it internally in order to use it. An F-35 has four external hardpoints capable of carrying a JASSM apiece, and since the missile has radar signature reduction of its own, the plane wouldn't even suffer much of a stealth penalty carrying them. (Of course, the same is also the case with JSOW.)

SpudmanWP wrote:

However, if you can safely get within 450km of the target, then something like the JSOW-ER may be a better option as you can get from 6-10 on a single F-35.

To get ten, are you picturing the external ones in pairs with some kind of two-bomb adapter on each of four external hardpoints, plus two inside with no such adapters?

Yes, it's called the BRU-69 which will carry two JSOWs. Here is a pic of a F-35 with a similar unit (likely a BRU-55/57) on both wing hardpoints (lower-righthand pic).

renatohm wrote:

Thank you, guys. As I noted, I don't expect a redesign right now, just wondering if it would be hard or easy had it been figured out earlier on. Bottom line: freakin' hard. I knew of the JSOW-ER beforehand, but JASSM-ER has more than twice the range. But geogen put it nicely: design a UCAV which can carry it internally.

With the kinds of ranges that the JASSM-ER has, there's no need for internal carriage, as they'll be fired well outside any threat ranges. The JSOW-ER gives as much range as needed, from an internally carried weapon.

Amen, geogen.

I didn't know about the fuel-replaces-warhead thingie, but 200 nm range with a reduced payload, albeit of more advanced properties, would be nice, as it would still keep the F-35 stealthy. Need more range? Fire JASSM-ER!

Wrightwing, indeed no need to carry JASSM-ER internally, but gas is too much only when you are on fire, and I think one can have no such thing as excessive range and stealth.

Spudman, you are right. But carrying the weapons internally makes life easier for the missiles, or enables them to reach farther.

renatohm wrote:

Wrightwing, indeed no need to carry JASSM-ER internally, but gas is too much only when you are on fire, and I think one can have no such thing as excessive range and stealth.

Spudman, you are right. But carrying the weapons internally makes life easier for the missiles, or enables them to reach farther.

It never hurts to have more range, but I'm trying to envision a situation where 300-400km would be insufficient, for an internally carried weapon(especially when you have external weapons with a >1000km range). You'd still be well outside any WEZs, with that sort of reach.

Lot 10 JASSM order (191 baseline+30 ER) announced June 28, 2012. Total production to date: ~1100

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/p ... llion.html

"Future integration efforts will focus on the U.S. and international versions of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II fighter aircraft and other international platforms. "

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Looks like its still on the cards.

JASSM is also due to get UAI soon.

What kind of operational range would F-35B from an LHD/LHA have with 2 or 4 JASSM? Does it change if operating off say the QE? I imagine carrying them externally means not carrying anything internal. Or will they have some leeway?

With JASSMs you are likely only carrying AMRAAMs internal because why would you need bombs if you need to attack from a long distance via JASSM. Although, you might have 4xAMRAAM internal and switch to escort once the JASSMs are gone. The possibilities are endless.

Besides the specific internal KPP loadout (2x1000lb + 2xAMRAAM), nothing has been publicly released on the F-35B.

Obviously the longer deck of the QE would allow for larger loads and more bringback.

I honestly think JASSM integration into the F-35 is mostly happening to ensure there is a decent sized international market for the weapon. In USAF hands I think the primary platform for it is going to be the B-1 which can carry 24 of them. JASSM is really for that first, overwhelming strike of any conflict. It is part of flooding the enemy air defense system with more than it can handle. A few F-35's might carry JASSM's for targets not convenient to hit with B-1's but each B-1 can carry what a squadron of F-35's can.

The F-35 would likely be used along with the F-22 to hit targets certain targets and respond to targets of opportunity that make themselves known responding to what is happening with masses of JASSM and TLAM I would think.

You are forgetting JASSM's (or it's soon to be cousin LRASM-A) role as a AShW missile.

SWP does not mention the effect of the ski jump for STO max takeoff weight for F-35B aboard CVF - mo' better: "Obviously the longer deck of the QE would allow for larger loads and more bringback."

Thanks, I forgot the ramp in going back to the B.

Forum: F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

F-35 and JASSM