Forum: F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Last edited by moon_light on Jun 07, 2012 - 08:10 PM; edited 1 time in total

hb_pencil wrote:

moon_light wrote:

southernphantom wrote:

Well, what threat nations have LO ships?? Russia doesn't, China doesn't, none of the EU nations do. I somehow don't see us picking a fight with the Swedes, either...

just some example

Netherlands : HNLMS Evertsen (F805)
China :Houbei class missile boat
French : La Fayette class frigate
Finnish :Hamina class missile boat
Turkish : Milgem class corvette
Swedish : Visby class
VietNam : Gepard class frigate
Russian : Steregushchy class
............... bla......bla

None of those are low observable. A few facets do not a stealth ship make. Otherwise the Arleigh Burke Class can be considered Low observable ships.

Those ships all have low observable features, but they cannot be considered low observable... with the Visby probably being the best of the lot. You missed the Skjold class, which probably better than anything on that list. The only true "low observable" ship was the Sea Shadow, but it was basically an F-117 built as a ship.

Sea shadow is like a stealth ship ( floating F-117 ), the other ships i listed may be not very stealth , but they sure have RCS smaller than normal ship of their class ( just like F-18 E/F compared to F-15 or B-1B compared to B-52 , F-18 E/F and B-1B although not stealth aircraft , have RCS 100 times smaller than normal aircrafts i think the same for ship not to mention that the RAM on a ship can be much thicker than aircraft because they don't really have to worry about weight )
a ship with low observable features may not invisible but they can have RCS of 10 to 100 times smaller than normal ship , if the APG-81 can detected normal destroyer from 300 km , then for a destroyer with stealth features the distance will be reduced to 75 km

F-16.net Sponsor

wrightwing wrote:

moon_light wrote:

and actually SH-60 and E-2 can't see over the horizon they just help the ship detected , attack targets over the horizon of itself (because these aircraft flying at high altitude so their horizon is much longer than the ship's one )

You may want to double check your facts here. These 2 platforms allow surface ships to target enemy vessels/aircraft/missiles, over the horizon from the ship.

yes that what i mean with the 2 platforms the ship can attacks , target enemy vessels over the ship's radar horizon ( sh-60 and E-2 can't look over their radar horizon , there is notthing magic about their radar they just at higher altitude so they have longer horizon than the ship's radars )

weasel1962 wrote:

Didn't the navy acquire the LJDAM for the DAMTC? I'd add that to the list. the F-35 should be able to carry 8 x GBU-54s internally as well. The LJDAM should have a bigger bang compared to the SDB II and 500lb-ers did do quite a bit of damage in the Falklands to frigate/destroyer sized targets. Though shorter range than the SDB, it does reduce tot (time to target) and leverages on the F-35's stealth to get closer to target.
.

GBu-54 is much much bigger than the SDB bombs the F-35 can only carry 2 of them internally ,

and one more thing if the ship is not moving or they are moving slower than the wave then it would be impossible to find , detected them by radar without SAR mode ( the range of SAR mode is very short as i mention before even the global hawk when using radar in SAR mode have range no more than 100 km , paint the ship with some color will make them very hard to spot by satelite.

moon_light wrote:

yes that what i mean with the 2 platforms the ship can attacks , target enemy vessels over the ship's radar horizon ( sh-60 and E-2 can't look over their radar horizon , there is notthing magic about their radar they just at higher altitude so they have longer horizon than the ship's radars )

Congratulations for that astute comment. Of course they have their own radar horizon limits. That's not the point I'm making though. The point that I am making, is that they can give a surface ship situational awareness for hundreds of kilometers, and allow the ship to engage them from further away, than it could on its own.

wrightwing wrote:

moon_light wrote:

yes that what i mean with the 2 platforms the ship can attacks , target enemy vessels over the ship's radar horizon ( sh-60 and E-2 can't look over their radar horizon , there is notthing magic about their radar they just at higher altitude so they have longer horizon than the ship's radars )

Congratulations for that astute comment. Of course they have their own radar horizon limits. That's not the point I'm making though. The point that I am making, is that they can give a surface ship situational awareness for hundreds of kilometers, and allow the ship to engage them from further away, than it could on its own.

:? i mean when they see the enemy ships they will also be seen and can be shoot down , and as i said before ship with stealth feature can have rcs lower than normal ship by 100 times (just like what they did to aircraft Eg : B-1b and F-18E/F ) and for real stealth stealth ship their RCS can be reduce by 1000 times (like how they did to F-22 compared to normal aircrafts :wink: ) , the RCS reduced by 10 times , the detection range will reduce by half
so if the E-2 or SH-60 can detected normal destroyer from 600 km , for ship with stealth feature like Arleigh Burke the range will be 150 km well inside the SAM range
:P

moon_light wrote:

wrightwing wrote:

moon_light wrote:

yes that what i mean with the 2 platforms the ship can attacks , target enemy vessels over the ship's radar horizon ( sh-60 and E-2 can't look over their radar horizon , there is notthing magic about their radar they just at higher altitude so they have longer horizon than the ship's radars )

Congratulations for that astute comment. Of course they have their own radar horizon limits. That's not the point I'm making though. The point that I am making, is that they can give a surface ship situational awareness for hundreds of kilometers, and allow the ship to engage them from further away, than it could on its own.

I mean when they see the enemy ships they will also be seen and can be shoot down , and as i said before ship with stealth feature can have rcs lower than normal ship by 100 times (just like what they did to aircraft Eg : B-1b and F-18E/F ) and for real stealth stealth ship their RCS can be reduce by 1000 times (like how they did to F-22 compared to normal aircrafts ) , the RCS reduced by 10 times , the detection range will reduce by half
so if the E-2 or SH-60 can detected normal destroyer from 600 km , for ship with stealth feature like Arleigh Burke the range will be 150 km well inside the SAM range

Frankly, I don't have the time or inclination to correct every single incorrect assumption and fallacy you've included in your post. However making completely unverified and almost certainly incorrect comparisons between aircraft and ships, claiming 100 times less RCS and then trying to operationalize it in the fashions you're doing illustrates just how amateurish your analysis is... which isn't surprising given your previous thread on nuclear weapons.

moon_light wrote:

weasel1962 wrote:

Didn't the navy acquire the LJDAM for the DAMTC? I'd add that to the list. the F-35 should be able to carry 8 x GBU-54s internally as well. The LJDAM should have a bigger bang compared to the SDB II and 500lb-ers did do quite a bit of damage in the Falklands to frigate/destroyer sized targets. Though shorter range than the SDB, it does reduce tot (time to target) and leverages on the F-35's stealth to get closer to target.
.

GBu-54 is much much bigger than the SDB bombs the F-35 can only carry 2 of them internally ,

That's what I thought until I read the training DEIS for the F-35A on page 1-5 downloadable in the link below.

http://www.f-35atrainingeis.com/EisDocument.html

"Optional internal loads include eight 500-pound GBU-38 JDAM-guided bombs" - I'm thinking 2 bombs per amraam slot and it shouldn't be much diff between a 38 and a 54. No aams in this config but there is always the option of an escort. Might not fit a B bay but certainly a C bay shouldn't be smaller than an A.

weasel1962 wrote:

.GBu-54 is much much bigger than the SDB bombs the F-35 can only carry 2 of them internally ,

That's what I thought until I read the training DEIS for the F-35A on page 1-5 downloadable in the link below.

http://www.f-35atrainingeis.com/EisDocument.html

"Optional internal loads include eight 500-pound GBU-38 JDAM-guided bombs" - I'm thinking 2 bombs per amraam slot and it shouldn't be much diff between a 38 and a 54. No aams in this config but there is always the option of an escort. Might not fit a B bay but certainly a C bay shouldn't be smaller than an A.[/quote]
well did read the same somewhere but i believe they just make mistake mixing between gbu-39 sdb and gbu-38, and i really think the gbu-53/B with it's fire and forget tri-mode seeker would be a better weapon than the gbu-54 , it would be very cool if they decide to produce the SMACM ( same as sdb ii but have engine so it is much faster and can have long range even when drop at low altitude

GBU-53s' warhead size is an issue (smaller than the 62lb sea skua warhead that the Brits use mainly on FAC-sized targets?). That's imho why the JSOW C-1 is still relevant (relatively cheap, long-range + bigger warhead). Neither can compete on cost with LJDAMs which I continue to believe will be used by the F-35. By F-35C IOC, maybe add LJDAM-ER to the list if they can get the 40k lasers to go that far.

moon_light wrote:

i mean when they see the enemy ships they will also be seen and can be shoot down , and as i said before ship with stealth feature can have rcs lower than normal ship by 100 times (just like what they did to aircraft Eg : B-1b and F-18E/F ) and for real stealth stealth ship their RCS can be reduce by 1000 times (like how they did to F-22 compared to normal aircrafts Wink

) , the RCS reduced by 10 times , the detection range will reduce by half
so if the E-2 or SH-60 can detected normal destroyer from 600 km , for ship with stealth feature like Arleigh Burke the range will be 150 km well inside the SAM range
Razz

Got any sources for that level of reduction for the Arleigh Burke. There are way too many right angles, antennae, etc.... for that to be the case. The ships that have LO properties look like this-

http://www.resonancepub.com/images/stealth_ship.gif

not like this-

http://www.military-today.com/navy/arle ... _class.jpg

No SAM is going to exceed the range of the E-2D's detection ranges. The SH-60 can just dip below the radar horizon if need be.

wrightwing wrote:

moon_light wrote:

:? i mean when they see the enemy ships they will also be seen and can be shoot down , and as i said before ship with stealth feature can have rcs lower than normal ship by 100 times (just like what they did to aircraft Eg : B-1b and F-18E/F ) and for real stealth stealth ship their RCS can be reduce by 1000 times (like how they did to F-22 compared to normal aircrafts :wink: ) , the RCS reduced by 10 times , the detection range will reduce by half
so if the E-2 or SH-60 can detected normal destroyer from 600 km , for ship with stealth feature like Arleigh Burke the range will be 150 km well inside the SAM range
:P

Got any sources for that level of reduction for the Arleigh Burke. There are way too many right angles, antennae, etc.... for that to be the case. The ships that have LO properties look like this-

http://www.resonancepub.com/images/stealth_ship.gif

not like this-

http://www.military-today.com/navy/arle ... _class.jpg

No SAM is going to exceed the range of the E-2D's detection ranges. The SH-60 can just dip below the radar horizon if need be.

i don't say Arleigh Burke is VLO :? i mean it will have lower RCS than normal ship (given that it have stealth technology in it ) look at the F-18 E/F and the F-15 :roll: do you see many different :?: no (i mean they both look like normal aircraft not like F-35 or F-117) , stealth is not only shaping but also material and coating ,and some paint coating claim > 90 % RCS reduction just by the coating alone and they can be paint on any ship very easy
Example :

Quote:

Intermat has achieved to develop RCS reduction coatings where RCS can be reduced by 97%

http://www.intermatstealth.com/index.ph ... s-coatings
so I think the Arleigh Burke with coating like that and few angle changing can have it's RCS reduced alot
and as i mention before if the ship is stationary it would be impossible for the E-2 to find it by radar even if it has a huge RCS unless you use SAR mode that have very limited range ( because the sea will reflect radar wave as well) :wink: , what if the ship detected the E-2 and it stop moving :wink:
the SH-60 can dip below the radar horizon but right when it see the ship , the ship will see it as well , and i believe that it much easier to shoot down SH-60 than shoot down F-35 :twisted:

moon_light wrote:

i don't say Arleigh Burke is VLO :? i mean it will have lower RCS than normal ship (given that it have stealth technology in it ) look at the F-18 E/F and the F-15 :roll: do you see many different :?: no (i mean they both look like normal aircraft not like F-35 or F-117) , stealth is not only shaping but also material and coating ,and some paint coating claim > 90 % RCS reduction just by the coating alone and they can be paint on any ship very easy
Example :

That's where you're absolutely incorrect. RAM/paint are not 90% of the stealth solution(perhaps 5-10% at best). The Arleigh Burke has a lot of right angles, gun turrets, antennas, that aren't remotely stealthy. Shaping is the most important single aspect of RCS reduction.

Quote:

and as i mention before if the ship is stationary it would be impossible for the E-2 to find it by radar even if it has a huge RCS unless you use SAR mode that have very limited range ( because the sea will reflect radar wave as well) :wink: , what if the ship detected the E-2 and it stop moving :wink:

The only time a fleet would be stationary, would be in port.

Quote:

the SH-60 can dip below the radar horizon but right when it see the ship , the ship will see it as well , and i believe that it much easier to shoot down SH-60 than shoot down F-35 :twisted:

The Ship's RCS is much higher than the SH-60's. They may have the same radar line of sight, but that doesn't mean mutual detection.

wrightwing wrote:

That's where you're absolutely incorrect. RAM/paint are not 90% of the stealth solution(perhaps 5-10% at best). The Arleigh Burke has a lot of right angles, gun turrets, antennas, that aren't remotely stealthy. Shaping is the most important single aspect of RCS reduction.

i think you get me wrong :P i did not say RAM is more important than shaping , what i say is some RAM can reduce the RCS of the object cover with it by more than 90 % (also mean the detection will be reduce by half ) and very easy to apply to any ship (sure much easier than what they did to F-16 and F-15 by iron ball paint because the RAM apply to ship doesnot necessary need to be light or heat resistance )
Intermat has achieved to develop RCS reduction coatings where RCS can be reduced by 97%
http://www.intermatstealth.com/index.ph ... s-coatings
and the RAM can reduce the RCS of object by more than 90 % does not mean it is more important than shaping
Eg : F-22 have RCS equal 0.0001 m2
F-15 have RCS equal 10 m2
in this example applying the RAM can reduce the RCS of F-15 by 90 % ( to 1 m2) but it's RCS still 10000 times bigger than the F-22 due to the F-22 shaping and material :P

Quote:

The only time a fleet would be stationary, would be in port.

what if they want to attack some facility on the ground surface:o ,the fleet may stay at well :roll: 400- 500 km from the shore to fire the tomahawk , no need to move closer or farther from the shore at that time so the ship may be stationary

Quote:

The Ship's RCS is much higher than the SH-60's. They may have the same radar line of sight, but that doesn't mean mutual detection

i think you are really underestimate the power of radar on ship ,Eg : SPY-1 radar can detected F-35 from 150 km ( some sources i have read) :wink: so at what range you think they will detected the SH-60 , even if the SH-60 have RCS of just 1 m2 that still 1000 times bigger than the F-35 , which mean the enemy can detected the SH-60 at range 8 times longer than where they can see the F-35 , and dont forget the ship's ECM which is many times better ( at less because of the power and size )

P/s : the only possible way that i think the F-35 or any fighters can destroy a modern ship is indirectly by torpedo mines , Eg : Mark 60 CAPTOR, drop it where the ship may pass and when the ship passes close by, the passive sonar of the mines detects it and releases the torpedo, which tracks the sound until it contacts the the keel of a surface ship and explodes , because torpedo travel underwater so the ship won't be able to intercept them by SAM , CIWS or laser (in future ), low RCS or IR signature management will have no effect as well :D , not to mention that a torpedo is more likely to sink the ship rather than just damage it
F-35 seem to be able to carry 6 Mark 60 :P ( weight the same as MK-84 , much shorter , drop like dumb bomb )

moon_light wrote:

i think you get me wrong :P i did not say RAM is more important than shaping , what i say is some RAM can reduce the RCS of the object cover with it by more than 90 % (also mean the detection will be reduce by half ) and very easy to apply to any ship (sure much easier than what they did to F-16 and F-15 by iron ball paint because the RAM apply to ship doesnot necessary need to be light or heat resistance )
Intermat has achieved to develop RCS reduction coatings where RCS can be reduced by 97%
http://www.intermatstealth.com/index.ph ... s-coatings
and the RAM can reduce the RCS of object by more than 90 % does not mean it is more important than shaping
Eg : F-22 have RCS equal 0.0001 m2
F-15 have RCS equal 10 m2
in this example applying the RAM can reduce the RCS of F-15 by 90 % ( to 1 m2) but it's RCS still 10000 times bigger than the F-22 due to the F-22 shaping and material :P

You'll note that on the aircraft, that have had RAM applied for RCS reduction, they still don't have all of the extra antennas, gun turrets, etc...
You can certainly reduce a ship's RCS, but not to the degree that you can with an aircraft. Just because it's bigger, isn't an advantage. You're not going to be able to get the same level of reduction, that an aircraft could. You're also pretty optimistic about the ability to detect emissions passively. Even if certain sensors are LPI, there are plenty of emissions on a ship, which aren't.

Quote:

what if they want to attack some facility on the ground surface:o ,the fleet may stay at well :roll: 400- 500 km from the shore to fire the tomahawk , no need to move closer or farther from the shore at that time so the ship may be stationary

The fleet would still be underway, and I doubt that an F-35 would be attacking any ship carrying Tomahawks.

Quote:

i think you are really underestimate the power of radar on ship ,Eg : SPY-1 radar can detected F-35 from 150 km ( some sources i have read) :wink:

That's a very optimistic claim, to say the least.

Quote:

so at what range you think they will detected the SH-60 , even if the SH-60 have RCS of just 1 m2 that still 1000 times bigger than the F-35 , which mean the enemy can detected the SH-60 at range 8 times longer than where they can see the F-35

You're operating from a flawed premise to start with. It's by no means a given, that an F-35 is going to be detected anywhere near 150km, which throws off the rest of the assertions.

Forum: F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

F-35 in anti ship mission