Forum: F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

More than likely.. that and it's reduction to YouTube quality degraded it further.

F-16.net Sponsor

Scorpion82 wrote:

That robotic NG speakers voice sounds horrible. Nice video however, seems that the EODAS has repeatedly lost the missile, but it was continuously tracked by the radar most of the time and EODAS re-acquired it.

"Northrop Grumman's DAS and APG-81 autonomously detected, tracked and targeted multiple, simultaneous ballistic rockets. The DAS autonomously detected all five rockets, launched in rapid succession, and tracked them from initial launch well past the second stage burnout."

You were saying?

Face it, DAS works and sow ill the F-35.

Watch the initial EODAS rocket track (you know, that 800+ mile one) and you can get a better idea of the symbols involved.

Rockets:Stages

0:26 - EODAS tracks R1:1st stage ignition and liftoff
0:40 - EODAS looses track at R1:1st stage burnout.
0:43 - RADAR picks up R1:2nd stage
0:44 - EODAS picks up R1:2nd stage
1:46 - EODAS picks up R2:1st stage liftoff
1:49 - RADAR picks up R2:1st stage
1:51 - RADAR looses track of R1:2nd stage
1:54 - EODAS is tracking R2:1st stage as it falls away before 2nd stage ignition since it's still hot. It properly IDs it as debris.
2:06 - EODAS is predicting R1's path after it looses track. This is "Coasting" mode. Notice that EODAS tracked R1 for 15 seconds longer than the RADAR.
2:06 - EODAS picks up R2:2nd stage
2:13 - R1 exits the FOV
2:46 - EODAS halts R2 track while RADAR continues
2:56 - EODAS changes track mode for R2:1st stage from active to "Coasting"
3:06 - EODAS picks up R3:1st stage liftoff
3:13 - RADAR picks up R3 while EODAS is tracking the burned out 1st stage
3:21 - EODAS picks up R3:2nd stage

End of video

A very interesting vid no doubt. And looks like the Catbird goes supersonic around 1:10 too, or something, lol.

Important to note though, that this was Not a 'Baseline F-35' capability, as it's reportedly an enhanced and modified capability demonstration only. Similar perhaps to how an apparently modified Lantirn FLIR cued by LM's IRST apertures could track ballistic missiles at over 100nm distance, during the B747 ABL tests.

No doubt a good AESA could further add to that future 'EO' capability of ballistic missile tracking, on enhanced aircraft in the future.

But with specific regards to the F-35, let's just focus on seeing block III to maturity and finally achieving IOC. They're are a few Air Forces out there needing recapitalization, as in yesterday -- with capability gaps widening and force structures hollowing, annually, during the wait.

You missed the part on that said "only minor modifications to the baseline F-35 JSF radar and DAS software". Notice that it did not take a change in hardware? Since they demonstrated this on BAC1-11 which only has Blk2 hardware, I think it's quite an achievement.

Considering that they are currently in Blk4 development, this is an entirely appropriate demonstration.

btw, I just listened to the vid and the 1st rocket was a Terrier-Oriale (not depicted in the chart).

http://sites.wff.nasa.gov/code810/vehic ... Oriole.pdf

I'd love to see an EODAS image of a Raptor. Mr. Green

If it can detect rockets at ranges like that, and human beings at 50 miles or more, what about aircraft? Even if the opposing craft has IR VLO techniques applied, it seems practically anything with show up on this sensor. In a stealth-on-stealth engagement, this would detect an enemy exponentially more reliably and safely than radar.

Ah, the possibilities...

firstimpulse wrote:

I'd love to see an EODAS image of a Raptor. Mr. Green

If it can detect rockets at ranges like that, and human beings at 50 miles or more, what about aircraft? Even if the opposing craft has IR VLO techniques applied, it seems practically anything with show up on this sensor. In a stealth-on-stealth engagement, this would detect an enemy exponentially more reliably and safely than radar.

Ah, the possibilities...

That footage got left on the cutting or to be burned with the rest of the classified stuff..

wrightwing wrote:

neurotech wrote:

I found the video looking for the other one, and didn't research the CATBird maximum altitude before posting a response. If absolute image quality was required, they could have used a ER-2 (U-2 variant) and get even clearer images.

I think this was more PR from Northrop-Grumman than practical imaging and tracking for NASA/SpaceX

Did you factor in that the image quality was perhaps degraded for purposes of wide dissemination, much like imagery from satellites is downgraded before being shown to those without the proper clearance.

Yes, I did factor that in. NASA have tracked rocket launches before the F-35 sensor package was available in CATBird. The WB-57 can fly at 60,000 ft and the ER-2 can go to 70,000 ft. The WB-57 has better sensors, and a higher altitude and is more capable than at tracking planned/known rocket launches than the CATBird. I'd also factor the ER-2 has more capability than the F-35 for high resolution imaging.

NASA has access to a significant amount of classified information and resources such as satellites. SpaceX, under the Space Act agreement would have access to US military resources like spy satellites and high resolution imaging, if operationally required.

The purpose of the demo was not to demonstrate tracking from the NASA side of the equation, but to show what is possible from the "Always On, Always Looking Everywhere" EODAS.

Imagine the difference this would have made just in the SCUD hunting role of GW1.

neurotech wrote:

wrightwing wrote:

neurotech wrote:

I found the video looking for the other one, and didn't research the CATBird maximum altitude before posting a response. If absolute image quality was required, they could have used a ER-2 (U-2 variant) and get even clearer images.

I think this was more PR from Northrop-Grumman than practical imaging and tracking for NASA/SpaceX

Did you factor in that the image quality was perhaps degraded for purposes of wide dissemination, much like imagery from satellites is downgraded before being shown to those without the proper clearance.

Yes, I did factor that in. NASA have tracked rocket launches before the F-35 sensor package was available in CATBird. The WB-57 can fly at 60,000 ft and the ER-2 can go to 70,000 ft. The WB-57 has better sensors, and a higher altitude and is more capable than at tracking planned/known rocket launches than the CATBird. I'd also factor the ER-2 has more capability than the F-35 for high resolution imaging.

NASA has access to a significant amount of classified information and resources such as satellites. SpaceX, under the Space Act agreement would have access to US military resources like spy satellites and high resolution imaging, if operationally required.

I wasn't suggesting that NASA didn't have access to better imagery. I was suggesting that the imagery that WE have access to, was very likely degraded, due to classification issues.

SpudmanWP wrote:

The purpose of the demo was not to demonstrate tracking from the NASA side of the equation, but to show what is possible from the "Always On, Always Looking Everywhere" EODAS.

Exactly, that was my whole point. It was for demonstrating the EODAS system.

SpudmanWP wrote:

Imagine the difference this would have made just in the SCUD hunting role of GW1.

Aircraft like the F-15E had high resolution FLIR pods, just not distributed aperture part.
For all the criticism of the F-35, the EODAS integration is what will make it a premier 5th gen strike fighter.

The problem with only using FLIR (which the F-35 has, albiet a superior one thanthe F-15E in GW1) is that it has to be looking at the missile to detect & track it. EODAS does not have this problem.

The F-15 also had a problem locating (even if it could detect) the missile's launch point. A multi-ship F-35 flight, or for that matter any two F-35s that can see the launch, will automatically geo-locate the source very quickly.

With the right software the F-35 should also be able to determine the launch trajectory and likely impact points.

this is one of the reasons why wing pairs are best suited to be as far apart as practical to cover each other, best range resolution with the EODAS.

Quote:

With the right software the F-35 should also be able to determine the launch trajectory and likely impact points.

Isn't a better scenario for the aircraft systems to relay what it knows about the launch and track to ground networks that can assimilate that with other information and have access to more far more computing power to perform the final targeting estimates?
That way you don't need to make room for more bells and whistles on an already stressed program.
Even if you did have that feature on the aircraft chewing up cpu cycles to determine nearly exact impact point, the pilot really can't do anything with the computed results other than to relay them.

They can, and will, transmit that data to ground terminals. The issue is that with lag in the signals, then inaccuracies creep in.

The F-35s are basically flying around with supercomputers and have plenty of spare CPU cycles to accurately compute this data. Besides, the F-35 would not need to compute final impact points, just basic trajectory in order to get emergency services up and running. Radars in the target area would determine final impact point because the missile may not be in it's final trajectory when the F-35 sees it.

On the integration issue, this is not being put forward as a Blk3 IOC feature, but part of a follow-on upgrade. Those Blk upgrades have not been finalized in either capabilities or timelines beyond a few PPT slides.

Forum: F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

AN/AAQ-37 DAS detects multiple rocket launches VIDEO