Forum: F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

If we do not do PGS or Hypersonic A2 weapons on the F35 it will be obsolete before 40yrs out IMO. What if the F35 is in the air superiority role against a J20 or Chinese Pak FA? its got no kinematic chance and its stealth will be marginally better - but if its got a mach 6 missile ....

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/hist ... ssile.html

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php ... p;t=173401

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnszlJC8iGs

F-16.net Sponsor

twistedneck wrote:

If we do not do PGS or Hypersonic A2 weapons on the F35 it will be obsolete before 40yrs out IMO. What if the F35 is in the air superiority role against a J20 or Chinese Pak FA? its got no kinematic chance and its stealth will be marginally better - but if its got a mach 6 missile ....

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/hist ... ssile.html

http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php ... p;t=173401

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnszlJC8iGs

Your sources! Oh God... my sides. LMAO

40 years from now, missiles will have improved to such an extent that "kinematic advantage" will be irrelevant.

count_to_10 wrote:

So, how long until there is a kit to attach the SDB seeker to other standard bombs?

Like SPICE 1000 & 2000 kits?

I thought that we talked that hypersonics into the ground back here:

http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... p;start=15

.

archeman wrote:

I thought that we talked that hypersonics into the ground back here:

http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... p;start=15

.

We did, but these kids keep bringing it back up. As evidenced by the recent Wave-Rider failures, the younger generation seems to have forgotten that it's been tried already. Their grandparents hit the wall of what's thermodynamically practical decades ago.

Face it children, you're not going to go any faster.

1st503rdsgt wrote:

archeman wrote:

I thought that we talked that hypersonics into the ground back here:

http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... p;start=15

.

We did, but these kids keep bringing it back up. As evidenced by the recent Wave-Rider failures, the younger generation seems to have forgotten that it's been tried already. Their grandparents hit the wall of what's thermodynamically practical decades ago.

Face it children, you're not going to go any faster.

Thank god (if you believe in one) your resonse is a fallacy. Its thinking like this that brings down even the best people and their ideas.

Also thank god for people like Regina Dugan, I'm sure you know it all's must have seen her TED talk about the mach 20 'failures' and how much data we got from those.. pragmatism is one thing but what you are vomiting up us classic forum know it all drivel, its also called displaced anger. Why don't you go get road rage and flip off a driver who cut you off.. at least then its not going to rub off on other well meaning people. You are almost as bad as those 'ever heard of the search button' noobs.. a close second to the 'internet spelling police'..

Just becuase you cant think it possible today does not mean it will fail tomorrow or when ever the next black swan comes along.

I see some folks are not giving up on it.

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-d ... ister.html

twistedneck wrote:

1st503rdsgt wrote:

archeman wrote:

I thought that we talked that hypersonics into the ground back here:

http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... p;start=15

.

We did, but these kids keep bringing it back up. As evidenced by the recent Wave-Rider failures, the younger generation seems to have forgotten that it's been tried already. Their grandparents hit the wall of what's thermodynamically practical decades ago.

Face it children, you're not going to go any faster.

Thank god (if you believe in one) your resonse is a fallacy. Its thinking like this that brings down even the best people and their ideas.

Also thank god for people like Regina Dugan, I'm sure you know it all's must have seen her TED talk about the mach 20 'failures' and how much data we got from those.. pragmatism is one thing but what you are vomiting up us classic forum know it all drivel, its also called displaced anger. Why don't you go get road rage and flip off a driver who cut you off.. at least then its not going to rub off on other well meaning people. You are almost as bad as those 'ever heard of the search button' noobs.. a close second to the 'internet spelling police'..

Just becuase you cant think it possible today does not mean it will fail tomorrow or when ever the next black swan comes along.

I see some folks are not giving up on it.

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-d ... ister.html

Tsk, tsk, aaaaawe... so butthurt. Me thinks I'm not the one suffering from some kind of "rage." Again, nice try with the sources, but of course the Russians are always talking about what they're *going* to do. That top picture (don't know why they bothered with the other two) strikes my untrained eye as implausible where hypersonics are concerned, but I'll let someone with the right qualifications make a judgment on that (you out there johnwill?). Sorry to burst your bubble, but hypersonic weapons would be limited to those platforms large enough to carry the big-a$$ rocket needed to boost the vehicle to speed; and that's assuming someone figures out how to end a test with something other that tiny fragments on the ocean floor.

twistedneck wrote:

1st503rdsgt wrote:

archeman wrote:

I thought that we talked that hypersonics into the ground back here:

http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... p;start=15

.

We did, but these kids keep bringing it back up. As evidenced by the recent Wave-Rider failures, the younger generation seems to have forgotten that it's been tried already. Their grandparents hit the wall of what's thermodynamically practical decades ago.

Face it children, you're not going to go any faster.

Thank god (if you believe in one) your resonse is a fallacy. Its thinking like this that brings down even the best people and their ideas.

Also thank god for people like Regina Dugan, I'm sure you know it all's must have seen her TED talk about the mach 20 'failures' and how much data we got from those.. pragmatism is one thing but what you are vomiting up us classic forum know it all drivel, its also called displaced anger. Why don't you go get road rage and flip off a driver who cut you off.. at least then its not going to rub off on other well meaning people. You are almost as bad as those 'ever heard of the search button' noobs.. a close second to the 'internet spelling police'..

Just becuase you cant think it possible today does not mean it will fail tomorrow or when ever the next black swan comes along.

I see some folks are not giving up on it.

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-d ... ister.html

It's not impossible, per se, but scramjets are simply not mature enough for weaponization. If we can make the underlying technology work, hypersonics might be a possibility, but there's a lot standing in their way. Don't hold your breath, buddy.

Anyways, a lot of us here on F-16 fly or work on/around military aircraft, or have relevant engineering experience. It's not at all unreasonable to expect some maturity, resourcefulness, and (gasp!) proper spelling/grammar when you have a mature, serious community.

Your post was the first time I have seen the word 'noob' used on this forum, and I sincerely hope it will be the last.

Yea tneck the point raised most often on those threads you didn't want to read wasn't that it won't work, but that we are soooooooo far from operational weapons that getting serious about that technology in the context of the F-35 is very premature. I'll let my grandkids tackle that problem.
I am taking a measured risk that it won't affect me in my functional lifetime.

UNLESS some kook thinks that we can get their right now so we MUST suck other programs dry to feed this waking dream with underdeveloped test articles that seem to be only the greatest menace to Pacific sea life since the invention of the gillnet.

archeman wrote:

Yea tneck the point raised most often on those threads you didn't want to read wasn't that it won't work, but that we are soooooooo far from operational weapons that getting serious about that technology in the context of the F-35 is very premature. I'll let my grandkids tackle that problem.
I am taking a measured risk that it won't affect me in my functional lifetime.

UNLESS some kook thinks that we can get their right now so we MUST suck other programs dry to feed this waking dream with underdeveloped test articles that seem to be only the greatest menace to Pacific sea life since the invention of the gillnet.

Point taken Archeman and 1st503rdsgt. Back to topic what is our best option to outpace enemy tactics that are clearly heading for hypersonic?

We know the Russians can design some amazing aero shapes, possibly better than we can. With India helping build on par AESA sets, China kicking in the manufacturing capital and holding most of the precious metals, i can't help but worry that the next Yuri Gagarin or Sputnik moment is coming up to surprise us this time in the form of Hypersonic.

We were so far behind Sizzler in 2008 there was no way to test our defenses on one! We still can’t until 2014. Who knows by that time they could field a Mach 4 version w radar easily able to easily spot an F35. that’s what’s got me most worried.

Edit: LOL @ Butthurt 1st503rdsgt i do appreciate that Smile

but your opining was on the harsh side. Also more thanks to southernphantom for helping to clarify.

twistedneck wrote:

Point taken Archeman and 1st503rdsgt. Back to topic what is our best option to outpace enemy tactics that are clearly heading for hypersonic?

We know the Russians can design some amazing aero shapes, possibly better than we can. With India helping build on par AESA sets, China kicking in the manufacturing capital and holding most of the precious metals, i can't help but worry that the next Yuri Gagarin or Sputnik moment is coming up to surprise us this time in the form of Hypersonic.

We were so far behind Sizzler in 2008 there was no way to test our defenses on one! We still can’t until 2014. Who knows by that time they could field a Mach 4 version w radar easily able to easily spot an F35. that’s what’s got me most worried.

Edit: LOL @ Butthurt 1st503rdsgt i do appreciate that Smile

but your opining was on the harsh side. Also more thanks to southernphantom for helping to clarify.

You panic rather easily. The Russians use speed as a crutch to overcome their shortcomings in LO technology and other systems; and speed is a harsh mistress, forcing one to give up range and payload, or to make the missile larger (usually some combination of the three). For example, the air-launched version of the BrahMos missile (which seems to have everyone in a tizzy) is over twice the size of the JASSM, yet has a smaller warhead and a shorter range (and only about half the range of JASSM-ER).

Work smarter, not harder.

twistedneck wrote:

Point taken Archeman and 1st503rdsgt. Back to topic what is our best option to outpace enemy tactics that are clearly heading for hypersonic?

We know the Russians can design some amazing aero shapes, possibly better than we can. With India helping build on par AESA sets, China kicking in the manufacturing capital and holding most of the precious metals, i can't help but worry that the next Yuri Gagarin or Sputnik moment is coming up to surprise us this time in the form of Hypersonic.

We were so far behind Sizzler in 2008 there was no way to test our defenses on one! We still can’t until 2014. Who knows by that time they could field a Mach 4 version w radar easily able to easily spot an F35. that’s what’s got me most worried.

Edit: LOL @ Butthurt 1st503rdsgt i do appreciate that Smile

but your opining was on the harsh side. Also more thanks to southernphantom for helping to clarify.

Me too. If the Russians can afford to fire 3M-54E Sizzler missiles at our F-35 fighters, we ARE doomed...

On the other hand, maybe we could just fire our own Mach 4 capable missiles back at them? You know, like this one:

Conan wrote:

twistedneck wrote:

Point taken Archeman and 1st503rdsgt. Back to topic what is our best option to outpace enemy tactics that are clearly heading for hypersonic?

We know the Russians can design some amazing aero shapes, possibly better than we can. With India helping build on par AESA sets, China kicking in the manufacturing capital and holding most of the precious metals, i can't help but worry that the next Yuri Gagarin or Sputnik moment is coming up to surprise us this time in the form of Hypersonic.

We were so far behind Sizzler in 2008 there was no way to test our defenses on one! We still can’t until 2014. Who knows by that time they could field a Mach 4 version w radar easily able to easily spot an F35. that’s what’s got me most worried.

Edit: LOL @ Butthurt 1st503rdsgt i do appreciate that Smile

but your opining was on the harsh side. Also more thanks to southernphantom for helping to clarify.

Me too. If the Russians can afford to fire 3M-54E Sizzler missiles at our F-35 fighters, we ARE doomed...

On the other hand, maybe we could just fire our own Mach 4 capable missiles back at them? You know, like this one:

Using 3000 lb (that's the low end of the Klub family) anti-ship missiles for A2A. That would be a hoot to see someone try.

Forum: F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Weapons on the F-35s