F-35A/C with 6 GBU-31's

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 10 Jun 2018, 01:35

Search for 'beast mode' for some answers - here is onesuch GREAT EXPLANATION from 'usnvo':

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=53171&p=384781&hilit=beast+mode#p384781

viewtopic.php?f=58&t=29374&p=393697&hilit=beast+mode#p393697

With a viddy: viewtopic.php?f=58&t=29374&p=393671&hilit=beast+mode#p393671

download/file.php?id=25453

The LAST graphic says OVER 18,000 lbs: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bQ6mjoe4hyU/U ... a+2012.bmp

elvis1 · by **elvis1** » 10 Jun 2018, 03:11

I had actually done the search. I have been reading here long enough to know that Spaz would call me on it if I didn't :wink:

. I also thought that the explanation from USNVO is the best that I had found.

I am guessing the difference between the 22,000 figure and the 18,000 figure is the difference between the CV/CTOL and the STOVL. The 1,000 lb difference on points 2, 4, 8 and 10 is the difference between 22,000 and 18,000. It would really be cool to see 5,000 lb GBU-28's instead of the fuel tanks--that would be a picture.

Will it actually be able to take off with this much weight? Taking the Max take-off weight (70k) minus the max fuel wt (18.5k) minus the empty weight (29k), I still come up with just over 22,000 lb for the "A". The "B" and "C" would have to sacrifice fuel to carry 18,000 and 22,000 lb--wondering if they can make up for this by just re-fueling right after take-off?? Can the the "C" "fill up" to over 70,000 lbs after take off? Either way, one could still take off with reduced fuel load and get a cool picture I am guessing.

Some of my confusion is around the desire to document much smaller loads than these with pictures / credible sources. . . . or being impressed with something that is much less impressive than what I believe will show up eventually on this . . . "beast".

I was really concerned about the investment in the F-35 before reading on this site--now I think it is the coolest thing ever.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 10 Jun 2018, 04:25

Thanks for searching. Having been a pilot flying an aircraft of yore with a Maximum Take Off weight of 24,500 lbs I can sincerely state that ONLY ONCE did I personally approach that figure [you will have read my TA4G tanker story I guess]. Sure I was not in any war where this kind of WEAPON max load may have been carried in suitable circumstances ashore and even more suitable circumstances off our one and only steam catapult. BTW in nil wind on a tropical day (South China Sea) the A4G could be catapulted with longitudinal stress up to 9G. To my knowledge that was never asked of anyone but may have been tested by CHLOE (you can search on that). In my long winded way I'm suggesting that getting hung up on any MAXIMUM figure can be misleading. Over the life of the F-35 variants loads will vary while you and I will never know much more than that unless told with video/photo what the situation may be in the internal carriage. BELIEVE IT OR NOT. Aircraft will be kitted out with weapons required for the mission or alternate if there is a change mid-air. FUEL can always be guzzled from appropriate tankers when available. The numbers we see are the maximum allowed for the weapon stations, how weapon weight load adds up on these is a rubics cube of fantasmagorical complexity. I want the NATOPS manual. :mrgreen:

Corsair1963 · by **Corsair1963** » 10 Jun 2018, 22:31

wrightwing wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:Does anybody have a source with a picture of a F-35A or C with six GBU-31's or another type 2,000 lbs class weapon??? (i.e. two internally and four externally)

Any help would be much appreciated.....

Out of curiosity, do you doubt the official pics. There aren't going to be any pics with the weapons bay doors open, and external weapons.

No, I don't doubt it for a second. As six JDAM's (2,000 lbs) plus the AMRAAMs and Sidewinders. Would be well within the Gross Weight even with a full internal fuel load. Yet, have come across some people that still doubt the F-35A/C could carry such a load????

wrightwing · by **wrightwing** » 11 Jun 2018, 20:58

Corsair1963 wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:Does anybody have a source with a picture of a F-35A or C with six GBU-31's or another type 2,000 lbs class weapon??? (i.e. two internally and four externally)

Any help would be much appreciated.....

Out of curiosity, do you doubt the official pics. There aren't going to be any pics with the weapons bay doors open, and external weapons.

No, I don't doubt it for a second. As six JDAM's (2,000 lbs) plus the AMRAAMs and Sidewinders. Would be well within the Gross Weight even with a full internal fuel load. Yet, have come across some people that still doubt the F-35A/C could carry such a load????

It can carry an even bigger load. It could carry 2 GBU-31, 2 GBU-28, 2 AMRAAM, 2 AIM-9X, and if using TER ejectors 6 750lb bombs, plus a gun pod.

Corsair1963 · by **Corsair1963** » 11 Jun 2018, 22:33

Honestly, the F-35's Payload vs Range compared to 4th Generation Types is truly impressive.....

weasel1962 · by **weasel1962** » 15 Jun 2018, 03:06

elvis1 wrote:Will it actually be able to take off with this much weight? Taking the Max take-off weight (70k) minus the max fuel wt (18.5k) minus the empty weight (29k), I still come up with just over 22,000 lb for the "A". The "B" and "C" would have to sacrifice fuel to carry 18,000 and 22,000 lb--wondering if they can make up for this by just re-fueling right after take-off?? Can the the "C" "fill up" to over 70,000 lbs after take off? Either way, one could still take off with reduced fuel load and get a cool picture I am guessing.

The max take off weight is roughly 1.5-1.7x afterburner thrust. 70+k is what current F-35A/Cs can achieve.

The max take off weight is lower for the B in STO mode. If conventional take off, the F-35 should be able to max its 66k payload.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 20 Jun 2018, 14:59

AY CARAMBA! This one has been in me face for a donkey age: https://www.f35.com/in-depth/detail/pre ... -at-a-time

"An F-35A flies the first external GBU-31, 2,000 pound Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) in a loads/flutter test flight at Edwards AFB, California." https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a6 ... __main.jpg (25Kb Low quality)

Corsair1963 · by **Corsair1963** » 28 Jun 2018, 02:40

Yes, per Billie Flynn.........

https://twitter.com/billieflynn/status/ ... 3905393664

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 28 Jun 2018, 02:58

Wow - Good Find - WE HAVE A WINNA - COME ON DOWN! https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DalwTOXWsAASVnl.jpg

https://twitter.com/billieflynn/status/ ... 3905393664

Q: "Is the F-35C above also carrying two GBU-31's (2,000 lbs) and two AIM-120 (AMRAAMs) internally???

A: Yep. Loaded for Bear! [LM TEST PILOT BILLIE FLYNN]

Q: Is it true the F-35A/C could still exceed Mach 1 with 6-GBU-31's???" [27 Jun 2018] [stay tooooned]

wrightwing · by **wrightwing** » 28 Jun 2018, 03:09

The >M1.1 with 6 GBU-31, 2 AIM-120, 2 AIM-9, has already been answered. That was the F-35C, too. The A model will be faster.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 28 Jun 2018, 03:49

Yeah but - no but - Yeah BuTT - I want Billie The Flynn to answer - then that clears up another known known unknown.

Corsair1963 · by **Corsair1963** » 28 Jun 2018, 04:10

spazsinbad wrote:Yeah but - no but - Yeah BuTT - I want Billie The Flynn to answer - then that clears up another known known unknown.

EXACTLY

Corsair1963 · by **Corsair1963** » 28 Jun 2018, 04:50

lrrpf52 wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:Honestly, the F-35's Payload vs Range compared to 4th Generation Types is truly impressive.....

The F-35's...

..RCS is smaller than an F-117A's and similar or smaller than an F-22A's.

..Internal fuel compared to 4th Gen Internal + External Fuel is truly impressive, especially since it has lower drag index.

..Energy-Maneuverability is truly impressive compared to 4th Gen carrying lesser loads even.

..Integrated avionics suite and central processing fusion smokes 4th Gen +, even the latest, most advanced F-16V and Blk III Super Hornets.

..Penetration capability and survivability in the most modern Integrated Air Defense Systems smokes 4th Gen types by a wide margin.

..Ability to perform AWACS, reconnaissance, Electronic Warfare, targeting and terminal guidance for over the horizon surface platforms, to include US Navy SM-6 is unparalleled with any 4th Gen type.

..F135 engine is a modern marvel that matches F100 and F110 Improved Performance Engines' max thrust in Afterburner, only the F135 does that in mil power, then can crank it up to 43,000lb of thrust in reheat.

..Digital Flight Control System is integrated with the FADEC for the engine, as well as other synthetic, programmable flight systems management, and its control surface actuators are independent of any central hydraulic system.

Pick any parameter or metric from any 4th Gen fighter or multirole combat aircraft, and the F-35 outclasses it in all of its strengths, while adding a whole slew of additional capabilities that are normally only present on multiple, single-mission aircraft.

By the numbers the F-35 crushes all comers..........truly impressive!