F35A Air to Air loadout?

imacca · by **imacca** » 08 Jul 2010, 15:36

Am interested in this as Australia is going to be using the F35A as its primary air superiority fighter in the future.

Seems to me that by the time we get them they will be able to carry 4 or maybe 6 AMRAAM internally.

Will they be qualified for assram / AIM9X internally? Assram can already lock on after launch, and we are buying AIM9X for the SuperHornets which is supposed to be able to lock on after launch at some point.

I believe that there are also underwing pylons under development for AIM9X/assram. Anyone know if these are actually under test as yet and, practically, how much carriage of assram or AIM9X will affect stealth? Wouldnt think that it would add a lot of drag?

Actually, does anyone have any opinions on which would be more/less stealthy? assram or AIM9x?

bjr1028 · by **bjr1028** » 08 Jul 2010, 15:48

MBDA is developing a trapeze launcher on the door station for ASRAAM. I will also work with AIM-9X block II or any other missile made for a sidewinder type missile.

imacca · by **imacca** » 08 Jul 2010, 16:13

So, with a trapeze type launcher the missile wont necesarily have to lock on after launch??

bjr1028 · by **bjr1028** » 08 Jul 2010, 23:25

No, but current western IRAAMs are designed to be rail launched rather than drop like AMRAAM.

apg77 · by **apg77** » 09 Jul 2010, 03:31

http://ericpalmer.wordpress.com/2010/04 ... apons-bay/

The above press release makes it more clear that they are working on 4 grand total internal for now for end of SDD.

apg77 · by **apg77** » 09 Jul 2010, 03:34

bjr1028 wrote:No, but current western IRAAMs are designed to be rail launched rather than drop like AMRAAM.

The Trapeze system, for evaluation in the F-35?s system development and demonstration (SDD) phase, will provide the ability to utilize rail-launched missiles carried on a trapeze that swings clear of the F-35?s weapon bay.

AIM-9X and AIM-132 will be ok.

SpudmanWP · by **SpudmanWP** » 09 Jul 2010, 04:03

apg77 wrote:http://ericpalmer.wordpress.com/2010/04/13/f-35-program-working-on-4-air-to-air-missiles-in-the-weapons-bay/

The above press release makes it more clear that they are working on 4 grand total internal for now for end of SDD.

True, the current configuration for SDD (Block 3) is 4 internal AAMs. Block 5 is where the move to 6 internal AAMs is planned. Block 5 is due for IOC in the 2017 timeframe.

geogen · by **geogen** » 09 Jul 2010, 06:33

apg77 wrote:Block 5 is due for IOC in the 2017 timeframe.

Unfortunately, that date's capability does not apply to RAAF though. Perhaps add a couple years for partner nations and FMS?

SpudmanWP · by **SpudmanWP** » 09 Jul 2010, 06:49

Geo, LM will not likely be building diferent Blks as the same time, especially for partner nations.

When Blk5 starts to roll off the line, they will not likely go back to Blk4 or 3 in follow-on jets.

beepa · by **beepa** » 09 Jul 2010, 07:18

SpudmanWP wrote:
apg77 wrote:http://ericpalmer.wordpress.com/2010/04/13/f-35-program-working-on-4-air-to-air-missiles-in-the-weapons-bay/

The above press release makes it more clear that they are working on 4 grand total internal for now for end of SDD.

True, the current configuration for SDD (Block 3) is 4 internal AAMs. Block 5 is where the move to 6 internal AAMs is planned. Block 5 is due for IOC in the 2017 timeframe.

Apart from "rushing them out the door" why wouldn't they test/evaluate the full capacity of the airframe from the start?. i.e. why not start with 6 AAMs and if the customer requires only 4 AAMs then just don't load one? Or does the move to 6 hinder the carriage of ATG weapons?

SpudmanWP · by **SpudmanWP** » 09 Jul 2010, 07:23

Primary reason is that 4 internal AAMs was the requirement set forth in the RFP.

Secondly, because there is only so much time and money available for SDD. 4 Internal AAMs can be accomplished using the minimum of hardware.

geogen · by **geogen** » 09 Jul 2010, 07:25

I concur, Spud. I was just saying that RAAF would likely Not be seeing Blk 5 6x-AMRAAM carrying IOC in 2017 as was suggested. More likely 2019(?) for them and other partners in a best-case, (unlike USAF which might define IOC differently and be on a different IOC timeframe).

SpudmanWP · by **SpudmanWP** » 09 Jul 2010, 07:43

True, although all partners will be getting Blk 5 at about the same time, how long it takes them to get them IOC is unknown.

Do you really think it will take the RAAF 2 years from receipt to IOC especially since this will not be their first batch of F-35s?

munny · by **munny** » 09 Jul 2010, 08:03

Is there a document somewhere which shows the plan for 6 missiles "INTERNALLY" at block 5? I've seen a diagram showing additions at various block levels but it just says 6 x AIM-120, not 6 x AIM120 Internally.

Scorpion82 · by **Scorpion82** » 09 Jul 2010, 08:30

munny wrote:Is there a document somewhere which shows the plan for 6 missiles "INTERNALLY" at block 5? I've seen a diagram showing additions at various block levels but it just says 6 x AIM-120, not 6 x AIM120 Internally.

LM has conducted feasibility studies for the internal carriage of 6 AMRAAMs. There are pictures floating around of a 3-D graphic from that studies. You may checkout the program docs thread and if you use the search function you'll likely find something quick. This matter has been discussed a couple of times.