Another Weapon for F-35? - HVPW

F-35 Armament, fuel tanks, internal and external hardpoints, loadouts, and other stores.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3281
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post07 Jul 2012, 12:26

Calculations of penetration are complicated. Work is force times distance, so at first order penetration depth would be proportional to energy, but at higher order you have to figure in the fact that the force on the penetrator increases with increasing velocity, which in turn changes as the penetrator decelerates in the target.
Einstein got it backward: one cannot prevent a war without preparing for it.

Uncertainty: Learn it, love it, live it.
Offline
User avatar

southernphantom

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1070
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 17:18
  • Location: Nuevo Mexico

Unread post07 Jul 2012, 13:03

geogen wrote:OK, I'll bite.

So what would the current 4-5k pound bomb, modified with this same multiplying busting effect have then? Equivalent to 10,000 lb worth of bunker busting?? Wow... I guess i'd just be more worried as a bad guy, with an F-15 dropping a 10,000lb equivalent buster, than an F-22/F-35 dropping a 5k equivalent... But that's just me. ;)

I hope Stephen enjoys a well deserved holiday in beautiful Brazil.


The F-15E is rated to carry 1-3 (can't remember which) GBU-15s, which have a launch weight of around 3640lbs. I could see some kind of heavier-class weapon being a possibility for the Beagles and SAC (err...oops...meant GSC :wink:

When in doubt, apparently, add a rocket...
Offline

velocityvector

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 171
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2009, 04:21
  • Location: Chicago

Unread post07 Jul 2012, 21:49

count_to_10 wrote:Calculations of penetration are complicated. Work is force times distance, so at first order penetration depth would be proportional to energy, but at higher order you have to figure in the fact that the force on the penetrator increases with increasing velocity, which in turn changes as the penetrator decelerates in the target.
Granted, it's a complicated event else r&d for this class of weapons would have ceased long ago. My goal was simply to illuminate basics in view that "potential energy" and the like were suggested. No need for diff eq's. But did you *have* to say "decelerates"? That hurts my ears. There is only acceleration :|
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3281
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post07 Jul 2012, 22:17

velocityvector wrote:
count_to_10 wrote:Calculations of penetration are complicated. Work is force times distance, so at first order penetration depth would be proportional to energy, but at higher order you have to figure in the fact that the force on the penetrator increases with increasing velocity, which in turn changes as the penetrator decelerates in the target.
Granted, it's a complicated event else r&d for this class of weapons would have ceased long ago. My goal was simply to illuminate basics in view that "potential energy" and the like were suggested. No need for diff eq's. But did you *have* to say "decelerates"? That hurts my ears. There is only acceleration :|

It's okay: I specified the reference frame. :wink:
Trust a Physics Ph.D: we really do use "decelerate" in scientific discussion.
Offline

velocityvector

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 171
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2009, 04:21
  • Location: Chicago

Unread post07 Jul 2012, 23:15

Trust a Physics Ph.D
Then you must've been awed by my simplification and the invocation of a rocket in the keester, speaking of which ... :) (I'm a CS guy turned patient liar-patent lawyer. It's been a while since I've built physical simulations, less-so for autonomous systems.)
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3281
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post07 Jul 2012, 23:55

velocityvector wrote:
Trust a Physics Ph.D
Then you must've been awed by my simplification and the invocation of a rocket in the keester, speaking of which ... :) (I'm a CS guy turned patient liar-patent lawyer. It's been a while since I've built physical simulations, less-so for autonomous systems.)

Go figure.
I'm actually a cosmologist, but have been running a lot of material simulations of small scale objects.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22853
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post17 Aug 2012, 09:25

Air Force bunker-busting bomb program moves forward with concept-development contract to Boeing
August 16, 2012 Posted by John Keller

http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articl ... -hvpw.html

"EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, Fla., 16 Aug. 2012. Air-launched weapons experts at the Boeing Co. Defense, Space & Security segment in St. Louis will help the U.S. Air Force design a rocket-propelled bomb for the F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter-bomber that can attack and destroy enemy bunkers, tunnel complexes, and other important deeply buried targets....

...Raytheon's Space and Airborne Systems segment in El Segundo, Calif., won a contract last January to design and demonstrate navigation and guidance technologies to keep future generations of deep-penetrating bombs and missiles on target in conditions where signals from Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite satellites are degraded or unavailable.

The contract calls for Raytheon to develop GPS-degraded munitions guidance technology as part of the Air Force High Velocity Penetrating Weapon program, which seeks to develop technologies for a future rocket-boosted bunker-busting bomb for the F-35 and other fighter-bombers.

Awarding the contract to Raytheon were officials of the Air Force Research Laboratory's Munitions Directorate at Eglin Air Force Base. Raytheon engineers will develop guidance to provide maximum penetration for a future High Velocity Penetrating Weapon, with the ability to overcome GPS-degraded environments and direct the deep-penetrating weapon to impact angles sufficient to destroy hard, deeply buried facilities.

Raytheon experts will explore weapons-guidance technologies for anti-jam GPS, angle-of-attack sensing, guidance law and autopilot, and RF seeker and guidance techniques that could support the High Velocity Penetrating Weapon's accuracy...."

Probably best to read entire article at the URL.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7677
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post18 Aug 2012, 01:06

I can't seem to access anything but the article in it's entirety but I'm curious to learn how much stand-off range the new munition will have. Assuming the rocket is reserved for the final Kamekaze dive, maybe fit a pair of swirchblade wings to allow it to glide from,a safer distance?
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2214
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post18 Aug 2012, 01:29

The F=ma formula factors in when the impact of the mass decelerates.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22853
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post18 Aug 2012, 01:31

Here is one previous article (with a JDAM graphic?). This old article is very similar to article above.... Another article mentioned is the same one that started this thread? Look at the second last post on the first page of this thread for the ROCKET bomb graphics.

Raytheon to develop GPS-degraded munitions guidance for High Velocity Penetrating Weapon Posted by John Keller
January 9, 2012

"EGLIN AFB, Fla., 9 Jan. 2012. Munitions guidance experts at the Raytheon Co. Space and Airborne Systems segment in El Segundo, Calif., will design and demonstrate navigation and guidance technologies that can keep new generations of deep-penetrating bombs and missiles on target in conditions where signals from Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite satellites are degraded or unavailable. Raytheon is doing the work under terms of an $11 million contract awarded Friday by the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory's Munitions Directorate at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla...."

http://www.militaryaerospace.com/conten ... 1/JDAM.jpg
Attachments
JDAM.jpg
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

arkadyrenko

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 313
  • Joined: 19 Sep 2011, 19:40

Unread post18 Aug 2012, 17:10

Hmmm, I enjoy how the military is more or less assuming that GPS won't be around in a full scale war.

As for gliding, I think don't know if they will want to tie together the wings with the rocket pack. Logically, I suspect that to be a round 2 development. Get the rocket penetrator working and then worry about stand-off delivery.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22853
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post18 Aug 2012, 20:26

arkadyrenko opines: "....I enjoy how the military is more or less assuming that GPS won't be around in a full scale war...." Enjoy? Why this word choice.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

arkadyrenko

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 313
  • Joined: 19 Sep 2011, 19:40

Unread post18 Aug 2012, 21:46

I enjoy it because it is a critical, and under-reported, change in military planning for the future. It marks a fundamental change from the past 20 years, when GPS and precision bombing was all the rage, to a more realistic and more interesting future.

As it portends a return to great-power military development, much more interesting than anti-terrorism, and a new wave of technological development it is pretty interesting to me.

In either case, whether or not I enjoy it, it is a fact and will spawn a whole host of interesting elements in the future. (It also represents a potential advantage for the US, if the US can fight in a GPS denied environment, the US won't have any fear about denying GPS (or the Chinese equivalent) as part of a theater wide EW strategy)
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7677
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post19 Aug 2012, 00:06

arkadyrenko wrote:Hmmm, I enjoy how the military is more or less assuming that GPS won't be around in a full scale war.

As for gliding, I think don't know if they will want to tie together the wings with the rocket pack. Logically, I suspect that to be a round 2 development. Get the rocket penetrator working and then worry about stand-off delivery.


Not much mystery or risk involve in developing a pair of wings for glide capability.. even getting the rocket technology right shouldn't be a big deal.
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3281
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post19 Aug 2012, 00:53

arkadyrenko wrote:I enjoy it because it is a critical, and under-reported, change in military planning for the future. It marks a fundamental change from the past 20 years, when GPS and precision bombing was all the rage, to a more realistic and more interesting future.

As it portends a return to great-power military development, much more interesting than anti-terrorism, and a new wave of technological development it is pretty interesting to me.

In either case, whether or not I enjoy it, it is a fact and will spawn a whole host of interesting elements in the future. (It also represents a potential advantage for the US, if the US can fight in a GPS denied environment, the US won't have any fear about denying GPS (or the Chinese equivalent) as part of a theater wide EW strategy)

At some point, the enemies of the US are going to deploy GPS guided weapons. I wonder how far along we are with area denial for that.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests