F-35 begins Raytheon JSOW qualification flights

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

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2243
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post08 Feb 2017, 01:03

SpudmanWP wrote:Here is a Hi-Res side profile of a JSOW. Note how none of the panels lines are perpendicular or join at a 90 degree angle.

Link only as it's a large image.

http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/JSOW2_11_1.jpg


The horizontal gap between panels (left side of the image just behind the folded wing) does not appear to be uniform. Isn't that a bit sloppy for stealth / VLO purposes?
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 800
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post08 Feb 2017, 01:17

From: fbo.gov Oct 20, 2016

The Sources Sought notice is being posted to satisfy the requirement of DFARS PGI 206.302-1. The Naval Air System Command (NAVAIR), Patuxent River, Maryland, intends to issue a sole source contract to Raytheon Missile Systems (RMS), Tucson, AZ to conduct a flight test demonstration of an extended range capability for the Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW) AGM-154C-1 All Up Round (AUR). The upgrade includes hardware modification to add a production representative engine/fuel/inlet system to the AGM-154C-1 variant as well as software modification to optimize midcourse and endgame performance for the powered JSOW.

Looking at the FY2017 budget, there is some money set aside for a demonstration.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7707
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post08 Feb 2017, 01:19

I guess the priority would be in reducing the frontal RCS.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

archeman

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 711
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2011, 05:37
  • Location: CA

Unread post08 Feb 2017, 01:29

RE: side panel gaps....

Remember this is mid-90s stealth design era for a throw away munition.
So.....close enough.
Daddy why do we have to hide? Because we use VI son, and they use windows.
Online
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2243
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post08 Feb 2017, 01:44

archeman wrote:RE: side panel gaps....

Remember this is mid-90s stealth design era for a throw away munition.
So.....close enough.


I'll buy the "throw away munition" argument, and I think Popcorn was on the right track about stealth from the front, since that is the aspect the target should be seeing. But even in the mid-90s, the F-117 guys were paranoid about joint fit among other things, and that was from the early-mid '80s.

With JSOW-ER, if you're going to be flying a several hundred miles, possibly at medium - high altitude, side aspect could become more important.

But my original question was about munitions being shot down by some sort of point-defense weapons system, and, at least in the case of JSOW, the powers that be appear to have taken that under some amount of consideration.
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8400
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post08 Feb 2017, 02:45

There is also the "Not For Production Use" sticker to consider.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2883
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post08 Feb 2017, 14:10

steve2267 wrote:
arian wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:JSOW has nose chines and serrated edges on the first joint.

I would not be surprised to find out it had some 1st gen RAM, but that's pure conjecture.

You can see even in this image that the joints are filled in with some material. When I took a close look at one, it appeared to be some sort of permanent ceramic-looking material.


If this is the case, why are the fasteners not covered over with a similar type of RAM putty? Would not the fasteners need to be covered over? Or would that be one of the last things they would do before hanging the munition on an aircraft? (Similar to they way they would butter the F-117s before a mission?)


I think the fasteners are so small that they will matter very little in being detected by regular radar systems. They are simply so small as not to reflect or scatter much radar energy. Of course it might be that they are covered with tape or putty or spray or whatever only before real combat sortie and only when deemed necessary. Any tape or putty might well deteriorate during storage and they'd also negatively affect serviceability of the munitions.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7707
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post08 Feb 2017, 14:30

hornetfinn wrote:
I think the fasteners are so small that they will matter very little in being detected by regular radar systems. They are simply so small as not to reflect or scatter much radar energy. Of course it might be that they are covered with tape or putty or spray or whatever only before real combat sortie and only when deemed necessary. Any tape or putty might well deteriorate during storage and they'd also negatively affect serviceability of the munitions.


Also, JSOW should not be considered in isolation but rather as part of a highly scripted choreography with different actors supporting and contributing to the overall success. Following is how Raytheon pitches the benefits of a collaborative strike. MALD-J could very easily make up for whatever RCS penalty those exposed fasteners may impose. :mrgreen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0acJ3xyhaJo
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

squirrelshoes

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 111
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2016, 23:53

Unread post09 Feb 2017, 02:26

popcorn wrote:Also, JSOW should not be considered in isolation but rather as part of a highly scripted choreography with different actors supporting and contributing to the overall success. Following is how Raytheon pitches the benefits of a collaborative strike. MALD-J could very easily make up for whatever RCS penalty those exposed fasteners may impose.

A wave of MALD + JSOW + SDB could be a serious IADS SAM battery depleter. If MALD works as advertised you can't ignore any of it.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7707
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post09 Feb 2017, 12:04

squirrelshoes wrote:
popcorn wrote:Also, JSOW should not be considered in isolation but rather as part of a highly scripted choreography with different actors supporting and contributing to the overall success. Following is how Raytheon pitches the benefits of a collaborative strike. MALD-J could very easily make up for whatever RCS penalty those exposed fasteners may impose.

A wave of MALD + JSOW + SDB could be a serious IADS SAM battery depleter. If MALD works as advertised you can't ignore any of it.

and add 5Gens with their own unique capabilities to the mix that can get much closer to the threat systems and it gets even worse. But can't blame Raytheon for excluding them, they want to highlight what their products bring to the fight and they paid for the video after all. :mrgreen:
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7707
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post02 Jun 2017, 00:40

Work ongoing to give JSOW C-1 much needed longer legs.

http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articl ... range.html

Raytheon ready to flight-test an extended-range powered and data-linked JSOW to attack moving ships

PATUXENT RIVER NAS, Md. – Smart munitions experts at the Raytheon Co. are making plans to flight-test a powered and extended-range version of the data-linked AGM-154C-1 Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW) to attack moving maritime targets like enemy surface warships.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23603
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post18 Nov 2019, 12:36

DUBAI: Raytheon Joint Standoff Weapon to be certificated for F-35A
18 Nov 2019 Garrett Reim

"The AGM-154 JSOW precision-strike glide bomb is to be certificated for the internal weapons bay of the US Air Force's F-35A Lighting II stealth fighter by the end of November 2019. The weapon's manufacturer, Raytheon, says the approval would allow it to sell the standoff weapon to international operators of the F-35A. The conventional take-off and landing F-35A is the most popular variant of the type with international customers.

The US Navy has already qualified the JSOW on its F-35C variant and now the USAF is to use that testing data to integrate the weapon onto its aircraft, says Mark Borup, senior manager of business development for Raytheon Missile Systems’ air warfare systems.

“It is going to be fully integrated on the F-35-A and the importance of that is that the USA has a number of friends and allies who have the F-35A,” he says. “It's very significant. It's a capability that many of our friends and allies really, really advocate for.”... [then stuff about JSOW-C Block III]

...Raytheon says it is also seeing interest from Middle East countries in the JSOW’s ability to glide into a target at a shallow angle. “Just recently one of the points of interest that we learned was a cave defeat capability is something that's needed,” says Borup. “If [the pilot] needs to get a 30⁰ dive angle to hit a vertical target, such as the front of a cave entrance, he can do that.” Raytheon declines to say who Middle East nations are targeting inside caves."

Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ic-462320/
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2253
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post18 Nov 2019, 15:58

popcorn wrote:Work ongoing to give JSOW C-1 much needed longer legs.

http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articl ... range.html

Raytheon ready to flight-test an extended-range powered and data-linked JSOW to attack moving ships

PATUXENT RIVER NAS, Md. – Smart munitions experts at the Raytheon Co. are making plans to flight-test a powered and extended-range version of the data-linked AGM-154C-1 Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW) to attack moving maritime targets like enemy surface warships.


According to the link above:
Extending the range of the AGM-154C-1 involves adding a Hamilton-Sundstrand TJ-150 turbojet engine to the ordinarily unpowered JSOW to extend the smart munition's range from 70 to 300 nautical miles.


WoW.
From what I read the extended range AGM-154C-1 could be a serious contender against the JSM for example! The extended range AGM-154C-1 has longer range (300 nautical miles against 150+ nautical miles) and a much bigger warhead (1000lb versus 275lb or so) compared to the JSM. What do you guys think about this?
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Online
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2243
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post18 Nov 2019, 16:38

IMO, comparing apples and oranges.

JSM is a nap-of the earth (sea?), high subsonic speed, smart weapon. JSOW, being a glide weapon, now powered, will probably not be as fast as JSM, and will be coming in from a high altitude. Not sure how to compare their observability characteristics; my impression is that JSM has lower LO than JSOW.

I think they may be more complementary than competitors.

Also, since Raytheon has teamed with Kongsberg... not sure how keen Raytheon would be to anger their partner?
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3344
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post18 Nov 2019, 16:39

ricnunes wrote:


WoW.
From what I read the extended range AGM-154C-1 could be a serious contender against the JSM for example! The extended range AGM-154C-1 has longer range (300 nautical miles against 150+ nautical miles) and a much bigger warhead (1000lb versus 275lb or so) compared to the JSM. What do you guys think about this?



https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... -it-sounds
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests