What will be the USNs primary F-35 naval strike weapon?

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

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5394
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post11 Feb 2019, 08:08

The U.S. Navy says it will begin deploying a cruise missile derivative of the stealthy AGM-154 Joint Stand-Off Weapon glide bomb, or JSOW, no later than the end of 2023, as an option for its F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and F-35C Joint Strike Fighters. The weapons will give these jets a significant additional extended-range strike capability, which is important given the increasingly advanced nature of integrated air defenses among potential opponents, especially Russia and China.

On Feb. 7, 2019, Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) announced its intention to issue a sole-source contract to Raytheon for work related to the new weapon, known as the JSOW-Extended Range, or JSOW-ER, on the U.S. government’s main contracting website, FedBizOpps. The Massachusetts-headquartered defense contractor developed the unpowered JSOW and you can read about it and the cruise missile derivative in depth in a previous feature from The War Zone. The notice also said that the JSOW-ER would be compatible with the U.S. Air Force’s F-35A Joint Strike Fighter, but it is not clear if that service actually intends to purchase the missiles.

Source: http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/26 ... side-f-35c
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1124
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post11 Feb 2019, 10:21

Corsair1963 wrote:The notice also said that the JSOW-ER would be compatible with the U.S. Air Force’s F-35A Joint Strike Fighter, but it is not clear if that service actually intends to purchase the missiles.


I think that point is related to RAAF using them on SH now, and may keep using them on F-35A. Not much point in the USAF buying them.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5394
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post11 Feb 2019, 11:16

element1loop wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:The notice also said that the JSOW-ER would be compatible with the U.S. Air Force’s F-35A Joint Strike Fighter, but it is not clear if that service actually intends to purchase the missiles.


I think that point is related to RAAF using them on SH now, and may keep using them on F-35A. Not much point in the USAF buying them.


If, they can fit inside the F-35A. I would say plenty of good reasons for the USAF to acquire it...
Offline
User avatar

zerion

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 626
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2014, 01:47
  • Location: Everywhere like such as...

Unread post25 Feb 2019, 19:17

Raytheon Wins F-35 Role For New JSOW-ER

Raytheon will develop and deploy a powered and extended-range variant of the Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW-ER) to attack land and maritime targets from within the weapons bay of the Lockheed Martin F-35A and carrier-based F-35C fighters, the U.S. Navy ...

http://aviationweek.com/awindefense/ray ... ew-jsow-er
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 689
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post25 Feb 2019, 23:57

Spending money on a version of JASSM-XR that fits in the F-35 bays would make far
more sense but the Navy having burned a decade on JSOW-C-1 which isn't useful in the high-end
threat environment needs something to show for it.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3154
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post25 Feb 2019, 23:59

marauder2048 wrote:Spending money on a version of JASSM-XR that fits in the F-35 bays would make far
more sense but the Navy having burned a decade on JSOW-C-1 which isn't useful in the high-end
threat environment needs something to show for it.

There's no need to put JASSM-XR in the bay. It has a range of over 1000nm. Even the standard JASSM allows F-35s to stay well outside of IADS MEZ.
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8291
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post26 Feb 2019, 00:03

Put JASSM on the wings and MALD-J in the bays :)
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 689
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post26 Feb 2019, 00:20

wrightwing wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:Spending money on a version of JASSM-XR that fits in the F-35 bays would make far
more sense but the Navy having burned a decade on JSOW-C-1 which isn't useful in the high-end
threat environment needs something to show for it.

There's no need to put JASSM-XR in the bay. It has a range of over 1000nm. Even the standard JASSM allows F-35s to stay well outside of IADS MEZ.


My assumption is that there's probably only going to be one wing+chine combo for JASSM moving forward.

People are connecting JASSM-XR to the earlier Lockheed concept which was a ~ 7,000 lb weapon with a boosted
penetrator intended strictly for internal carriage on the bombers. My view is that JASSM-XR as contracted is just
JASSM-ER with the new laminar-flow wing/chine which is a nice range bump but not the 1000 nautical mile
range of the earlier concepts.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3154
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post26 Feb 2019, 00:57

marauder2048 wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:Spending money on a version of JASSM-XR that fits in the F-35 bays would make far
more sense but the Navy having burned a decade on JSOW-C-1 which isn't useful in the high-end
threat environment needs something to show for it.

There's no need to put JASSM-XR in the bay. It has a range of over 1000nm. Even the standard JASSM allows F-35s to stay well outside of IADS MEZ.


My assumption is that there's probably only going to be one wing+chine combo for JASSM moving forward.

People are connecting JASSM-XR to the earlier Lockheed concept which was a ~ 7,000 lb weapon with a boosted
penetrator intended strictly for internal carriage on the bombers. My view is that JASSM-XR as contracted is just
JASSM-ER with the new laminar-flow wing/chine which is a nice range bump but not the 1000 nautical mile
range of the earlier concepts.


JASSM-ER is already a 600nm weapon. Why would you suppose the XR variant wouldn't be exactly that?
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 689
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post26 Feb 2019, 01:25

wrightwing wrote:
JASSM-ER is already a 600nm weapon. Why would you suppose the XR variant wouldn't be exactly that?



I'm skeptical they can get a 400 nautical mile range bump from an improved wing.
Offline

squirrelshoes

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 90
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2016, 23:53

Unread post26 Feb 2019, 05:33

marauder2048 wrote:Spending money on a version of JASSM-XR that fits in the F-35 bays would make far
more sense but the Navy having burned a decade on JSOW-C-1 which isn't useful in the high-end
threat environment needs something to show for it.

I can definitely better use of resources than spending money trying to fit a weapon that is being developed to have a range of 1,000 miles into the internal bays of a fighter. They could launch it from over Germany and hit Moscow, hell they launched CALCMs from the wings of B-52s and JASSM-XR should have significantly longer legs than CALCM.
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 689
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post26 Feb 2019, 08:20

squirrelshoes wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:Spending money on a version of JASSM-XR that fits in the F-35 bays would make far
more sense but the Navy having burned a decade on JSOW-C-1 which isn't useful in the high-end
threat environment needs something to show for it.

I can definitely better use of resources than spending money trying to fit a weapon that is being developed to have a range of 1,000 miles into the internal bays of a fighter. They could launch it from over Germany and hit Moscow, hell they launched CALCMs from the wings of B-52s and JASSM-XR should have significantly longer legs than CALCM.


If only straight line range could be converted into something else useful like say loiter.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3154
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post26 Feb 2019, 08:51

marauder2048 wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
JASSM-ER is already a 600nm weapon. Why would you suppose the XR variant wouldn't be exactly that?



I'm skeptical they can get a 400 nautical mile range bump from an improved wing.

It carries more fuel in addition to better aerodynamics.
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 689
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post26 Feb 2019, 10:31

wrightwing wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
JASSM-ER is already a 600nm weapon. Why would you suppose the XR variant wouldn't be exactly that?



I'm skeptical they can get a 400 nautical mile range bump from an improved wing.

It carries more fuel in addition to better aerodynamics.


Where?
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7676
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post26 Feb 2019, 11:38

They could always reduce the warhead weight but still have a big BOOM. Other areas could be an improved engine efficiency.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest