Lockheed develops rack to make F-35A/C a six-shooter

[timmymagic]

In the end the F-35 will likely have the largest selection of weapons available to any modern day fighter!

Compared to the F-15? No chance...especially as at the rate they're going it will be 2050 before they get anything added. Lots of announcements, but they'll all be in the queue behind the Block IV weapons. Thats JSM, Spear & Spear EW, ASRAAM CSP, Paveway IV Penetrator, Meteor, JSOW-C1, SDB II Stormbreaker, AARGM-ER. That list was pared down from the original intention as well (the UK removed Brimstone, Storm Shadow and Paveway IV Moving Target from the list a long time ago). The only good news is the SOM-J may be removed from that list with Turkey being removed from the programme (not that anyone outside of Turkey was going to buy it anyway).

[bring_it_on]

In the end the F-35 will likely have the largest selection of weapons available to any modern day fighter!

Compared to the F-15? No chance...especially as at the rate they're going it will be 2050 before they get anything added. Lots of announcements, but they'll all be in the queue behind the Block IV weapons. Thats JSM, Spear & Spear EW, ASRAAM CSP, Paveway IV Penetrator, Meteor, JSOW-C1, SDB II Stormbreaker, AARGM-ER. That list was pared down from the original intention as well (the UK removed Brimstone, Storm Shadow and Paveway IV Moving Target from the list a long time ago). The only good news is the SOM-J may be removed from that list with Turkey being removed from the programme (not that anyone outside of Turkey was going to buy it anyway).

It depends who is pushing for upgrades. You referenced UK programs. That is a lot different from the USAF or USN getting the weapons that it wants or needs in a timely fashion. The test fleet is also slated to receive about 6 aircraft over the next couple of years. Some of the original timelines set for block 4 weapons integration were weapon development schedule dependent.

The SDB-II is itself in LRIP and only slated to become operational this summer. AARGM-ER just entered EMD and has the EA-18G as the threshold platform (for good reason). SiAW is less far along then it. Same with some of the UK strike weapons and the JSM. If the USAF and USN want, they can spiral into the C2D2 additional weapons capability early if that is what is desired operationally. The current block 4 weapon integration is likely to suffice though as some of the weapons they desire are themselves in development. Same with AIM-260. There is one thing to show urgency in integration and another thing to actually field a credible capability that justifies that urgency. It will take quite a while for the USAF or the USN to build up inventory of these weapons to justify rapid integration onto more and more platforms.

The USAF declared IOC on the F-35 4 years ago, and the USN just last year. And we are already on the second tranche of weapons integration with Blk 4/C2D2 upgrades. Things are only likely to speed up but there need to be a weapons to integrate and a justifiable need to push integration plans to the left. You can't have an inventory of 200 weapons and then want to move integration on additional platforms to the left. That's barely enough to meet the needs of the threshold platform. For example in FY19, the USAF bought just 500 SDB-II's. Those will likely take a couple of years to deliver. Between testing and other usage how many will the deployed F-15E's have access to in the early 2020's? Only when those 4-digit SDB II buys begin showing up in the inventory will you really have a need to bring more platforms onboard. The Navy which counts the F-35 as the threshold platfrom will likely be able to deploy the SDB-II on the F-35C within 2 years of the munition declaring IOC with the USAF. That's a new weapon, on a new block just a year after the service performs its first at sea deployment. The Marines should get it around the same time as well.

So the program office is more than justified in balancing the need to integrate new weapons with the need to introduce EW upgrades, hardware modifications/upgrades, new software enabled modes, and other capabilities like increased internal AMRAAM carriage. If there is an urgent need, or if you have weapons that exist in sufficient quantity that are just held up by the integration schedule, I'm sure they can move a few things around and move those plans to the left. But most of these Next Gen weapons aren't even in rate production yet. For some its a chicken and egg problem, but for most it just has to do with their own development schedule.

[doge]

6x AAM internal CG
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/ ... 3-2020.pdf

[ricnunes]

Cool! That's among the first diagrams what I've seen regarding the Sidekick rack.

[mixelflick]

I wonder why 6 internal AMRAAM's wasn't pursued earlier, as a baseline per se?

They had to know the Raptor fleet would be small, even assuming they got funding for 340 or so. They also had to know any air to air weapon didn't have 100% PK, so one would think that was baked into the assumptions. A conservative assumption may have been 50%, and that would mean each F-35 could only kill 1 or 2 enemy aircraft (given a 2/4 AMRAAM loadout).

I understand carrying everything internal means limitations. But after getting 8 AAM's into the Raptor, I would have thought 6 would be the goal on the baseline F-35. Oh well, I'm just glad this is coming. Hopefully with next gen AAM's, it means 8 to 12, not just 6...

[wrightwing]

I wonder why 6 internal AMRAAM's wasn't pursued earlier, as a baseline per se?

They had to know the Raptor fleet would be small, even assuming they got funding for 340 or so. They also had to know any air to air weapon didn't have 100% PK, so one would think that was baked into the assumptions. A conservative assumption may have been 50%, and that would mean each F-35 could only kill 1 or 2 enemy aircraft (given a 2/4 AMRAAM loadout).

I understand carrying everything internal means limitations. But after getting 8 AAM's into the Raptor, I would have thought 6 would be the goal on the baseline F-35. Oh well, I'm just glad this is coming. Hopefully with next gen AAM's, it means 8 to 12, not just 6...

Because the priority for the F-35 was qualifying A2G weapons and capabilities, and without unlimited funds/test aircraft, capacity had to be added sequentially.

[Dragon029]

The initial program baseline requirements assumed a much larger F-22 fleet as the GFC, etc hadn't happened yet. Even if they had the 'full' buy of ~340 jets we're talking about a time when the Soviet Union had recently dissolved and China's rise hadn't really begun yet (their economy and military spending really skyrocketed in the mid-2000s). When it came to the 2012 rebaseline the name of the game was program risk-reduction, so they weren't going to try and add more capability then, leaving it to wait until Follow On Modernisation.

[Boman]

Reviwing an old thread here - has anyone seen the sidekick arrangement?
What I'm interested in is either drawing or photo that shows how this is intended to work on the F-35A and F-35C?

[Corsair1963]

In the end the F-35 will likely have the largest selection of weapons available to any modern day fighter!

Compared to the F-15? No chance...especially as at the rate they're going it will be 2050 before they get anything added. Lots of announcements, but they'll all be in the queue behind the Block IV weapons. Thats JSM, Spear & Spear EW, ASRAAM CSP, Paveway IV Penetrator, Meteor, JSOW-C1, SDB II Stormbreaker, AARGM-ER. That list was pared down from the original intention as well (the UK removed Brimstone, Storm Shadow and Paveway IV Moving Target from the list a long time ago). The only good news is the SOM-J may be removed from that list with Turkey being removed from the programme (not that anyone outside of Turkey was going to buy it anyway).

LOL


Sorry, the F-35 is just entering service and will have numerous options not available to the F-15 in the coming years. These will be at least partially funded by current and/or future F-35 Customers.

I highly doubt the US Government would fund their integration into the F-15E/EX in the majority of the cases. Considering the small size of the fleet.

[magitsu]

I highly doubt the US Government would fund their integration into the F-15E/EX in the majority of the cases. Considering the small size of the fleet.

Yeah, quite unlikely that Meteor and similar Euro missiles will ever end up on US owned fighters, but all of the useful ones will be integrated to some variant of F-35. Because there's so many European F-35 users, and more coming.
US on the other hand will likely include everything that's not a bomber class weapon to F-35. Even if it might develop them attached to B-1, F-15...

[Corsair1963]

I highly doubt the US Government would fund their integration into the F-15E/EX in the majority of the cases. Considering the small size of the fleet.

Yeah, quite unlikely that Meteor and similar Euro missiles will ever end up on US fighters but all of the useful ones will be integrated to some variant of F-35. Because there's so many European F-35 users, and more coming.
US on the other hand will likely include everything that's not a bomber class weapon to F-35. Even if it might develop them attached to B-1, F-15...

Yes, the F-35 is the future for at least the next 30-40 years. So, we can expect it to get the lion's share of the funding during that period.

[garrya]

Go ahead and think whatever you want. When an AIM-9L (big fins) was looked at for RCS with a RAM coat it was only 0.001 from the front sector. Now take into account the smaller (by a lot) fins of the AIM-9X, and that the PYLON has RAM and shaping so some energy reflected from the missile will be absorbed or redirected by the pylon. Some of the energy will be further absorbed and reflected by the aircraft itself. They knew what they were doing when they made the bent pylon design.

To be fair, Simulation of F-35 model using Ansys HFSS show quite significant increase of average RCS when the airframe is equipped with AIM-9X missile

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

To be fair, Simulation of F-35 model using Ansys HFSS show quite significant increase of average RCS when the airframe is equipped with AIM-9X missile

FUNZw3DVEAA-HrC.jpg

Looking at the two images I can see that existing hot spots at ~60-90 deg off the nose and 10-45 degrees down got significantly stronger, while another one at 45 deg off the nose and ~15 deg down got a little stronger. The change is not significant for most of the visible sphere. This really seems to prove my point, that adding the wingtip 9X will not magically make the F-35 show up on radar. That is well within the capability of the "wormhole generating" Barracuda suite to manage.

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

My guess is short them the external AIM-9X's have a small impact on the F-35's overall RCS. While, long-term more capable and advanced Air to Air Missiles are in development. Which, will allow the F-35 both greater reach and in larger numbers. (internally)

I'd bet so also. While external AIM-9X's will likely slightly increase the RCS of F-35, it will still have far lower RCS than almost anything currently flying. Also most of the increased RCS come from close to directly perpendicular to the aircraft and missile which makes it easy to manage. Returns from frontal sector are likely very small with AIM-9X as they are rather small even with older AIM-9 class weapons with much higher amount and area of reflective surfaces.

It's also a choice that is made according to mission needs. I'd bet that in attack missions against fully functioning IADS, F-35s would not carry them. On the other hand when they are tasked for OCA or DCA, they might well carry them. There slightly increased RCS is not going to matter much especially when it most likely has low impact on front sector RCS.

ASRAAM is another weapon for external carriage and I'd bet it has even lower RCS than AIM-9X with very small fins.

I don't really buy that. We give Su-57 so much sh*t for RCS shaping such as round nacelles and perpendicular angles, but with these pylons it's the same thing. AIM-9X has no LO shaping, and especially at lower frequencies it's going to be worse.

For reference to others, this was the post I responded to.

*EDIT* in my model I use a 0.0005 RCS for the F-35 from the front clean, 0.061 when loaded with external 9X. In my model an S-400 radar can detect a clean and quiet F-35 at 63km, or a "dirty" (9X equipped) and jamming F-35 at 7km. The power of EW! My model requires an RCS of 5m before the Barracuda can't hide the aircraft better than a clean and quiet F-35.

"“This jet isn’t just about the weapons — it’s a game-changing capability. The Tornado GR.4 can't just stroll into a double digit SAM MEZ [Missile Engagement Zone]. In the F-35 I can generate a wormhole in the airspace and lead everyone through it. There isn’t another platform around that can do that. This isn’t all about height and supercruise speed — it’s the ability to not be seen,” added Beck"

“While F-35 is capable of stand-off jamming for other aircraft — providing 10 times the effective radiated power of any legacy fighter — F-35s can also operate in closer proximity to the threat (‘stand-in’) to provide jamming power many multiples that of any legacy fighter.”

[Corsair1963]

Any recent news on the Sidekick???