F-35 and X-47B

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3110
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post10 May 2019, 17:02

Why on earth isn't a strike capability fielded with this?

Is the tech just not there yet? Or would it take too long?? Or perhaps the Navy wants to put the $ to use elsewhere???
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 22652
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post10 May 2019, 22:48

'mixelflick' you seem to be always deficient in knowledge about the F-35. Why is this so? Have you just joined the forum or have you just become interested in the F-35 but gaining information as you go? There is something amiss for sure.

This NEW sat antenna has just been developed. A Sat Antenna will be fitted to the F-35 in a Block Four upgrade AFAIK - this has been a long standing aim of the program for a decade. Canadian interests used to MOAN about this lack for ages.

viewtopic.php?f=62&t=19268&p=225435&hilit=satellite+communication+block#p225435
"...Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) 17 Jun 2012
...Q 3.15 When will the F-35 be capable of SATCOM?
A 3.15 SATCOM is currently planned to be included in the Block 4 of the F-35 follow-on development program, currently scheduled in the 2020 timeframe. Canadian F-35As are therefore currently forecasted to be equipped with BLOS communication in time for Canada’s declaration of Initial Operational Capability (IOC).

Q 3.16 Why was the installation of SATCOM in the F-35 intentionally delayed?
A 3.16 Although originally intended to be included in earlier versions of the F-35, a conscious decision was made within the JSF Partnership to delay upgrading the F-35 with SATCOM until later in the program. The aim of this deferment was to await emerging satellite constellation/capability developments and the maturing of associated enabling technologies, and to thereby avoid the investment of funds into waning technologies/capabilities.

Q 3.17 Can the F-35A communicate in the Arctic?
A 3.17 Yes, the F-35A will be fully capable of communicating in the Arctic. Recent reports concerning delays in the F-35’s SATCOM system has led to public misinformation, which has implied that a lack of SATCOM constitutes an inability to maintain communications in the Arctic. The F-35 is capable of multiple alternate forms of communication, all of which contribute to maintaining reliable communications in the Arctic...."
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/pri/2/pro- ... ng.asp#f35

EXAMPLE of new ANTI-JAM Satellite Constellation Abuildin': https://www.c4isrnet.com/c2-comms/satel ... satellite/
Attachments
F-35BLOCK4upgradesTEXTed.gif
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

usnvo

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 154
  • Joined: 01 Jul 2015, 18:51

Unread post13 May 2019, 06:33

mixelflick wrote:Why on earth isn't a strike capability fielded with this?

Is the tech just not there yet? Or would it take too long?? Or perhaps the Navy wants to put the $ to use elsewhere???


It appears that the adults have asserted themselves at NAVAIR. Lets consider, adding a strike capability (if it doesn't just duplicate the autopilot like capability of the X-47 to fly to a spot and drop a JDAM) is multiple orders of magnitude more difficult than just refueling.

- Start with the fact that your UCAV has to navigate autonomously is a GPS denied environment, avoiding surface and airborne radars (which they had to detect, so add an LPI Radar and F-35 type EW system).
- Locate the target using a variety of sensors in a GPS denied and EW environment (So beyond your LPI Radar, add something like the F-35s EOTS sensor)
- Have the ability to attack the target with weapons that can be utilized in GPS and communications denied environments.
- Maneuver around manned aircraft and avoid enemy aircraft (going to need something like a multi-spectral DAS)
- Don't forget a LPI satellite link so they can communicate but in the chance they can't communicate via satellite, they would also need some stealthy communications capability like MADL as well as to operate in an intelligent fashion in a communications denied environment.
- Can't forget countermeasures to maximize survival.

What could be easier. Notice that the software requirement is already as complex as the F-35 and that is before you do any programming to replicate what a highly trained human pilot does, so add maybe another order of magnitude in complexity.

And all of this is for the first ever CV capable UAV. Yeah, that is where I would start if I wanted to keep costs down while delivering relevant capability to the fleet and learn a whole lot about UAVs.

Just a note, the aircraft may look "stealthy", but the same attributes (minimum wetted surface, good body lift, and long thin wings) are also the same thing one would expect on a long endurance aircraft.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3110
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post13 May 2019, 14:44

spazsinbad wrote:'mixelflick' you seem to be always deficient in knowledge about the F-35. Why is this so? Have you just joined the forum or have you just become interested in the F-35 but gaining information as you go? There is something amiss for sure.

This NEW sat antenna has just been developed. A Sat Antenna will be fitted to the F-35 in a Block Four upgrade AFAIK - this has been a long standing aim of the program for a decade. Canadian interests used to MOAN about this lack for ages.

viewtopic.php?f=62&t=19268&p=225435&hilit=satellite+communication+block#p225435
"...Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) 17 Jun 2012
...Q 3.15 When will the F-35 be capable of SATCOM?
A 3.15 SATCOM is currently planned to be included in the Block 4 of the F-35 follow-on development program, currently scheduled in the 2020 timeframe. Canadian F-35As are therefore currently forecasted to be equipped with BLOS communication in time for Canada’s declaration of Initial Operational Capability (IOC).

Q 3.16 Why was the installation of SATCOM in the F-35 intentionally delayed?
A 3.16 Although originally intended to be included in earlier versions of the F-35, a conscious decision was made within the JSF Partnership to delay upgrading the F-35 with SATCOM until later in the program. The aim of this deferment was to await emerging satellite constellation/capability developments and the maturing of associated enabling technologies, and to thereby avoid the investment of funds into waning technologies/capabilities.

Q 3.17 Can the F-35A communicate in the Arctic?
A 3.17 Yes, the F-35A will be fully capable of communicating in the Arctic. Recent reports concerning delays in the F-35’s SATCOM system has led to public misinformation, which has implied that a lack of SATCOM constitutes an inability to maintain communications in the Arctic. The F-35 is capable of multiple alternate forms of communication, all of which contribute to maintaining reliable communications in the Arctic...."
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/pri/2/pro- ... ng.asp#f35

EXAMPLE of new ANTI-JAM Satellite Constellation Abuildin': https://www.c4isrnet.com/c2-comms/satel ... satellite/


I was referring to the X-47B...
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 22652
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post13 May 2019, 16:15

'mixelflick' said: "I was referring to the X-47B..." Why not make that clear? SIMPLES.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 626
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post14 May 2019, 00:16

usnvo wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Why on earth isn't a strike capability fielded with this?

Is the tech just not there yet? Or would it take too long?? Or perhaps the Navy wants to put the $ to use elsewhere???


It appears that the adults have asserted themselves at NAVAIR. Lets consider, adding a strike capability (if it doesn't just duplicate the autopilot like capability of the X-47 to fly to a spot and drop a JDAM) is multiple orders of magnitude more difficult than just refueling.

- Start with the fact that your UCAV has to navigate autonomously is a GPS denied environment, avoiding surface and airborne radars (which they had to detect, so add an LPI Radar and F-35 type EW system).
- Locate the target using a variety of sensors in a GPS denied and EW environment (So beyond your LPI Radar, add something like the F-35s EOTS sensor)
- Have the ability to attack the target with weapons that can be utilized in GPS and communications denied environments.
- Maneuver around manned aircraft and avoid enemy aircraft (going to need something like a multi-spectral DAS)
- Don't forget a LPI satellite link so they can communicate but in the chance they can't communicate via satellite, they would also need some stealthy communications capability like MADL as well as to operate in an intelligent fashion in a communications denied environment.
- Can't forget countermeasures to maximize survival.



Translation: the well known remaining high-risk areas that the Navy was supposed to address since the 2006 QDR
(after DARPA UCAV retired risk for many of them) weren't addressed. And the Navy can't blame
funding since Congress was authorizing money for X-47b continued development (amongst other efforts)
that the Navy didn't want.

There's no evidence that these areas have low TRLs otherwise GAO would have screamed about it after
JROC validated the high-end UCLASS effort back in 2011.

The Navy has spent the intervening eight years diverting, deflecting and repurposing an unmanned
effort with intent and with but one beneficiary: FA-XX.

Pretty much the entire MQ-25 reason for existence was tenuous at best and vanished once they got new build Super Hornets with conformals.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3110
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post14 May 2019, 13:18

spazsinbad wrote:'mixelflick' said: "I was referring to the X-47B..." Why not make that clear? SIMPLES.


To be honest, I assumed everyone on this board knows the F-35 has a robust air to ground capability. That is after all, its reason for being.

However, in the future I'll try and make it clear(er).
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 22652
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post14 May 2019, 13:35

mixelflick wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:'mixelflick' said: "I was referring to the X-47B..." Why not make that clear? SIMPLES.

To be honest, I assumed everyone on this board knows the F-35 has a robust air to ground capability. That is after all, its reason for being. However, in the future I'll try and make it clear(er).

Your post in question is at top of this page. At bottom of previous page is this post about 'broadband satnav': (why would not I assume your post was about that fielding?) viewtopic.php?f=55&t=20468&p=419143&hilit=broadband#p419143
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Previous

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: agrippa, sprstdlyscottsmn and 3 guests