Navy: F-35C Will Be Eyes and Ears of the Fleet

Variants for different customers or mission profiles
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21207
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post16 Jan 2014, 03:34

'neurotech' fair enough. I thought you had something mixed up. People will be worried about robot NavAvers for some time to come. A history of safe ops has to be achieved. It seems to me that that history is well on the way with a lot more to come. OMG :twisted: human pilots do not always do so well n'est pas?

It seems to me there are equivalent safe guards comparable to human deck landing ops (which do not always work perfectly either - plenty of APPROACH stories in that regard - LSOs worry about their screw ups all the time - so should everyone). At least the ROBOT will not be worried - Day/NIGHT! :devil:

The next UCLASS should be named after Alfred E. Neumann "Wot? Me Worry?" :D
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2343
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post16 Jan 2014, 03:58

spazsinbad wrote:'neurotech' fair enough. I thought you had something mixed up. People will be worried about robot NavAvers for some time to come. A history of safe ops has to be achieved. It seems to me that that history is well on the way with a lot more to come. OMG :twisted: human pilots do not always do so well n'est pas?

It seems to me there are equivalent safe guards comparable to human deck landing ops (which do not always work perfectly either - plenty of APPROACH stories in that regard - LSOs worry about their screw ups all the time - so should everyone). At least the ROBOT will not be worried - Day/NIGHT! :devil:

The next UCLASS should be named after Alfred E. Neumann "Wot? Me Worry?" :D

Commercial Aviation would be a lot safer if they had LSOs for emergency or maginal weather conditions. At least have a PLAT camera so somebody in the tower can visual see the aircraft is lined up and on glide path.

Two recent crashes (Asiana 214 at SFO & Southwest 235 at LGA) could have been avoided if they did a missed approach and tried again. It's likely that human factors played a major role in both crashes.

Speaking of human deck landing ops. I was watching a video of a F/A-18E flown by the Squadron CO (Cmdr. Fravor) with a major pitching deck and landing on the first approach. The conditions were so bad they were using manual MOVLAS "ball" and I'm pretty sure that if they'd tried to land on ACLS, the jet would have chased the glidepath and probably been waved off. The F-35C is significantly better at adjusting glidepath behind the boat.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21207
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post16 Jan 2014, 04:19

As mentioned before I think - that CO is a good bloke to take the tanker from the nugget on a bad night and get some difficult night landing for himself. Newbies need to be nurtured in a good environment.

"This video is not available in your country."


As for pilots crashing their aircraft on a fine and beaut day? They need to learn how to fly. Just letting the automatics do the job is not good enough. Every commercial pilot needs to know how to fly and should be able to practice that regularly - if not on their regular aircraft for real - at least on a light aircraft so that they know and practice the basics. Landing visually in ideal conditions should be a no brainer - apparently not for some Korean Airline pilots.
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 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7371
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post16 Jan 2014, 05:55

It would be unlikely though for a robot to land at the wrong airport...? :D
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7371
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post16 Jan 2014, 07:43

Projected range increases for JSF variants with Israeli-designed EFTs and AETD-derived engine. IMO, if UCLASS is configured to take/receive fuel, it can function as a connector, shuttling between KC-46 and B/C jets deep in hostile airspace, extending their time on station even further. 1


http://www.sldinfo.com/what-are-the-nex ... r-warfare/

F-35 Version Base Combat Radius With Drop Tanks With Enhanced Engine
CTOL. 584 NMI. 770 NMI 885 NMI
STOVL 469 NMI 655 NMI 753 NMI
CV 615 NMI 801 NMI 921 NMI
Last edited by popcorn on 17 Jan 2014, 01:19, edited 2 times in total.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3246
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post17 Jan 2014, 00:54

neurotech wrote:@count_to_10: More like expense of a "human" pilot. In the Navy, it still costs a lot of money to train and keep pilots carrier qualified. For non-human cargo, and patrol aircraft, going autonomous will save money.

Which will be when the insurance companies decide its too risky to insure human pilots cheaply. :wink:
Einstein got it backward: one cannot prevent a war without preparing for it.

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

Corsair1963

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 4526
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post17 Jan 2014, 03:37

popcorn wrote:Projected range increases for JSF variants with Israeli-designed EFTs and AETD-derived engine. IMO, if UCLASS is configured to take/receive fuel, it can function as a connector, shuttling between KC-46 and B/C jets deep in hostile airspace, extending their time on station even further. 1


http://www.sldinfo.com/what-are-the-nex ... r-warfare/

F-35 Version Base Combat Radius With Drop Tanks With Enhanced Engine
CTOL. 584 NMI. 770 NMI 885 NMI
STOVL 469 NMI 655 NMI 753 NMI
CV 615 NMI 801 NMI 921 NMI



What ever happened with the CFT's that Israel was suppose to develop for the F-35???
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7371
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post17 Jan 2014, 05:28

Corsair1963 wrote:
popcorn wrote:Projected range increases for JSF variants with Israeli-designed EFTs and AETD-derived engine. IMO, if UCLASS is configured to take/receive fuel, it can function as a connector, shuttling between KC-46 and B/C jets deep in hostile airspace, extending their time on station even further. 1


http://www.sldinfo.com/what-are-the-nex ... r-warfare/

F-35 Version Base Combat Radius With Drop Tanks With Enhanced Engine
CTOL. 584 NMI. 770 NMI 885 NMI
STOVL 469 NMI 655 NMI 753 NMI
CV 615 NMI 801 NMI 921 NMI



What ever happened with the CFT's that Israel was suppose to develop for the F-35???


I don't think CFTs were in the mix, rather EFTs with jettisonable pylons
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21207
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post17 Jan 2014, 07:21

Yes the External Fuel Tanks with Jettisonable Pylons have been mentioned a few times with this added attraction (mentioned earlier in the EFT/CFT thread)....

http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... ozi#218540
&
viewtopic.php?f=61&t=24168&hilit=Egozi

Israel to boost range of future F-35 fleet 11 Jan 2008 Arie Egozi
"The Israeli air force wants to increase the operational range of its future fleet of 100 Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighters by adding new external fuel tanks that are already being developed by domestic companies.

Elbit Systems subsidiary Cyclone Aviation is offering to supply external tanks to be carried on the F-35's under-wing hardpoints, while Israel Aerospace Industries plans to produce conformal fuel tanks for the Israeli fighters.

Israel's air force recently completed the design of a unique F-35 version optimised for its mission requirements, but further details remain highly classified...."

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... et-220748/
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 4526
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post18 Jan 2014, 02:49

spazsinbad wrote:Yes the External Fuel Tanks with Jettisonable Pylons have been mentioned a few times with this added attraction (mentioned earlier in the EFT/CFT thread)....

http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... ozi#218540
&
viewtopic.php?f=61&t=24168&hilit=Egozi

Israel to boost range of future F-35 fleet 11 Jan 2008 Arie Egozi
"The Israeli air force wants to increase the operational range of its future fleet of 100 Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighters by adding new external fuel tanks that are already being developed by domestic companies.

Elbit Systems subsidiary Cyclone Aviation is offering to supply external tanks to be carried on the F-35's under-wing hardpoints, while Israel Aerospace Industries plans to produce conformal fuel tanks for the Israeli fighters.

Israel's air force recently completed the design of a unique F-35 version optimised for its mission requirements, but further details remain highly classified...."

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... et-220748/


Well, considering the large internal fuel carried by the F-35. Which, can be increased with External Fuel Tanks and CFT's, The Lightning should have little issue with range. In addition in the future we maybe have Stealthy UCAV's acting as Mid-Air Refuelers!
Offline

southernphantom

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1042
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 17:18
  • Location: Kentucky

Unread post29 Jan 2014, 15:53

This tells me that the Israelis want a hedge against future IADS that may render traditional tankers unworkable. A fully tanked-out F-35- especially if the tanks have minimal RCS- would be able to perform nuclear strikes across the region. I have a sneaking suspicion that this is the true reason for the upgrades.
I'm a mining engineer. How the hell did I wind up here?
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2076
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post06 Feb 2014, 13:59

Lemme get this right --

We're using a 6 yr old press article as the basis for this discussion?
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21207
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post06 Feb 2014, 18:58

Hmmm... 'Corsair1963 jumped in late with this question: "What ever happened with the CFT's that Israel was suppose to develop for the F-35???" So we drugged up the 6 year old. End of story. Then the 'SouthernPhantomie' jumped in - a bit late probably and then after light years your goodself. I dunno but I do not think the six year old is the basis YMMV. :bang:
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2885
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
  • Location: Houston

Unread post06 Feb 2014, 19:53

quicksilver wrote:Lemme get this right --We're using a 6 yr old press article as the basis for this discussion?



"Operation Babylon, was a surprise Israeli air strike carried out on 7 June 1981, that destroyed a nuclear reactor under construction 17 kilometers (10.5 miles) southeast of Baghdad, Iraq.

Iranian nuclear reactors are a bit further, thus the need (CFT, maybe??) for greater range! :)
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2076
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post09 Feb 2014, 00:12

Six year old article. Sounds like Sweetman…"back in 2003…someone said [this]".

:roll:
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Variants and Missions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest