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

[spazsinbad]

F-35 Offers Dream Capabilities for Pilots Who Have Flown It 11 Feb 2014 Robert K. Ackerman

“Ease of operation and new technologies outweigh the problems that remain to be solved for the expensive Lightning II....

...Four pilots sitting on a Tuesday panel at West 2014, co-sponsored by AFCEA International and the U.S. Naval Institute and being held February 11-13 in San Diego, discussed the state of the F-35 program as well as the jet’s prognosis. Lt. Cmdr. Michael Burks, USN, senior Navy test pilot for the F-35 and integrated test force operations officer, described the aircraft as having “unbelievable flying qualities” and being easy to fly. Cmdr. Luke Barradell, USN, operations officer, Carrier Air Wing 11, said that the aircraft is “very docile” in the administrative phased of flight, and it is going to be a delight to fly off carriers....

...Cmdr. Burks offered that the aircraft’s technologies will change the way air missions are carried out. Equipped with a plethora of sensors and datalinks, the vehicle offers a range of potential alternitives with the synergy it brings to the battlespace. “In the future, it may not matter where the weapon comes from,” the commander said of a bombing run. “I may pass the data along, or I may fire a weapon and it may come from somewhere else. That is where we are heading.”

Still, the F-35’s advanced technologies are offering some unforeseen challenges. Its low-observable stealth material will require different handling than traditional carrier aircraft. Cdr. Burks said here will have to be a “paradigm shift out in the fleet” to maintain its low observability. “No longer can we allow these aircraft to get grimy at sea” as was the practice with conventional jet aircraft, he observed. Gigliotti said that sailors and Marines have been developing new practices for that purpose. The incredibly noisy engine also will change life for deck crews during takeoff, Cmdr. Burks added, saying they probably will need noise cancellation earphones.”

http://www.afcea.org/content/?q=node/12336

[neptune]

[quote="spazsinbad.... “No longer can we allow these aircraft to get grimy at sea” as was the practice with conventional jet aircraft, he observed....”[/quote]

You've seen nothing yet!, America's greatest innovations come when massive effort is implemented in escaping the dreaded "scrubbing detail".

[spazsinbad]

Our old carrier had short supply of fresh water so any scrubbing was minimal.

Depends on the situations encountered by the F-35B/Cs I guess. Probably aircraft will be struck below more often to minimise exposure to any potential corrosion. Pity there was not expansion on what was meant by the comment. “No longer can we allow these aircraft to get grimy at sea” as was the practice with conventional jet aircraft, he observed. Gigliotti said that sailors and Marines have been developing new practices for that purpose." It has been made clear from the start that the aircraft has been designed to deal with issues at sea (which all three benefit from). What new practices are being developed?

[spazsinbad]

Youse read the script above now see the video: ONE HOUR VIDEO Apparently!

Video: Joint Strike Fighter Roundtable: What Do Pilots Who Are Flying It Today Have to Say? 12 Feb 2014

"Joint Strike Fighter Roundtable: What Do Pilots Who Are Flying It Today Have to Say? at the WEST 2014 Conference. Moderator: Mr. Ward Carroll, Editor-in-Chief, Military.com Panelists: - LCDR Michael Burks, Senior Navy Test Pilot for F-35 - CDR Frederick Crecelius, Commanding Officer, VFA-101 - William Gigliotti, F-35 Lighting II, FW Site/Production Lead Test Pilot Lockheed Martin Corporation - LtCol Steve Gillette, Commander Officer, VMFA-121. (1hr)"

http://www.dvidshub.net/video/321590/jo ... y-have-say

VIDEO Variations: http://www.dvidshub.net/download/popup/321590

[spazsinbad]

This is an excellent video. Only download the smallest version because it is just the guys talking. However they speak in detail about a lot of things including the HOOK issues (there were two as explained) and the HMDS problems whilst at the end they rave about the 'delta flight path' for the F-35C that will make carrier landing so easy.

I'll attempt to extract just the audio for the first and last of the three things I mentioned..... To post here when done.

Testing has started on 'shake, rattle & roll' with so far six successful flyins as well as earlier 30+ 100% successful roll-ins but I'm not going to transcribe the audio - youse can hear it for youseselfs.

OK OK here is the HMDS fix(s) from LCDR Burks (Sniff) USN Test Pilot....

[blindpilot]

This is an excellent video. Only download the smallest version because it is just the guys talking. However they speak in detail about a lot of things including the HOOK issues (there were two as explained) and the HMDS problems whilst at the end they rave about the 'delta flight path' for the F-35C that will make carrier landing so easy.

...
Testing has started on 'shake, rattle & roll' with so far six successful flyins as well as earlier 30+ 100% successful roll-ins but I'm not going to transcribe the audio - youse can hear it for youseselfs.

Thanks Spaz. I waded thru the video and there is one other thing they barely mentioned that is a very big thing.
Concerning network centric data fusion and operations, the quote went something like this, "well ... yes the weapons are being integrated on the plane bla bla but understand the way this works now is I may not even have the weapon on my plane. I find the target, identify, choose a weapon, and MAYBE EVEN PULL THE TRIGGER, but the actual missile ,may not be coming from my aircraft."

I continue to believe that most of us are underrating the changes associated with the paradigm shift. This is a big deal! IMHO

BP

[spazsinbad]

Thanks for reminding me 'BP' about that quote/aspect. Yes it is jaw dropping and often not recognised by most because....

...Reel off a host of things that will go wrong - in their imagination of course - never that things can go as planned and practiced for; under all kinds of adverse conditions (which are mentioned in the video). I could spend hours making audio excerpts - that will be the next one (networking weapon releases off other aircraft).

[spazsinbad]

Fire for Effect - Commence: from same video above

[cantaz]

28:55 and 30:15, apparently LO maintainability and filler cure time are not disrupting mission availability. This is relevant to page 48 of the 2013 DOT&E report, which suggests LO might be contributing to a decline in aircraft serviceability.

[spazsinbad]

I guess it is appropriate to highlight the 'BP' quote/notion mentioned above and in the audio excerpt with this LONG article - best read at source - below.... ONLY the first part excerpted with LONG last part about disadvantages and whatnots left out due to restrictions placed upon me by moderators about such matters as excerpting. I guess 'someone' will take care of the rest eh.

Navy’s UCLASS Could Be Air to Air Fighter (bit of a misleading headline but I guess MISSILE TRUCK does not cut it)
By: Dave Majumdar February 13, 2014

"Could the U.S. Navy’s future Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) aircraft have an air-to-air role? The service’s director of air warfare Rear Adm. Mike Manazir posed that it could during a Dec. 20 interview with USNI News.

Manazir contemplated the possibility that that the UCLASS, which is primarily being designed for the intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) and strike roles, could be used as a flying missile magazine which could supplement the firepower of the F/A-18E/F and F-35C Joint Strike Fighter in air-to-air combat as a robotic wingman of sorts.

“Maybe we put a whole bunch of AMRAAMs (Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile) on it and that thing is the truck,” Manazir said. “So this unmanned truck goes downtown with—as far as it can go—with a decision-maker.”

In Manazir’s vision the UCLASS could be commanded remotely from a Northrop Grumman E-2D Hawkeye or a Lockheed Martin F-35C Joint Strike Fighter flight leader.

The concept has a lot of merit, said Air Force Reserve Col. Michael Pietrucha, a former F-15E weapons systems officer and autonomous unmanned air vehicle expert in a Wednesday interview with USNI News.

“This is not beyond the state-of-the-art,” Pietrucha said.
“The difficulty is always that the aircraft it self has no judgment and no prioritization scheme and isn’t going to have the systems onboard to do all things that a fighter does.”

The solution, Pietrucha said, is to leverage the sensors, situational awareness and inherent human judgment of a fighter pilot in a manned command aircraft. The manned aircraft would detect, track and identify the target, then hand-off the target for the unmanned aircraft to engage the “bandit”—as hostile targets are known.

“The Navy is ahead of the Air Force on this,” Pietrucha said, specifically citing the Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air (NIFC-CA) concept where a common air picture would be shared across multiple air platforms via a network of data-links.

Under the NIFC-CA concept, any “shooter” can fire on a target that is being tracked by a “sensor”, so long as the target is within range.

“If you solve that problem, then your missile caddy UCAV [unmanned combat air vehicle] wingman is a going concern,” Pietrucha said. “You can now target his missiles for him.”..."

http://news.usni.org/2014/02/13/navys-u ... ir-fighter

DON't forget - read it all at the jump.

[hobo]

The article dedicates quite a bit of space to the kinematic implications of launching an AMRAAM from a subsonic platform.

Pardon me for channeling Geogan for a moment, but one obvious solution would be to simply go with a bigger missile. (nobody worries about the kinematics of a SA-20 or Patriot TEL...)

The ESSM Block 2 for instance is already slated to receive a dual mode active/semi-active radar homing seeker.

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2013/08/20/navy-works-to-develop-sea-sparrow-block-2/

The baseline ESSM has been fired from a NASAMS launcher, which was originally designed for AMRAAM.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/norway-fires-first-ground-based-evolved-sea-sparrow-missile-from-nasams-launcher-161756765.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SCzBE3f6mQ

The obvious trade-offs would be that a bigger missile would require more volume in the UCAV, but at 12 feet long and 10 inches in diameter (620lb) the ESSM is smaller than the 13 foot, 10 inch diameter (783lb) AGM-88 and much smaller than the 13 foot 15 inch(1,000lb) AIM-54.

Assuming the UCAV were designed from the start to carry ESSM it would likely be no big deal, especially in a sub-sonic platform.

[SpudmanWP]

On that note, what's keeping them from using the ESSM in the internal F-35 A2G stations?

[sferrin]

On that note, what's keeping them from using the ESSM in the internal F-35 A2G stations?

Or the "corners" of an F-15? Don't know how many could be squeezed into an F-22's internal bay (assuming the ejectors could be rebuilt to handle the extra weight.

[popcorn]

This is an excellent video. Only download the smallest version because it is just the guys talking. However they speak in detail about a lot of things including the HOOK issues (there were two as explained) and the HMDS problems whilst at the end they rave about the 'delta flight path' for the F-35C that will make carrier landing so easy.

...
Testing has started on 'shake, rattle & roll' with so far six successful flyins as well as earlier 30+ 100% successful roll-ins but I'm not going to transcribe the audio - youse can hear it for youseselfs.

Thanks Spaz. I waded thru the video and there is one other thing they barely mentioned that is a very big thing.
Concerning network centric data fusion and operations, the quote went something like this, "well ... yes the weapons are being integrated on the plane bla bla but understand the way this works now is I may not even have the weapon on my plane. I find the target, identify, choose a weapon, and MAYBE EVEN PULL THE TRIGGER, but the actual missile ,may not be coming from my aircraft."

I continue to believe that most of us are underrating the changes associated with the paradigm shift. This is a big deal! IMHO

BP

Hmmm.. interesting. I wonder who how they will credit the kill, then?
.,each gets to paint half a jet on the fuselage or is the launcher-jet left out in the cold and treated like a UCLASS missile sled?

[hobo]

On that note, what's keeping them from using the ESSM in the internal F-35 A2G stations?

Assuming the length really is twelve feet (not just 12ish feet) then it could likely be made to fit on the air to ground station but the environment within the bay could be outside of what the ESSM was designed to take. I also suspect that few F-35 operators would be willing to swap two AIM-120s for a single ESSM.(given the plan to fit two AIM-120s on that station.)

Another issue is that the AIM-120 really is a very versatile missile with substantial capabilities in a WVR fight. I don't know if an ESSM could match it there. (which really matters when you start talking about an aircraft that would only be carrying four total missiles)

Bigger missiles offer some advantages, particularly their range and speed, but for the most part modern air to air weapons have tended to be roughly AMRAAM sized because that is where the optimal balance seems to be.

MICA 10 foot 6.3 inch diameter 246lb
Derby 11.8 foot 6.3 inch diameter 260lb
AMRAAM 12 foot 7 inch diameter 335lb
AA-12 11.8 foot 7.9 inch diameter 385lb
PL-12 12.6 foot 8 inch diameter 396lb
Meteor 12 foot 7 inch diameter 407lb
ESSM 12 foot 10 inch diameter 620lb

Of course the ESSM would be nowhere near a record size for an air launched weapon but it would be quite a bit bigger than the norm for weapons that have gone operational since 1990.

If a 400lb Meteor can be carried on the F-35's internal air to air station I wonder if a 600lb ESSM could. That might allow an F-35 to carry four AIM-120 and two ESSM internally.