F-35A/C to carry heavier weapons internally?

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

squirrelshoes

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2016, 23:53

Unread post22 Jul 2019, 10:08

Corsair1963 wrote:According to the current information, the BLU-136/B is a 2,000 lb.-class bomb designed to rain down metal fragments on enemy forces as a replacement for cluster munitions, without leaving behind unexploded ordnance. This weapon is four-times the size of the BLU-134/B Improved Lethality Warhead, which is now being put into production. The BLU-134 and BLU-136 are different designs.
I wonder if they could make an SDB size version with a RF/MWR seeker? It would be a nice fit for F-35 in DEAD role.
Offline

taog

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 75
  • Joined: 12 Dec 2013, 17:36

Unread post22 Jul 2019, 10:49

FS425 modification allows the F-35 Ac to carry "aft heavy" weaponry.

Not a heavier weapon.

Image
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2208
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post22 Jul 2019, 11:54

A booster stage for a hypersonic munition would put a lot of mass towards the rear of said munition.
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 798
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post22 Jul 2019, 18:38

steve2267 wrote:A booster stage for a hypersonic munition would put a lot of mass towards the rear of said munition.


I was thinking about boosted penetrator designs a la HVPW.
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2208
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post22 Jul 2019, 20:52

marauder2048 wrote:
steve2267 wrote:A booster stage for a hypersonic munition would put a lot of mass towards the rear of said munition.


I was thinking about boosted penetrator designs a la HVPW.


Good call.

While it might be possible to create a hypersonic weapon that fits internally inside the F-35 weapons bay, the resulting fineness ratio would probably not be optimal.

Digging up some old links regarding the HVPW... am not sure how much additional mass is towards the rear compared to a Mk84. The HVPW still appears to have a lot of mass concentrated at the nose of the weapon (obviously, as it is designed for penetration.)

Here are some links:

F-16.net thread: Another Weapons for F-35 - HVPW

Meet America's New 'Bunker-Buster' Super Bomb @ National Interest (Oh, vey :roll: )
Attachments
Rose.pdf
(842.53 KiB) Downloaded 91 times
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline

kimjongnumbaun

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 300
  • Joined: 08 Dec 2016, 21:41

Unread post22 Jul 2019, 22:32

squirrelshoes wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:According to the current information, the BLU-136/B is a 2,000 lb.-class bomb designed to rain down metal fragments on enemy forces as a replacement for cluster munitions, without leaving behind unexploded ordnance. This weapon is four-times the size of the BLU-134/B Improved Lethality Warhead, which is now being put into production. The BLU-134 and BLU-136 are different designs.
I wonder if they could make an SDB size version with a RF/MWR seeker? It would be a nice fit for F-35 in DEAD role.


SDB II has a RF seeker head so it already fills that role.
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 798
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post22 Jul 2019, 23:32

steve2267 wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:
steve2267 wrote:A booster stage for a hypersonic munition would put a lot of mass towards the rear of said munition.


I was thinking about boosted penetrator designs a la HVPW.


Digging up some old links regarding the HVPW... am not sure how much additional mass is towards the rear compared to a Mk84. The HVPW still appears to have a lot of mass concentrated at the nose of the weapon (obviously, as it is designed for penetration.)


Depends on the final configuration; a wrap-around booster motor (slide 17) rather than a tandem booster motor
might be preferable since you could get closer to the optimal penetrator L/D ratio given bay constraints.
Offline

taog

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 75
  • Joined: 12 Dec 2013, 17:36

Unread post24 Jul 2019, 12:14

https://aviationweek.com/defense/f-35-m ... eapons-bay

https://twitter.com/TheDEWLine/status/1 ... 7231978499

According to Steve Trimble's report, a source close to program tells him this modification is aimed to make the AARGM-ER and SiAW can be carried internally by F-35 A/C. Also, this is a necessary modification to implement the Sidekick concept.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3311
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post24 Jul 2019, 16:16

eloise wrote:
Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is awarded a $34,670,000 undefinitized cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to develop and deliver an engineering change proposal to enable the production cut-in of the Fuselage Station 425 Bulkhead structural modification required for F-35A and F-35C to allow full-envelope internal carriage of aft heavy weaponry.

does that mean current heavy weapon can't be carried in full envelope?

No. It means that they want to carry heavier weapons, with full envelope available. It already has full envelope with the current full internal payload weight. Heavier weapons would require modifications, though.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5444
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post24 Jul 2019, 16:20

wrightwing wrote:
eloise wrote:
Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is awarded a $34,670,000 undefinitized cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to develop and deliver an engineering change proposal to enable the production cut-in of the Fuselage Station 425 Bulkhead structural modification required for F-35A and F-35C to allow full-envelope internal carriage of aft heavy weaponry.

does that mean current heavy weapon can't be carried in full envelope?

No. It means that they want to carry heavier weapons, with full envelope available. It already has full envelope with the current full internal payload weight. Heavier weapons would require modifications, though.


Not heavier. Just different weight distribution. JDAMs/JSOWs are relatively nose-heavy. AARGM-ER has a more even weight distribution, meaning more weight towards the rear. That's what they're modifying for.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 798
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post24 Jul 2019, 17:39

sferrin wrote:Not heavier. Just different weight distribution. JDAMs/JSOWs are relatively nose-heavy. AARGM-ER has a more even weight distribution, meaning more weight towards the rear. That's what they're modifying for.


JSOW-ER is likely to change that too.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4536
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post24 Jul 2019, 17:45

sferrin wrote:Not heavier. Just different weight distribution. JDAMs/JSOWs are relatively nose-heavy. AARGM-ER has a more even weight distribution, meaning more weight towards the rear. That's what they're modifying for.

Internal carriage of AARGM-ER whose approach can be masked by the Barracuda sure sounds like a death knell for IADS hubs
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5444
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post24 Jul 2019, 19:05

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:
sferrin wrote:Not heavier. Just different weight distribution. JDAMs/JSOWs are relatively nose-heavy. AARGM-ER has a more even weight distribution, meaning more weight towards the rear. That's what they're modifying for.

Internal carriage of AARGM-ER whose approach can be masked by the Barracuda sure sounds like a death knell for IADS hubs


Barracuda?
"There I was. . ."
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4536
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post24 Jul 2019, 19:18

The ECM suite of the F-35 which is stated to "create wormholes" through IADS radar networks that 4th gen strike aircraft can pass through. If it can do that they it should easily mask an AARGM-ER until it is too late.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

aussiebloke

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 73
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2017, 22:29

Unread post24 Jul 2019, 19:19

sferrin wrote:
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:
Internal carriage of AARGM-ER whose approach can be masked by the Barracuda sure sounds like a death knell for IADS hubs


Barracuda?


AN/ASQ-239 Barracuda

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... -f-448795/
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests