F-35B aces first release of a UK Paveway IV Bomb

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

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1795
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post26 Mar 2017, 13:33

marauder2048 wrote:GBU-49 and Paveway IV have different mass and aerodynamic properties which is why there
had to be a separate store integration campaign on the F-35B for the Paveway IV a lot of which
was building up the release envelopes. It's the same reason why LJDAM and LSDB probably
won't be considered for Block 3F since they are aero/mass wise distinct from the non-laser versions.


Absolutely.
The fact that both GBU-49 and Paveway IV have different warheads and airfoils (as it can be seen above) is certainly the reason why they have different mass and aerodynamic properties.
Actually it can be seen in the image above that the GBU-49 weights 627lb while the Paveway IV weights 680lb.



SpudmanWP wrote:The only other thing I can think of is that PavewayIV is only on the F-35B for Block3F and not the F-35A.

That's that this graphic seems to indicate.

Page 4-6
http://www.gunnies.com.au/docs/F-35_weapons_roadmap.pdf

It seems that when the F-35s will share weapons eventually, early blocks will not (ie F-35C only having JSOW at 3F, UK only using ASRAAM/Pv4, etc).


Here I echo marauder2048's post.
The GBU-49 and Paveway IV have different warheads and airfoils which means that they have different mass and aerodynamic properties and this together with a somehow different weapons bay between the F-35B and the F-35A (for example) means that in order to certificate the F-35A to use Paveway IV there's the need of further tests (namely separation tests) in this F-35 variant.
But in terms of electronics/guidance system both GBU-49 and Paveway IV seem to be the same thing.
This being said, the fact that the F-35A (Block 3F) won't cleared to use the Paveway IV doesn't means it's software issue (afterall all variants of the F-35 use the exact same software) but instead it's a "physical issue" or more precisely a lack of Paveway IV testing with the F-35A (Paveway IV was only tested for far on the F-35B).
A 4th/4.5th gen fighter aircraft stands about as much chance against a F-35 as a guns-only Sabre has against a Viper.
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

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

Unread post26 Mar 2017, 15:31

ricnunes wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:GBU-49 and Paveway IV have different mass and aerodynamic properties which is why there
had to be a separate store integration campaign on the F-35B for the Paveway IV a lot of which
was building up the release envelopes. It's the same reason why LJDAM and LSDB probably
won't be considered for Block 3F since they are aero/mass wise distinct from the non-laser versions.


Absolutely.
The fact that both GBU-49 and Paveway IV have different warheads and airfoils (as it can be seen above) is certainly the reason why they have different mass and aerodynamic properties.
Actually it can be seen in the image above that the GBU-49 weights 627lb while the Paveway IV weights 680lb.



SpudmanWP wrote:The only other thing I can think of is that PavewayIV is only on the F-35B for Block3F and not the F-35A.

That's that this graphic seems to indicate.

Page 4-6
http://www.gunnies.com.au/docs/F-35_weapons_roadmap.pdf

It seems that when the F-35s will share weapons eventually, early blocks will not (ie F-35C only having JSOW at 3F, UK only using ASRAAM/Pv4, etc).


Here I echo marauder2048's post.
The GBU-49 and Paveway IV have different warheads and airfoils which means that they have different mass and aerodynamic properties and this together with a somehow different weapons bay between the F-35B and the F-35A (for example) means that in order to certificate the F-35A to use Paveway IV there's the need of further tests (namely separation tests) in this F-35 variant.
But in terms of electronics/guidance system both GBU-49 and Paveway IV seem to be the same thing.
This being said, the fact that the F-35A (Block 3F) won't cleared to use the Paveway IV doesn't means it's software issue (afterall all variants of the F-35 use the exact same software) but instead it's a "physical issue" or more precisely a lack of Paveway IV testing with the F-35A (Paveway IV was only tested for far on the F-35B).


...so both are mil-std-1760??... :)

....has anything dropped to date, not -1760?? :?
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1795
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post26 Mar 2017, 16:13

neptune wrote:...so both are mil-std-1760??... :)



Yes, it seems so.
For example according to the following site:
http://defense-update.com/products/p/paveway.htm

Enhanced Laser Guided Bombs (ELGB) are enhanced with additional GPS guidance capability, to enable improved operational flexibility and employment under adverse weather conditions such as heavy clouds coverage, minimizing laser use (stealth) or presence of countermeasures. With the addition of GPS capability, the LGB can "memorize" the laser spot location, and continue to navigate to this spot for up to 10 seconds after the laser designation goes off for any reason. The weapon can also be employed in GPS only mode, attacking targets whose coordinates are known. The Enhanced Paveway interfaces with the aircraft avionics over the Mil-Std 1760 armament bus, and can be programmed to memorize up to eight target locations, to enable rapid retargeting during flight. When 1760 is not available (older aircraft), the weapon can be programmed with one target prior to takeoff, and engage targets designated by coded laser, when such signals are detected.
A 4th/4.5th gen fighter aircraft stands about as much chance against a F-35 as a guns-only Sabre has against a Viper.
Offline
User avatar

doge

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 159
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 16:07

Unread post10 Jan 2019, 14:43

I found a video dropping 5 PavewayIVs at the same time and a moving target attack video, so I post it.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BsbbQdwguH3/
https://www.instagram.com/p/Briv79AgRzH/
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1795
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post10 Jan 2019, 20:38

Nice video doge :thumb:
A 4th/4.5th gen fighter aircraft stands about as much chance against a F-35 as a guns-only Sabre has against a Viper.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3057
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post10 Jan 2019, 23:38

Impressive, especially if the F-35 was guiding all 5 simultaneously.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3907
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post10 Jan 2019, 23:45

wrightwing wrote:Impressive, especially if the F-35 was guiding all 5 simultaneously.

That's the part I question. How many were being guided and in what way?
"Spurts"

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

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 8045
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post11 Jan 2019, 00:25

Well, the 4 fixed targets were likely GPS with laser updates to cover accuracy and the moving target was laser.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2371
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post11 Jan 2019, 00:49

Station release sequence and interval vs assigned targets would be an interesting topic to understand given a moving target within some proximity to those that are stationary. Am sure they’ve considered but I’d be interested in knowing the potential for bomb-to-bomb collisions...
Previous

Return to F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests