Forum: F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Please, please...

Like Barney Fife, load one bullet and let someone shoot the d@mn thing.

Mr. Green

F-16.net Sponsor

outlaw162 wrote:

Please, please...

Like Barney Fife, load one bullet and let someone shoot the d@mn thing.

Mr. Green

They said "damn" on the Andy Griffith show?

An Aunt Bee outtake... Very Happy

Quote:

Clearance for munitions on adjacent pylons and clearance for the flap are the two leading thoughts.'

There are no plans for two 9Xs on the same pylon (stations 1 and 11).

I would have thunk that the clearance would have been addressed when they were designing the hardpoint for the pylon in the wing, not via special pylon to relocate the munition.

Quote:

SV, the pod is new (both the gun and the pod), for the F-35 only (A,B, and C), and is stealthy.

The bird is really starting to look like it is dressed for the office now. Very business like.
In case there were those that supposed that this thing was really not built to go blow things to pieces.

Is there any benefit arising from commmonality between the 3 variants when it comes to weapons tests? Do they all have to perform and pass the same test points for every weapon in their inventory?

[quote="archeman"]

Quote:

The bird is really starting to look like it is dressed for the office now. Very business like.

She's not supposed to be dressed for business! She's supposed to be butt naked, in her birthday suit - naked is her business suit.

Hanging stuff on her wings defeats the entire purposed for having the F-35, rather than advanced variants of F-16s and F-15s. All of the benefits of internal munitions are lost - performance is lost - fuel consumption goes up - LO is all but a distant memeory. All that remains is sensor fusion for the pilot.

sewerrat wrote:

She's not supposed to be dressed for business! She's supposed to be butt naked, in her birthday suit - naked is her business suit.

Hanging stuff on her wings defeats the entire purposed for having the F-35, rather than advanced variants of F-16s and F-15s. All of the benefits of internal munitions are lost - performance is lost - fuel consumption goes up - LO is all but a distant memeory. All that remains is sensor fusion for the pilot.

Well, unless we intend to take on someone more dangerous than Western Samoa, it only makes since to operate the thing with a couple of bags and some Sidewinders most of the time.

[quote="sewerrat"]

archeman wrote:

Quote:

The bird is really starting to look like it is dressed for the office now. Very business like.

She's not supposed to be dressed for business! She's supposed to be butt naked, in her birthday suit - naked is her business suit.

Hanging stuff on her wings defeats the entire purposed for having the F-35, rather than advanced variants of F-16s and F-15s. All of the benefits of internal munitions are lost - performance is lost - fuel consumption goes up - LO is all but a distant memeory. All that remains is sensor fusion for the pilot.

Actually, once the airspace over the targets has been sanitized of SAM/fighter threats, then it was always the plan to use external stores. The stealth capabilities were to facilitate that sanitizing on first day of war situations(i.e. provide forced entry capabilities in non-permissive airspace).

[quote="sewerrat"]

archeman wrote:

Quote:

The bird is really starting to look like it is dressed for the office now. Very business like.

She's not supposed to be dressed for business! She's supposed to be butt naked, in her birthday suit - naked is her business suit.

Hanging stuff on her wings defeats the entire purposed for having the F-35, rather than advanced variants of F-16s and F-15s. All of the benefits of internal munitions are lost - performance is lost - fuel consumption goes up - LO is all but a distant memeory. All that remains is sensor fusion for the pilot.

Is it really? These 4th generation jets need as well, a F35 does not, extra pods like for instance ALQ 131, Lantirn pods, LITENING AT Targeting-Surveillance Pod, a satcom pod like the Canadian F18.

Not to forget a reconnaissance pod as for instance the RAFAEL’s REECELITE.
Concerning reconnaissance, this makes a F35 more multi role than most or any other 4th generation jets.

Because of all these extra needed pods (4th generation), external loaded with weapons as well, the F35 is a much more efficient equipped jet, concerning weapon loads, than 4th generation jets.

With all these extra needed pods a 4th generation jet will become at least some $15-$20 million more expensive than advertized or compared with a F35.

Concerning weapon loads, most F16’s did not fly with a weapon load with more weapons than the F35 in the internal bays (+ 2 sidewinders external).
A configuration F16 for example: 2x 2000 lbs, two or three external tanks, 2 Amraams/2 sidewinders (or 4 Amraams).

A F16 needs at least two or three external tanks having the same range as a F35.

With a F35 one has a choice, flying stealth or not. With a 4th generation jet one has no choice at all.

archeman wrote:

I would have thunk that the clearance would have been addressed when they were designing the hardpoint for the pylon in the wing, not via special pylon to relocate the munition.

They are limited on how close to the fuselage they can get to due to the F-35VB's roll-posts (which have to clear the inboard pylon) and the length of the wing. A 45 degree offset is fine considering the F-15 mounts them on the sides of the pylon.

archeman wrote:

It appears in these photos that the missles are offset to the outsides of the rail. Is this to make room for 2 sidewinders on that same pilon or to make ample clearance for ordinance on the other pilons?

I think, actually, the rail launcher angles outward about 30 deg or so. Probably though for clearance to inner stations. I had heard the inner pylons (stations 2, 3 etc.) may take 2 rail launchers in the future.

Did the "Bee" finally fly with the gun pod? I can't find the thread but it was said to have "faulted" on the taxiway and returned to the chocks. Smile

BRU-69 is specifically being designed for the F-35. Here are some shots of a BRU-55 on an F-35.

SpudmanWP wrote:

archeman wrote:

I would have thunk that the clearance would have been addressed when they were designing the hardpoint for the pylon in the wing, not via special pylon to relocate the munition.

They are limited on how close to the fuselage they can get to due to the F-35VB's roll-posts (which have to clear the inboard pylon) and the length of the wing. A 45 degree offset is fine considering the F-15 mounts them on the sides of the pylon.

F-14 also had some interesting mounts for AIM-9s.

m wrote:

A F16 needs at least two or three external tanks having the same range as a F35.

Anyone know what the F-35's range would be with a couple of jugs?

Forum: F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

First F-35A test flight with external weapons