Forum: Program and politics

Flight control surfaces will have no effect with zero airspeed however. But as TEG is saying the engine, controlled by computer and pilot control input, maintains stability as required. Also via computer control it can descend at a controlled rate. I read recently that the maximum descent rate was 6 feet per ?? has been increased to 7 feet per ?? gathered from results of USS Wasp trials. This increase will allow more bring back and also improves vertical landing performance to get through the 'cobblestone effect'.

F-16.net Sponsor

Oops, my bad. I didn't read that post carefully enough. Even still, the F-35 is no harrier. The flight control system can manipulate the roll posts and engine nozzle for stability so I don't see what the problem is regarding weight distribution issues in the F-35. It seems to work fine according to every video showing it landing.

Repeated from elsehweres on this forum (repeated because it is clear and dramatic I hope)...
http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... yak#206645
http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... yak#201804
http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... yak#200931

Test Flying The Joint Strike Fighter Talk by Graham Tomlinson 9th Feb 2011

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/hawkerassoci ... ghter.html

"...The STOVL mode control system is derived from ‘Unified’ developed by the ‘RAE’ on the VAAC Harrier. The throttle commands acceleration and deceleration (or thrust on the ground and in the STO mode, and in all conventional modes); in the hover the stick moved backwards/forwards commands upwards/downwards vertical velocity (or pitch rate elsewhere); in the hover the stick moved from side to side commands bank angle (or roll rate elsewhere) and if released returns the aircraft to wings level; in the hover the pedals command yaw rate (or sideslip elsewhere).

Future development will clear full envelope autopilot/auto throttle, automatic deceleration to a spot, and TRC (translational rate command) which in the hover allows the pilot to make small positional corrections easily, and will then bring the aircraft to a standstill if the pilot releases the controls. A pilot’s helmet mounted display (HMD) is fitted instead of a HUD.

In the Harrier the pilot must obey the rules. The F-35B fly-by-wire system gives angle-of-attack and sideslip control, and departure protection. Further pilot workload reduction is given by performance deficit protection, conversion speed window protection and FOD protection warning; and flight test has a watching brief on the requirement for possible tail strike protection during slow landings (currently not considered necessary). Pilot cognitive errors (of trying to control thrust with the throttle) have been mitigated in the design. In the unlikely event of the lift fan failing catastrophically the aircraft would pitch inverted in 0.6 seconds, and the pilot is protected by auto-ejection signalled by pitch rate and attitude (derived from the YAK 38 & 141 systems)...."

spazsinbad wrote:

Flight control surfaces will have no effect with zero airspeed however. But as TEG is saying the engine, controlled by computer and pilot control input, maintains stability as required. Also via computer control it can descend at a controlled rate. I read recently that the maximum descent rate was 6 feet per ?? has been increased to 7 feet per ?? gathered from results of USS Wasp trials. This increase will allow more bring back and also improves vertical landing performance to get through the 'cobblestone effect'.

VLBB is both a technical matter and an analytic matter. For the purpose of calculating VLBB performance relative to the spec, they have to book certain performance margins for control power and 'suckdown.' There are also a set of ground rules and assumptions about the conditions at/in which the system can produce the nominal performance -- ambient air temp, pressure etc. When the GR&A change, the margins that must be booked change also. A change in the rate of decent would be but one example. Also, any F-35 performance number (e.g. range, accel, sustained G, VLBB etc) that is affected by propulsion system performance is calculated at min engine (as opposed to average engine). As I understand it, F-35 min engine is the thrust the system has to produce in the last hour of its life before overhaul.

Japan confident F-35 jets will be delivered on schedule despite U.S. defense cuts
TOKYO, Jan 27, 2012 (Xinhua via COMTEX) --

http://www.individual.com/storyrss.php? ... 2aad39f571

"Japan's Defense Minister Naoki Tanaka said Friday that he saw no change in the schedule for the United States to deliver its F-35 fighter jets by fiscal 2016 despite U.S. defense spending cuts....

...But despite defense analysts railing on the F-35 program for being inordinately expensive and beset with technical glitches, the defense ministry here said that the F-35 Lightning offers superior stealth capabilities, second only to that of the U.S. F- 22 Raptor, with a radar cross-section roughly equal to the size of a metal golf ball, making the jet largely undetectable.

Japan's defense ministry was also impressed with the jets data link system that can share information with the latest radars...."

A lot of details at the URL webpage...

Quote:

Japan and the F-35: What to do?

by Mark Miller

Opinions Apr. 02, 2012 - 06:49AM JST

Many critics have questioned the viability of a single engine strike aircraft that has a limited range, no ability to super-cruise, does not work well from short landing strips, and might be an overly-complex hangar queen, as the sole fighter aircraft for nations such as Australia and Canada; but what about Japan?

As more nations develop stealth fighters, then the use of radar as the main target acquisition device will be taken over by infrared, wake tracking, electro-optics, and radio/electronic chatter detection – thereby side-stepping radar stealth features – in short order.

If the F-35’s many technical problems are finally resolved and it becomes a proven combat capable aircraft, then it might be a valuable first-day-of-war weapons platform that can take out an enemy’s air defense capabilities, and decimate their command, control and communications infrastructure.

More at the link -> http://www.japantoday.com/category/opin ... what-to-do

hotrampphotography wrote:

Quote:

Japan and the F-35: What to do?

by Mark Miller

Opinions Apr. 02, 2012 - 06:49AM JST

As more nations develop stealth fighters, then the use of radar as the main target acquisition device will be taken over by infrared, wake tracking, electro-optics, and radio/electronic chatter detection – thereby side-stepping radar stealth features – in short order.

More at the link -> http://www.japantoday.com/category/opin ... what-to-do

To carry the argument a little bit further:

As more alien "Predator" races develop optical prism invisibility body armor, then the use of the eyes as humanity's main target acquisition device will be taken over by ears, noses, fingers, and tongues - thereby side-stepping the fact that your troops are functionally blind against the Predators - in short order.

And of course, this will result in a sensor-based arms race to develop ever-stealthier aircraft and more-capable sensors. As I believe I've said before, the future of air combat could very well be Hunt For Red October-esque long-duration hide-and-go-seek games, supported by VLO and the apparent trend of the high-capability 5th-gen fighters being long-range twin-engine (and two-seat, in some cases) air superiority fighters. Just my Two Cents

southernphantom wrote:

And of course, this will result in a sensor-based arms race to develop ever-stealthier aircraft and more-capable sensors. As I believe I've said before, the future of air combat could very well be Hunt For Red October-esque long-duration hide-and-go-seek games, supported by VLO and the apparent trend of the high-capability 5th-gen fighters being long-range twin-engine (and two-seat, in some cases) air superiority fighters. Just my Two Cents

I think that's a possible arms race, but the more I've been thinking about it the less likely it seems to me. No matter how you cut it, an airplane will never have the endurance of an SSN. You can't sit there and quietly tail another plane. You find it and kill it fast, or you avoid it. If you can't kill it fast, you will run out of fuel and need to go home. So, I think there will be a lot of not-finding-in-the-first-place, and a lot of avoiding. You can't really fight a stealth fighter, even with another stealth fighter. If someone takes away your radar, you aren't going to be able to get that capability back, any more than the Governator can taste his way to the invisible Predator aliens; radar just has insurmountable advantages over other sensors. At best you'll be only part of the way back to where you would've been if your radar would only work against the enemy stealth fighters. Stealth air superiority fighters will remain useful for wiping out the legacy fighters and bombers, but I doubt they'll even be able to fight each other, or meaningfully hunt stealth bombers. Besides, the enemy will never have a significant portion of its population, or its fighting forces, flying around in small fighters. If you want to hurt the enemy, you have to attack their assets on the ground. Killing their fighters was just the legacy way to get at their ground assets. Sneaking past is the 5th gen way.

Which points up, the trend in 5th gen fighters (in so far as only two measly points establish a trend, there being only two in production that have demonstrated stealth) has actually been to single-engine planes with adequate stealth (stealth greater than needed to get you in weapons release range is money wasted), a longer range, less kinematics, and a focus on ground attack. Even among the near-stealth and maybe-will-go-into-production, the F-22 is the only pure air superiority fighter. PAK-FA is decidedly multi-role, and J-20 is almost certainly a coastal bomber. And in both of those cases, the decision to use twin engines is almost certainly a reaction to not having an engine as good as the F-135 to make a single-engined fighter with. Twin-engine and longer-ranged are incompatible in a fighter/bomber. One engine will be more efficient (in purchase cost and maintenance as well as fuel use) and give less heat signature than two, unless you simply can't produce one engine good enough to meet your needed performance. Avoidance and ground attack are where the focus will be. Indeed, if you look at all the stealth aircraft, the F-22 is a blip driven by its particular time. As the first actual stealth fighter, it had insurmountable advantages over large numbers of legacy fighters, that it made sense to exploit. But since you still can't really fight a stealth fighter, even with another stealth fighter, it makes very little sense to keep spending a lot of money on fighting the Law of Diminishing Returns to try to kill enemy stealth fighters you'll only wind up failing to kill anyway. You can simply go around an air superiority fighter and kill whatever it was protecting if it can't see you either. If it was protecting its airfield, you might just kill it without ever seeing it, too.

H/T to SNAFU's 'solomon':

Japan – F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Aircraft

http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/ ... _12-15.pdf (44Kb)

"WASHINGTON, May 1, 2012 – The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress April 30 of a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Government of Japan for a possible sale of an initial four F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Conventional Take-Off and Landing (CTOL) aircraft with an option to purchase an additional 38 F-35 CTOL aircraft. The estimated cost is $10 billion.

All aircraft will be configured with the Pratt and Whitney F-135 engines, and 5 spare Pratt and Whitney F-135 engines. Other Aircraft Equipment includes: Electronic Warfare Systems, Command, Control, Communication, Computers and Intelligence/Communication, Navigational and Identifications (C4I/CNI), Autonomic Logistics Global Support System (ALGS), Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS), Flight Mission Trainer, Weapons Employment Capability, and other Subsystems, Features, and Capabilities, F-35 unique infrared flares, reprogramming center, and F-35 Performance Based Logistics. Also included: software development/integration, flight test instrumentation, aircraft ferry and tanker support, spare and repair parts, support equipment, tools and test equipment, technical data and publications, personnel training and training equipment, U.S. Government and contractor engineering, technical, and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is $10 billion....

...The proposed sale of aircraft and support will augment Japan’s operational aircraft inventory and enhance its air-to-air and air-to-ground self-defense capability. The Japan Air Self-Defense Force’s F-4 aircraft will be decommissioned as F-35’s are added to the inventory...."

U.S. May Sell 4 F-35s to Japan May. 2, 2012 By WENDELL MINNICK

http://www.defensenews.com/article/2012 ... /305020001

"...Implementation of the proposed sale could take as long as 15 years, according to the press release, but industry sources indicated deliveries could begin as early as 2016.

The number of JSFs could expand to 100-120 F-35As for the F-XX program to replace the Mitsubishi F-15J/DJ Eagles.

Contractor representatives will be in Japan to conduct engineering technical services and autonomic logistics and global support for after-aircraft delivery, according to the press release.

During the Singapore Airshow in February, Lockheed Martin’s Dave Scott, director of F-35 international customer engagement, said that with U.S. government approval, Lockheed offered Japan as an F-35A final assembly and check-out site, “which is where they put the four major structural components of the airplane together, install the engines and all the electronic systems, do the codings, do the test flights.”

Lockheed is also offering construction of major structural components and subcomponents, engine assembly, integration and test, and light maintenance and repair, he said."

Japan, U.S. may sign F-35 contract in June [2012] May 10, 2012

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/rss/nn20120510a9.html

"WASHINGTON — The United States is making final arrangements with Japan for both parties to sign a contract next month for Tokyo's purchase of four F-35 stealth fighters, a top U.S. Navy officer indicated Tuesday.

Vice Adm. David Venlet signalled this at a hearing of the Senate Armed Service Committee's Subcommittee on Airland. Japan wants the four F-35s delivered in fiscal 2016.

If the two governments seal the contract, it will pave the way for the delivery in 2016, Venlet said. He added that the software program to be installed on the F-35 will be completed that year as well....

...In Tokyo, Chief Cabinet Secretary Osamu Fujimura said at a press conference that Japan will urge the United States to stick to the initial price tag of ¥8.9 billion per aircraft.

The Defense Ministry estimates the principal fuselage itself to cost around ¥8.9 billion, while the price would be ¥9.9 billion per aircraft, including spare parts.

Tokyo hopes Washington will sign the contract by the end of next month, Fujimura said."

"I think that's a possible arms race, but the more I've been thinking about it the less likely it seems to me. No matter how you cut it, an airplane will never have the endurance of an SSN. You can't sit there and quietly tail another plane. You find it and kill it fast, or you avoid it. If you can't kill it fast, you will run out of fuel and need to go home. So, I think there will be a lot of not-finding-in-the-first-place, and a lot of avoiding. You can't really fight a stealth fighter, even with another stealth fighter. If someone takes away your radar, you aren't going to be able to get that capability back, any more than the Governator can taste his way to the invisible Predator aliens; radar just has insurmountable advantages over other sensors. "

If stealth planes start to become commonplace then the development of bi-static low frequency radar combined with better IR/Optical systems will allow for their detection. That stuff has a lot of limitations & costs but it's a possible solution.

Japan to buy F-35 stealth jet despite rising cost TOKYO, Jun 29, 2012 (Xinhua via COMTEX)

http://www.individual.com/storyrss.php? ... f5a1a3e31a

"Japan on Friday confirmed the order to purchase the F-35 stealth jet as its next-generation fighter jet despite the aircraft's higher price.

Japan plans to acquire a total of 42 jets with the first four delivered by 2016. Each aircraft is set to cost about 10.2 billion yen (about 128 million U.S. dollars), according to local media reports...."

[quote="spazsinbad"]Japan to buy F-35 stealth jet despite rising cost ..."Japan on Friday confirmed ...quote]

another slant

Japan Agrees to F-35 Buy Despite Price Increase

http://www.defensenews.com/article/2012 ... /306290002

...On June 29, Tokyo signed a Letter of Offer and Acceptance for four fighter jets at $120 million each, along with two simulators and other accessories for a total cost of 60 billion yen...

Now we can watch for the LRIP 7 contract mod to LM. Smile

Forum: Program and politics

Japan F-35 Decision Genuinely Based Upon Capability