6 AMRAAM Loadout moved up to Block 4

[SpudmanWP]

Arent you confusing EOTS and DAS, and in what a 1k*1k staring array would be more advanced than russian/chinese /european products? You are talkin of 2024, a "wice as powerful" (what doese it mean???). In 2024, Su57, Typhoon with new sensors, Rafale F4 should be in service then.... Apparently, the only thing really more advanced in IR is the number of apertures, definitely not the sensibility of sensors...
5* the resolution, ok. Don't you think competition will ALSO advance in the meantime?

Yes, he might be confusing EODAS with EOTS when it comes to the Las Vegas quote as there are pics from both systems of Las Vegas, but that does not negate the issue. EOTS performs better than the same systems on Russian fighters. There are plenty of Russian mfg published docs that state it's range. EOTS is getting an upgrade in Block 4.2 but the technical details are not available yet. What is known is that it's a drop-in replacement (no new electrical or cooling needs), costs less, and has higher reliability than the current EOTS.

On the EODAS side, given that the nobody has anything like it operationally, by default the EODAS is superior. It is also getting an update in Block 4.2 that will give it 5x the resolution, decreased cost and increased reliability.

Finally, the F-35 needs to do something with all of this current & increased capability. The current ICP uses, and more importantly shares, the raw data to form a single, coherent picture of the battlefield. The added capability of the new sensors will not overwhelm the ICP in Block 4.2 because it too is getting an update to increase it's CPU power bu 25x.

While I have no doubts that at some point in the future Russian planes will have the same kinds of systems that the F-35 currently has, by that time the F-35 and other newer US fighters will to have advanced beyond the current tech. In order for Russia to catch up to, let alone surpass US tech, it has to advance at a higher rate than the US. That takes money, lots of money, which Russia does not have.

[ricnunes]

So according to your own definitions, stealth is the generation differentiator and F-117 is a fifth gen?

Like SpudmanWP correctly said, the F-117 is NOT a fighter, it is a bomber just like the B-2 for example and as such the F-117 could never be considered a 5th gen fighter aircraft (and neither the B-2 by the way).

I'd prefer saying that fifth gen is a force multiplier and that stealth is ONE of multiple capabilities allowing it. But we are far from the original discussion...

Agreed that stealth in not the only new capability when we're talking about 5th gen fighter aircraft but it's a vital one or resuming without stealth you don't have 5th gen. I believe we can agree on this, right?

5th gen is the paramount of multirole airplanes. And first steps into 6th gen. Paramount will change when capacities, instead of being pulled into a single platform, will be directed by highly networked and specialized assets at a desired effect whatever the platform. (at least it is my opinion)

I absolutely agree that for a fighter aircraft to be 5th gen it is paramount to be multirole and as such this totally and completely contradicts your F-117 example (the F-117 could be anything but definitely NOT multirole).

So lets see, you claim that the Rafale, Typhoon, etc... are not 4th gen, but they aren't 5th gen for sure (completely lack stealth for starters), 6th gen are definitely NOT as well (this gen still doesn't exist) and neither they are 3rd gen, what generation would they be (in your opinion)??

The only thing i wanted to underline is that the definition of a gen is a complex matter and that saying "vs 4th gen" is abusive. "vs F-16 block 10" and vs "Typhoon PE4" for example are a whole different matter.

The thing that your still missing (I'm starting to feel that it's on purpose) is that just because the Typhoon FGR4 is more advanced than a F-16 block 10 - and it better be since afterall they are what? 30 years apart? - doesn't mean that they are from a different generations. Afterall they share the same characteristics/traits like for example, high agility, multirole capable and other features that characterize the 4th gen.
If you want to compare a Typhoon FGR4 with a F-16 then you must use the F-16 Block 70 for comparison since they are both contemporary (the F-16 block 10 is not contemporary) and a comparison between a Typhoon FGR4 and the F-16 Block 70 certainly wouldn't look that great for the Typhoon in an overall Typhoon vs F-16 comparison.

And as such, would you categorize the F-16 block 10 as a 4th gen fighter aircraft while the F-16 block 70 would belong to that "new magical" gen of yours??
And what about the F-104 example that I gave you earlier?
For example you have the F-104A/C then later it came the F-104G and then finally the most advanced Starfighter variant, the Italian F-104S. So according to your logic, the F-104A/C would be 2nd gen, the F-104G would be 3rd gen and the F-104S 4th gen??
Then in what generations would you fit aircraft like the F-4, Mig-23, Mig-25, F-14, F-15, F-16, F/A-18, etc....
Moreover, if we look at what you call "pure" 4th gen, we had F-15A and then the F/A-18A. Wouldn't the F/A-18A be far more advanced than the F-15A, afterall and for example the F/A-18A already had MFDs while the F-15 did not. Does this mean that the F-15A would be 3rd gen while the F/A-18A would be 4th gen?? I guess that the vast majority here would totally disagree (probably including you) if someone said something like that.

I really would like to see you answering those questions/points above!

And again, if it rocks your boat we can call aircraft like the Rafale, Typhoon, SH, etc... 4.5th gen fighter aircraft, I personally wouldn't have any problems with that. But then again the 4.5 name itself implies (and correctly so) a 4th gen or more precisely an improved 4th gen (but still 4th gen) which is what aircraft like the Rafale, Typhoon, SH, etc... really, really are.

[marsavian]

Really not confused, just included both EOTS/EODAS proposed updates in one post for completeness sake.



How it all works together

[element1loop]

Don't you think competition will ALSO advance in the meantime?

Already been pointed out to you that those with best resourcing can evolve faster.

[aasm]

Already been pointed out to you that those with best resourcing can evolve faster.

money helps for sure, but there are many other factors...

[botsing]

Already been pointed out to you that those with best resourcing can evolve faster.

money helps for sure, but there are many other factors...

Talent you mean?

The biggest talents in the world get the best career opportunities in the USA, not only financially but also with greater freedom, more responsibility, better funds, better tools and of course all the other talents in their team.


Espionage you mean?

Espionage might give some insight but it will not give you an instant production capability. Imagine WW2 Germany that gets their hands on a modern ARM chip, how long before they can even come close to producing an equal part?


Luck you mean?

Well yeah, it's always a great thing to base your military doctrine on luck.

[aasm]

Already been pointed out to you that those with best resourcing can evolve faster.

money helps for sure, but there are many other factors...

Talent you mean?

The biggest talents in the world get the best career opportunities in the USA, not only financially but also with greater freedom, more responsibility, better funds, better tools and of course all the other talents in their team.


Espionage you mean?

Espionage might give some insight but it will not give you an instant production capability. Imagine WW2 Germany that gets their hands on a modern ARM chip, how long before they can even come close to producing an equal part?


Luck you mean?

Well yeah, it's always a great thing to base your military doctrine on luck.

Over simplified. Otherwise USA would be more advanced on every field, which is not always the case (see cars, airbus for example). May be you should consider that EU economics as a whole is on par with USA... Or that NASA sometimes consults DA for aero issues, that the very software used to build F-35 is Catia (french) etc., that Boeing is patnering with SAAB to build FX... I intently stayed on mechanical/sofware engineering stuff.

[ricnunes]

Over simplified. Otherwise USA would be more advanced on every field, which is not always the case (see cars, airbus for example). May be you should consider that EU economics as a whole is on par with USA... Or that NASA sometimes consults DA for aero issues, that the very software used to build F-35 is Catia (french) etc., that Boeing is patnering with SAAB to build FX... I intently stayed on mechanical/sofware engineering stuff.

No, it's you who's oversimplifying.
Obviously the USA (or any other nation) cannot be more advanced in every possible field since in order to be more advanced in every possible field would mean having unlimited resources (or near unlimited) something which even the USA doesn't have.
Nevertheless the USA is by far the most advanced country in the majority of fields (due to the reasons mentioned by botsing) and since that even the USA doesn't have unlimited resources, this means that the USA tends to work to be more advanced in fields that (strategically) interests it more such as and namely as aerospace industry.
If you want to deny this than go ahead but then you could also claim that it's the sun that orbits around the Earth instead the actual truth and fact (which is exactly the opposite).

Funny that you mentioned Airbus. By the way did you forget about BOEING??

Here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerospace_manufacturer

Above you can see/read that Boeing is bigger than Airbus!
Moreover if you look at the 10 biggest aerospace companies, 6 are American and the rest divided among European countries (namely UK, France and Italy). And if you look at the top 5, four (4) of them are American and there's only one (1) European company (Airbus).

[swiss]

Really not confused, just included both EOTS/EODAS proposed updates in one post for completeness sake.



How it all works together

Very informative videos.

How will the F-35 get information from space, maritime and ground sources? Link 16? As far as i know MADL works only from F-35 to F-35?

[SpudmanWP]

MADL is designed to work with 25 nodes for a reason, 24 being other F-35s and one terminal to act as a gateway to other sources. NG actually makes a turnkey MADL & IFDL Gateway so that you can add F-35s & F-22 into your existing network without using Link-16. The F-35 is scheduled to also get SATCOM in Block 4. You are also correct in that the F-35 can use Link-16 (along with other broadcast-type data links), but that is not the optimal choice.

http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabili ... fault.aspx

https://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabil ... rminal.pdf

[playloud]

MADL is designed to work with 25 nodes for a reason, 24 being other F-35s and one terminal to act as a gateway to other sources. NG actually makes a turnkey MADL & IFDL Gateway so that you can add F-35s & F-22 into your existing network without using Link-16. The F-35 is scheduled to also get SATCOM in Block 4. You are also correct in that the F-35 can use Link-16 (along with other broadcast-type data links), but that is not the optimal choice.

http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabili ... fault.aspx

https://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabil ... rminal.pdf

So, do all F-35s have to be on the same network? Or can the network span beyond 25 nodes, even if you're only connected with the closest 24?

[SpudmanWP]

MADL is a self-healing network so I would imagine that it self-constructs based on geography & nearby units.

Basically, it's a Network of Networks where an overall battle picture will be shared between the networks with detailed data being shared when requested. That detailed data might also be automatically gathered without active participation from the F-35/22 pilot.

[hythelday]

Uh... B-2 acting as node between sattelite and F-22s?

[SpudmanWP]

Uh... B-2 acting as node between sattelite and F-22s?

It could be that or a high flying VLO drone.

IIRC they have talked of the B-2 either getting MADL or some other gateway functionality. Acting as a gateway is logical given the F-22's lack of SATCOM or transmit Link-16 (they are getting that soon).

[swiss]

MADL is designed to work with 25 nodes for a reason, 24 being other F-35s and one terminal to act as a gateway to other sources. NG actually makes a turnkey MADL & IFDL Gateway so that you can add F-35s & F-22 into your existing network without using Link-16. The F-35 is scheduled to also get SATCOM in Block 4. You are also correct in that the F-35 can use Link-16 (along with other broadcast-type data links), but that is not the optimal choice.

http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabili ... fault.aspx

https://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabil ... rminal.pdf

Thanks for the links Spud.

So with Freedom550 F-22, F-35 and 4 gen Jets can share Date fore more secure then with Link-16.