6 AMRAAM Loadout moved up to Block 4

That's an old pic, and not definitive.

That's an old pic, and not definitive.

It is recently confirmed AFAIK

Let’s Do More Shots
28 Mar 2017 John A. Tirpak

"​The F-35 program office is looking at adding capacity for another AIM-120 AMRAAM radar-guided air-to-air missile in each of the jet’s two weapons bays, increasing internal—and thus stealthy—missile loadout by 50 percent, program director Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan said March 22. Speaking with reporters after his speech at a McAleese/Credit Suisse conference in Washington, D.C., Bogdan said, “There is potential … to add a third missile on each side.”

The upgrade would likely be part of the Block IV program of F-35 enhancements, but “that’s something I know the services and all the partners” are interested in. Bogdan said this would not require some special version of AMRAAM, but “the same AMRAAM missiles that we carry today, just an extra one; probably on the weapons bay door.” The F-35 can carry two AMRAAMs in each bay now, or a mix of AMRAAMs and Joint Direct Attack Munitions internally.

http://www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Pa ... Shots.aspx

uclass, that image is about 5 years old and has been posted / referenced dozens of times throughout the forum, while garrya's article was posted a day or two ago here: viewtopic.php?f=54&t=52935

Can we delete this thread so that we don't have a billion different threads about Block 4?

AIM-9X Block 3? LOL...

AIM-9X Block 3? LOL...

No laughing matter

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 60-388468/

To create the new AIM-9X Block III, the NAVAIR will primarily focus on the missile's rocket motor. "Increased range will be achieved through a combination of increased rocket motor performance and missile power management," NAVAIR says.

In addition to an improved, more energetic, rocket motor, the enhanced weapon will also have a new insensitive munitions warhead, which will be safer to use onboard an aircraft carrier. However, the Block III will "leverage" the current Block II's guidance unit and electronics-including the missile's AMRAAM-derived datalink.

While the Pentagon needs the new Sidewinder to be a supplemental BVR weapon for situations where friendly fighters are faced with electronic attacks that degrade with radar-guided weapons, it will not compromise on the AIM-9X's close in performance. "The requirement and design call for the same WVR [within visual range]/HOBS [high off-boresight] capabilities as those found in the AIM-9X Block II," NAVAIR says.

The Block III is currently scheduled to enter into its engineering and manufacturing development phase in 2016, NAVAIR says. Subsequently, it will go into developmental testing in 2018 with operational tests starting in 2020. If all goes well, an initial operational capability date is expected in 2022. "The Block III development schedule follows the increased number of Joint Strike Fighter aircraft entering service," NAVAIR says.

I think it was canceled/delayed though.

Postponed indefinitely, although there's still some minor upgrade planned (the digital fuse, etc mentioned on the other thread was probably it).

F-35 fires AIM-9X as Raytheon snags next-gen weapons contract
22 Jan 2016 James Drew

"...The navy wanted to extend the range of the AIM-9X by 60% under a Block III programme for beyond-visual-range engagements, but the project was cancelled in the fiscal year 2016 budget, with only an “insensitive munitions warhead” side project carried forward...."

Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ns-421133/

Postponed indefinitely, although there's still some minor upgrade planned (the digital fuse, etc mentioned on the other thread was probably it).

Yeah, I considered that thing dead and money was going toward pushing missile tech in other directions.

There is an old graphic of a config with 4 AIM-9Xs and 4 AIM-120s - two AMRAAMs on the outer door. Is this possible?

There is an old graphic of a config with 4 AIM-9Xs and 4 AIM-120s - two AMRAAMs on the outer door. Is this possible?

First I've heard of it. Link to graphic? Or can you post graphic? (i.e. attach it)

This looks a bit dated, but what happened to the idea of increasing the AAM capacity to 6 per bay?

Well... that's a nifty graphic. First time I've ever seen it. I see no headers of footers denoting from what document (or other origin) it comes. Do you know from where it came?

From a geometric storage perspective, if the illustration is accurate, maybe everything will actually fit. But the devil usually lives in the details. In this case, the details about how you achieve clean stores separation? I foresee immediate issues with how you obtain clean separation with the "uppermost" missiles or bombs stored along the "doors". But that is why engineers get paid to figure out whether something will work, and then they go test it to death.

I'm afraid I cannot answer your question. But thanks for posting the graphic.

It's fan fiction from YEARS ago.

The size of the missiles looks all wrong.