F-16.net

element1loop wrote:It will be a * pre-requisite * laser-ranger capability in DAS/IRST that cues a DIRCM in order of tell the DIRCM precisely where to point in the sky.

An (allegedly) "passive" DAS/IRST system is NOT going to suffice for this (due to the need for vector, for this system and others)

Do you think laser would need to lead the target? The ranges and speeds involved are far too small for range data to be of any use. DIRCM would know very well where to precisely point in the sky by only knowing the target direction and no range data. Laser would hit the target no matter what it did as even the fastest target could move just some centimeters during the time laser needs to travel from DIRCM to target and because laser travels in perfectly direct line.

quicksilver wrote:

vanshilar wrote:EOTS and EODAS are two different sets of sensors. EOTS is essentially a telescope under the nose which can be pointed toward different targets. EODAS is a set of six fixed cameras. The EODAS doesn't have a laser rangefinder. The EOTS does.

^^
This.

Agreed. I don't see why EODAS would need independent laser ranging capability as there is EOTS for that.

hornetfinn wrote:

element1loop wrote:It will be a * pre-requisite * laser-ranger capability in DAS/IRST that cues a DIRCM in order of tell the DIRCM precisely where to point in the sky.

An (allegedly) "passive" DAS/IRST system is NOT going to suffice for this (due to the need for vector, for this system and others)

Do you think laser would need to lead the target? The ranges and speeds involved are far too small for range data to be of any use.

I think he's talking about the parallax between the laser emitter and whichever DAS sensor has the target in its FOV; a target appearing at bearing 090, 0 deg elevation could require the laser to aim down bearing 089, elevation -0.5 deg for instance to hit an incoming missile's seeker at close range, because that DAS sensor is lower and further forward on the fuselage.

Still doesn't mean you need laser range finders in each DAS aperture though; there's various other means for overcoming that challenge.

Quote from spaz! (Thanks in advance! )
viewtopic.php?f=61&t=53680&p=382509&hilit=F+35s+Could+Shoot+Down+North+Korean+Missiles#p382509

In October 2014, Northrop conducted an end-to-end test of this concept, using a ground-based distributed aperture system and radar-equipped testbed aircraft. The information was correlated via datalink to produce intercept-quality targeting data, accurate enough for an Amraam or Aegis guided-missile destroyer to use.

According to this, it seems necessary to have two F-35... (Insufficient precision with one F-35sDAS...?)
And...In this case the target is a ballistic missile... For cases against fighter size targets the range becomes narrower...?

element1loop wrote:

optimist wrote:"5. Barracuda listens to emissions coming from that direction with parameters that match best the type of target (if known)"

It does a bit more than that, BAE released some stuff on the tech. How a shift in the bearing of the sensing plane gives a range as well. Think of the f-22 passive RF targeting and add some more to it.

By which is meant relative Doppler shift analysis, which only tracks with sub-weapon quality.

If a system claims weapon quality tracking, it is using a laser ranger.

I don't think anyone would dispute a f-22 launching passively, a missile BVR at an A2A emitting target before, I don't know where the f-22 is now. If they are using a laser to target they aren't passive anymore.
F-35 has built upon that system it had. BaE were claiming lat long, distance and course, flying a S course to give accurate enough data for a bvr launch. As opposed to a straight course for ground emitters.

gta4 wrote:So the question is
Can das+esm target rear hemisphere enemy and guide amraam?

If it appears on the 360-deg Panoramic Cockpit Display then it can be targeted.

quicksilver wrote:To be perfectly clear (and to reinforce what others have pointed out above) -- none of the six EODAS apertures incorporate a laser.

No fuzz on it.

Actually we were wrong! Not only DAS as a laser but each DAS camera has several lasers!!
Here's the evidence:

I note your design includes modifications for expeditionary operations, an extra engine, and new apertures in the forward quarter...

quicksilver wrote:I note your design includes modifications for expeditionary operations, an extra engine, and new apertures in the forward quarter...

Absolutely! Not only it includes a more economical twin engine solution (which is very attractive to Canada and JT) but it's also integrated with TWO (2) EOTS instead of only one (1). Eat this F-35!

ricnunes wrote:

quicksilver wrote:I note your design includes modifications for expeditionary operations, an extra engine, and new apertures in the forward quarter...

Absolutely! Not only it includes a more economical twin engine solution (which is very attractive to Canada and JT) but it's also integrated with TWO (2) EOTS instead of only one (1). Eat this F-35!

And it even has 4 PAWS missile approach warning systems!

Luftwaffe markings on it ? I see you're trying to sell it to the Germans too !

blindpilot wrote:... totally misses this critical part of the F-35 design. There is no stove pipe targeting in the F-35. I'm assuming (I have to .. need to know and all) your background allows you hear what I'm saying,.. where the laser is in a stove pipe, really is a red herring,... what they were doing at a system level.

Since I don't have a need to know what element knows, so I have to guess, and for others who may not have engineering backgrounds, I should define my vocabulary usage ... specifically "stove pipes."

Integrating technology into an existing system often is done with "add-on" assembly. In the Vietnam era, we literally, and often, duct taped new systems to the side of the cockpit/canopy rail. Each system had its own end to end function. We (engineers) called that building isolated systems in side by side "stove pipes," that could not interact with one another. Ricnunes "hedgehog" is a great example of this engineering, although I'd add another stovepipe with a racoon mask ... for stealth, of course.

Fifth Gen engineering is in direct opposition to this philosophy. What we are starting to call "mesh" networking is almost like Star Trec TNG's Borg collective. New tech,- sensor, weapon, or CNI is "assimilated into the collective."

That's why discussing the stove pipe targeting approach is fruitless with the F-35. It doesn't have any true stove pipe targeting..

FWIW, and hopefully not insulting to element (cuz I had no need to know .. so had to triangulate what might be of value),
BP

botsing wrote:And it even has 4 PAWS missile approach warning systems!

LOL

viper12 wrote:Luftwaffe markings on it ? I see you're trying to sell it to the Germans too !

Exactly! And it even has an orifice, err I mean... a space in the rear to load and release those B61 Nuclear Bombs

blindpilot wrote:F-35,000 fleet in the year 3535

"Ain't gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lie
Everything you think, do and say
Is in the DAS you took today"

This thread gets better by the minute.

ricnunes wrote:Actually we were wrong! Not only DAS as a laser but each DAS camera has several lasers!!
Here's the evidence:

But where are the extra fuel tanks? What if it can't go far enough????!?!?!?