06 Oct 2017, 23:05
I start this thread not to discuss agile software development, which could certainly be a part of this topic, but to ask the following question:
Could the F-35 avionics system -- hardware + software, but especially software -- become the basis for a modular avionics system for future combat aircraft?
Before going further, I also must ask, does the US govt own the intellectual property to the F-35 avionics, especially the software? If not, if LM kept it (smart of them!), then this idea could become prohibitively expensive.
We have discussed how sensor fusion has become a foundational principle -- and a transformative power -- of 5th generation fighter aircraft, especially with regard to how it enhances the pilot's situational awareness. We have also discussed the networked nature of 5th generational fighter aircraft, and how the system-of-systems concept(s) are transforming warfare, not just aerial warfare.
If I take a step back and look at the F-35 from a broader systems perspective, I see the following elements of the F-35:
Avionics can be further broken down as
Re-arranging these, one can look at an aircraft as:
aircraft = airframe & FC avionics (i.e. flight computers + sw) + propulsion + thermal mgmt + avionics + weapons (1)
It seems to me that if approached properly, almost all the F-35 avionics could become the basis for the Air Force PCA, Navy FX-AA, and that could be a HUGE cost savings. If the future 3-stream engine (from P&W --or-- GE) is airframe plug-and-play compatible with the F135, I could see the PCA / FX-AA starting with an F135 or F135 GO 2, then upgrading to the new motor when it is available.
The aircraft manufacturer, then, has to design / build the airframe and integrate it with the avionics system, propulsion system, and weapons system, which could potentially all be GFE and developed on separate spiral or concurrent development tracks by the government. This is still an important task, and it leaves room for creating eye watering kinematic performance, but 5th generation concepts seem to be showing that kinematic performance is less important than it once was. The manufacturer also has to design the airframe and integrate those systems with a thermal management system to handle ever increasing power demands from both electronics as well as future directed energy weapons.
Since the F-35 is largely a software driven aircraft, and future designs are likely to be also, being able to quickly re-use the huge investment made in F-35 software could potentially yield enormous cost savings for other aircraft. While designing and building new aircraft won't be as simple as clicking legos together -- the aircraft manufacturer still has to integrate the various pieces -- abstracting aircraft design / development into these separate pieces could yield enormous benefits, and potentially enable a faster / tighter development cycle where maybe you are producing a new class or type of aircraft every 5 years with a production run of around 500, rather than a 20+ year development cycle.
For example, Boeing / LM / Northrop could concentrate on airframe design (reliability / performance / low observables / systems integration). Other contracts would continue to develop combat/sensor/communication avionics (based on the F-35 system as a starting point). The same with propulsion and weapons.
Perhaps my imagination has run wild, and this is not realistic given integration issues. Perhaps you lose a lot of performance by plug-and-play aircraft systems modules. On the other hand, kinematic performance is not as important (for airframes, anyways) as it once was. 5th generation / 6th generation and onward seems to be increasingly towards a networked / integrated domain defined more by software and less by hardware.
Is this already underway, or am I all wet? Has anyone read of the Air Force / Navy considering re-use of the F-35 avionics system as the basis for PCA / FX-AA?
[ETA - I just made a bunch of edits a few minutes after posting to try to clarify some thoughts. Apologies to anyone responding already to my original post.]
Could the F-35 avionics system -- hardware + software, but especially software -- become the basis for a modular avionics system for future combat aircraft?
Before going further, I also must ask, does the US govt own the intellectual property to the F-35 avionics, especially the software? If not, if LM kept it (smart of them!), then this idea could become prohibitively expensive.
We have discussed how sensor fusion has become a foundational principle -- and a transformative power -- of 5th generation fighter aircraft, especially with regard to how it enhances the pilot's situational awareness. We have also discussed the networked nature of 5th generational fighter aircraft, and how the system-of-systems concept(s) are transforming warfare, not just aerial warfare.
If I take a step back and look at the F-35 from a broader systems perspective, I see the following elements of the F-35:
- airframe
- engine (or propulsion system)
- thermal management systems
- avionics (which can be further broken down as:)
- hardware -- sensors, computer hardware, network hardware, receivers + transceivers
- software
Avionics can be further broken down as
- flight critical (i.e. hardware + software required to fly the aircraft)
- sensors
- communications
- user interface (i.e. pilot HMDS etc)
Re-arranging these, one can look at an aircraft as:
aircraft = airframe & FC avionics (i.e. flight computers + sw) + propulsion + thermal mgmt + avionics + weapons (1)
It seems to me that if approached properly, almost all the F-35 avionics could become the basis for the Air Force PCA, Navy FX-AA, and that could be a HUGE cost savings. If the future 3-stream engine (from P&W --or-- GE) is airframe plug-and-play compatible with the F135, I could see the PCA / FX-AA starting with an F135 or F135 GO 2, then upgrading to the new motor when it is available.
The aircraft manufacturer, then, has to design / build the airframe and integrate it with the avionics system, propulsion system, and weapons system, which could potentially all be GFE and developed on separate spiral or concurrent development tracks by the government. This is still an important task, and it leaves room for creating eye watering kinematic performance, but 5th generation concepts seem to be showing that kinematic performance is less important than it once was. The manufacturer also has to design the airframe and integrate those systems with a thermal management system to handle ever increasing power demands from both electronics as well as future directed energy weapons.
Since the F-35 is largely a software driven aircraft, and future designs are likely to be also, being able to quickly re-use the huge investment made in F-35 software could potentially yield enormous cost savings for other aircraft. While designing and building new aircraft won't be as simple as clicking legos together -- the aircraft manufacturer still has to integrate the various pieces -- abstracting aircraft design / development into these separate pieces could yield enormous benefits, and potentially enable a faster / tighter development cycle where maybe you are producing a new class or type of aircraft every 5 years with a production run of around 500, rather than a 20+ year development cycle.
For example, Boeing / LM / Northrop could concentrate on airframe design (reliability / performance / low observables / systems integration). Other contracts would continue to develop combat/sensor/communication avionics (based on the F-35 system as a starting point). The same with propulsion and weapons.
Perhaps my imagination has run wild, and this is not realistic given integration issues. Perhaps you lose a lot of performance by plug-and-play aircraft systems modules. On the other hand, kinematic performance is not as important (for airframes, anyways) as it once was. 5th generation / 6th generation and onward seems to be increasingly towards a networked / integrated domain defined more by software and less by hardware.
Is this already underway, or am I all wet? Has anyone read of the Air Force / Navy considering re-use of the F-35 avionics system as the basis for PCA / FX-AA?
[ETA - I just made a bunch of edits a few minutes after posting to try to clarify some thoughts. Apologies to anyone responding already to my original post.]
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
(interesting content.) But the content is too professional and difficult for me. 
