Don't know how this escaped Bill's notice but at the end of this video by Aviation Week and just before it cuts to a Raytheon advertisement you'll see the F-35 firing a missile. They are building and designing this missile with the F-35 in mind! How sweet it is!
Yes there was a image still from the test for the F-35's IRST system which showed a capability to detect missile launch from something in the range of 1800km over the horizon. It makes sense that they are developing an offensive capability to go with this system.
ReplyDeletewow. i didn't know that either. but it just shows further utility present in the F-35's configuration. mix this capability with a very fast Meteor type missile and you have a cheapish theater wide ballistic missile protector for US and allied forces
ReplyDeleteAgain!
I LUV IT!!!!!
Uhm... what would be the price of having an Aegis for 6 months on station vs. having an F35 6 months on station? Among other questions, how many F35 would you have to keep to guarantee one of them always "in orbit"?
ReplyDeleteMind you, I like the critter --the engineer in me would want one in his backyard, along with several other "toys"--, but my guess is that keeping an "orbit" wouldn't be cost effective. For a surge it might be worthwhile, though --while, say, waiting for the nearest Arleigh--.
As always, just thinking aloud. Take care.
Ferran, BCN.
i was kinda thinking differently Ferran.
ReplyDeletemore like during the initial deployment for forward based forces. something extremely vulnerable like a battalion of Marines or Para-troopers that had a mini-ARG available and only that for support. the biggest threat to dispersed operations is their piecemeal destruction. and if you can destroy a couple of companies in a battalion with one or two scuds a piece then you have saved money (from the enemies point of view)...an orbit of F-35's could be pretty darn effective in that light.
Oh, understood. I'd put that under "surge", though.
ReplyDeleteThanks. Ferran, BCN.
Just to clarify, the sensor used on the F-35 was the EODAS (the 360 coverage one) not the IRST.
ReplyDeleteIs it just me or was the clarity of the seeker view (especially in the beginning of the engagement) freaking amazing?
Good catch Solomon, thank's. Almost looks authentic.
ReplyDeleteI think what Ron might be refering to is this:
http://www.irconnect.com/noc/press/pages/news_releases.html?d=200739
DAS tracked the rocket for over 9 minutes out to 800+ miles -- until the rocket stage burned out. It probably detected it at a closer distance, I'm guessing about 500 miles based on some rough altitude vs. horizon estimates.
B. Bolsøy
Oslo
solomon, would u think it would be helpful to include some of these technologies we are developing back into the F22, i know we arent producing more but add them on?
ReplyDelete@ joe - Certainly these can be added to the F-22 but it would be ridiculously expensive. In fact a lot of the F-35's systems started life in the F-22 program but were cut to save costs and transferred until the technology became more affordable.
ReplyDeleteNumber one problem for the F-22 is its obsolete computers which use early 90's core technology incompatible with the newer F-35 systems. I believe the big upgrade program planned for the fleet soon will address some of this but wait for the next round of updates (around the 2020 mark) for full benefit of price reductions start to roll around.
totally agree Ron. and that's a big problem for the F-22. i think its designed to be upgraded but whether or not we'll have the money to do so is in question...at least in my mind.
ReplyDelete