It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

SM-6 hits over horizon target using F-35B as sensor

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 09:59 PM
link   
In the first test of the F-35B integrated as part of the Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air architecture, an SM-6 was fired from the USS Desert Ship (LLS-1), at a target over the horizon. As part of the test, an F-35B from VMX-1 was transmitting data through its datalink to the Desert Ship, guiding the missile to the target. The missile successfully detected and hit the target using the data from the F-35.

The goal is to use F-35s as elevated sensors for ships, allowing the targeting of over the horizon threats that the ships can't see. This will allow them to expand the lethality of Aegis, and allow for better defenses for battle groups the aircraft are operating with.


WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE, New Mexico– The Navy hosted its first live fire demonstration to successfully test the integration of F-35 with existing Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air (NIFC-CA) architecture, Sept. 12.

During the test, an unmodified U.S. Marine Corps F-35B from the Marine Operational Test and Evaluation Squadron (VMX 1), based in Edwards Air Force Base, acted as an elevated sensor to detect an over-the-horizon threat. The aircraft then sent data through its Multi-Function Advanced Data Link to a ground station connected to USS Desert Ship (LLS-1), a land-based launch facility designed to simulate a ship at sea. Using the latest Aegis Weapon System Baseline 9.C1 and a Standard Missile 6, the system successfully detected and engaged the target.

While the goal of this test was to prove the compatibility of these systems within existing NIFC-CA architecture, this future capability will extend the Navy’s engagement range to detect, analyze and intercept targets in operational settings. Using any variant of the F-35 as a broad area sensor, the aircraft can significantly increase the Aegis capability to detect, track and engage.

www.navsea.navy.mil...




posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 10:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Beautiful to see how integrated it's already become. The nay sayers will probably have some negative retort.



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 10:13 PM
link   
So if the f35 is not in the air at the time how will the military deal with the same threat?



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 10:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Orionx2

If they're in a combat area, either F-35s will be flying BARCAP, or E-2s will be flying watching for threats.



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 10:51 PM
link   
Why do we need a billion dollar plane for spotter when a cheap drone could do it?



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 11:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Orionx2

If they're in a combat area, either F-35s will be flying BARCAP, or E-2s will be flying watching for threats.

Odd, if it is not a combat area?



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 11:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Orionx2

Then there probably aren't going to be threats like this. If they're far enough out at sea, there aren't going to be many threats coming at them they won't see coming.



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 11:53 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

They aren't using a billion dollar plane. And they're using it because there are no cheap drones flying off carriers capable of doing it, and aren't going to be any time soon.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 12:25 AM
link   
atleast they are finding something for the f-35 to do. still dont understand the concept of that plane. its a stealth fighter with a massive honking engine with no diffusion on the exhaust and its supposed to be stealthy. so far im leaning towards it being more of a test bed that they tried to get allies to foot the bill for R&D. even the proposal to create it makes no sense. its always been historically more expensive to build a new plane rather then using an existing one IE the f-22 and now that its years down the line we can all see that its true. its intended role, to create a cheap multirole stealth plane, went out the window years ago. not to mention the f-22 is still superior.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 12:31 AM
link   
That C2 center must be looking pretty awesome.

Peek a boo! I see you!
Now, go away!
edit on 9/14/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 12:32 AM
link   
a reply to: TheScale

The IR signature is much lower than you think it is. Even with that engine.

Changing the F-22 to do what the F-35 does would have required a total redesign of the airframe, and would have been hugely expensive and killed it even faster. As for it being superior, you're comparing apples and oranges, as most people do. The two aircraft were designed to complement each other, not compete against each other. The F-35 is a strike platform, the F-22 is an air superiority fighter.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

the only thing that would have been expensive with the f-22 is vertical takeoff. everything else it could have pulled off. yeah it woulda caused more wear and tear on an airvraft carrier but the f-35 itself is doing that. albiet its doing it in a positive way, by hitting that same stretch of runway every single time. in the end i still believe it would have been far cheaper and the evidence historically will back that up. even in the past retrofitting planes to fill a role was always far cheaper. as for what the f-35 does, well it doesnt do a whole lot yet and its far past their timetable. not to mention theyve always failed at creating good multirole aircraft. u usually give up alot to provide that multicapable airframe and the turning ability of the f-35 kinda shows that. theres a reason many pilots have said theyd rather be in an f-16
edit on 14-9-2016 by TheScale because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-9-2016 by TheScale because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Orionx2

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Orionx2

If they're in a combat area, either F-35s will be flying BARCAP, or E-2s will be flying watching for threats.

Odd, if it is not a combat area?


Then no need to have a missile hit a target the ship can't see anyway. Attacking somethimg really only works if you in combat.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Orionx2

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Orionx2

If they're in a combat area, either F-35s will be flying BARCAP, or E-2s will be flying watching for threats.

Odd, if it is not a combat area?


Then no need to have a missile hit a target the ship can't see anyway. Attacking somethimg really only works if you in combat.

EDIT: i guess context is helpful. just read the entirety of the qoutes that didnt make it through when u replied. my bad.

:pointless but figured id leave it for posterity:
so by that logic we should just get rid of bootcamp and any military training because if its not war its not worth anything?
edit on 14-9-2016 by TheScale because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-9-2016 by TheScale because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:24 AM
link   
a reply to: TheScale

The F-22 can't carry the weapons that the F-35 can. It can only carry two 1,000 lb JDAMs, and would require a redesign of the weapons bay to carry them. As for carrier operations, it would have required a redesign of the wing box, landing gear, hydraulic system, and aft fuselage before it could land on a ship.

So you're saying the F-18 is a lousy multirole aircraft? As for the pilots that want to be in an F-16, there are a lot more that want to be in an F-35 after only flying it a few times. Red Air pilots flying against it have said that they took off, and were "dead" before they knew the F-35s were even in the area near them. Even in WVR combat, the F-35 has had no problems beating multiple opponents in 2v1 fights.

The F-35 is the most advanced aircraft ever built, and does things nothing else can even dream of doing.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:25 AM
link   
a reply to: TheScale

So if you aren't at war with someone, you're going to pop missiles off at them?



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: TheScale

The IR signature is much lower than you think it is. Even with that engine.

Changing the F-22 to do what the F-35 does would have required a total redesign of the airframe, and would have been hugely expensive and killed it even faster. As for it being superior, you're comparing apples and oranges, as most people do. The two aircraft were designed to complement each other, not compete against each other. The F-35 is a strike platform, the F-22 is an air superiority fighter.


During training they can't get Sam lock and we're forced to use transponders for training so thr ground crews could track them. I'd say stealth was a big success when our own equipment can't see them.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

yes but like the evidence has shown in the past with planes being developed it always is cheaper to go the route of retrofitting existing designs. to r&d and entirely new plane, test it and all the systems that go along with it has always historically been far more expensive then the alternative. when the f-35 is carrying its full payload it loses its stealthiness due to all that junk hanging off the wings. imagine if the funding that went into the f-35 had just been relegated to the f-22. we could have a massive fleet of planes capable of doing their job right now with much of the same technology retrofitted in. shoot just the code for the fly by wire system on the f-35 has cost billions of dollars of development and its still not done. but that 120million dollar pricetag was apparently too expensive so they needed a "cheaper" plane to fill that role. i pity the a-10 pilots tasked with flying close air support for our troops. nothing like flying at high speed from a few thousand feet up doing strafing runs a couple hundred feet from friendly's. just a small % of that funding could have kept the a-10's flying which in no way can the f-35 really fill that role. i do agree that the f-18 is a nice plane but it even lost out on its intended role, maybe it was a blessing though cause it was a wonderful plane for the navy.
edit on 14-9-2016 by TheScale because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-9-2016 by TheScale because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-9-2016 by TheScale because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:52 AM
link   
a reply to: TheScale

And the F-22 that you think it would have been so cheap to modify would have been in the same boat. It would have had to carry any weapons it could externally if it was in the ground attack role. There's a reason that it doesn't do much ground attack. As much as you think it would have worked, the F-35 is the better choice for the mission it's doing, and is going to always be better than the F-22 could have possibly been at the same job.

I don't know where you're getting your news from, but the fly by wire system on the F-35 didn't cost anywhere near "billions of dollars" to develop. The computer software was always designed to be installed incrementally, because it was easier to develop that way, than to try to develop it all at once.

The A-10s are still flying and will be for years still. As for CAS, it's not what you think it is anymore. Most CAS missions are carried out by F-16s, B-52s and B-1s anymore.
edit on 9/14/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:58 AM
link   
I wonder how many more of these fake reports to justify continued funding for this failed aircraft there will be




top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join