Lockheed-Martin F-35 "Lightning II" - Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), page 8
Pages: <<  5    6    7    8    9  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 12:45 PM by Cjwinnit
Originally posted by intelgurl
F-35 & AIM-9's
One interesting point that came up in that discussion was why does the F-22 have it's AIM-9 in an internal bay and the F-35 only have it available for external mounting. (internal mounting is more stealthy).
My answer was at the time an educated guess and has since been confirmed by someone I know who is affiliated with the AIM-9X program.
The answer is that the AIM-9 requires a forward looking bay from which to "sniff out" targets. (In-fuselage bays in the belly of the plane will not work for the AIM-9).
The F-22 has 2 side bays specifically for 2 AIM-9 missiles in each bay. The F-35 does not have these side bays due to the need to stay within the required cost parameters.
It also bears mentioning that the F-35 can still internally mount other air-to-air munitions such as the AIM-120, so it is not unprotected in that regard.


Something needs clearing up. the AIM-9 may be too big for the JSF bays but I believe the specialist equipment needed to launch heatseekers from an internal bay (like the F-22) will at least be optional in the JSF.

I say that because the RAF and the australian air force have plenty of AIM-132 ASRAAM missiles which air also heatseeking AA missiles. It's either an upgrade problem with the AIM-9L/M/X missiles or it simply doesn't fit.

The AIM-132 is thinner than the AIM-9 and is relatively new so may fit internally into the JSF.

ASRAAM's are already standard fit on Eurofighter Typhoon, the aussie F-18's and the Tornado F3.

Sidewinder: Length ( 2.87 m ) Diameter (0.13 m ) Finspan ( 63 cm )
ASRAAM: Length ( 2.73 m ) Diameter ( 0.168 m ) Finspan ( 45 cm )

(compare the fins on an ASRAAM or ASMT to those on a Sidewinder)

Side doors for a bunch of JSF's would be a cool idea but they would have to be really small (just for ASRAAM's and maybe
ASMT ) or the profile of the aircraft may have to change. If the missiles were pinned to the inside of the doors it could be a very small bay indeed.

Would it be worth it? Definately, at least to the Navy. Bear in mind with this mod the planes could carry 4x AMRAAM and 2x ASRAAM, and considering the RN will use the plane as an air superiority aircraft for fleet defence (as well as a strike plane) something tells me they would love this upgrade. It would basically give them a "mini-F-22" albeit not quite so good.

Edit: Is it just me, or do Brimstone and the Joint Common Missile look really similar??

[edit on 22-11-2004 by Cjwinnit]



reply posted on 22-11-2004 @ 01:33 PM by Cjwinnit
Hmm, it's getting interesting:

en.wikipedia.org...

"While all three versions had an initial slate of intended users, the situation is now somewhat fluid. With real-world performance of the Harrier being seen as positive, USAF is considering the F-35B (Stovl). The Royal Navy is considering ordering the F-35C (carrier) variant for its large CVF carriers."

Anecdotally, I've read in a few places that the RAF is looking at the F-35 A as a strike platform.


reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 12:22 PM by thelibra
As to the original post, I can say, with 100% certainty and validated fact by multiple LM employees that, yes, the JSF is going to be the workhorse of airborn forces around the world for the next 20-50 years. However, it would be more accurate to state it is replacing the F-16, rather than the F-22. Both have entirely different mission specs and needs, and the JSF's versatility is more closely match to the F-16, as opposed to the much more specialized F-22. Additional confirmation is available in the form of public sales records to our own armed forces and other countries.

It is a truly remarkable plane.

Additional technically non-confidential information, but probably largely unknown to the general public, is the capacity for the JSF to use High Energy Weapon (HEW) lasers. This is not to say they are currently outfitted, but rather they have the right potential to deal with the increased heat load, thanks to the AIR-fan near-vertical lift design (as opposed to Boeing's x-plane design, which involved jets), and the type of fuel used. Fuel, burning hotter, turns out not to be a problem for the engine design, it merely makes the plane fly faster. So it can be used as a coolant. Ambient heat generated by the laser(s) can be vented by the air fan. It's really quite brilliant. Currently, the only obstacle is managing to overcome the difficulties inherent in targeting something through several hundred or thousand feet worth of atmosphere. Since the amount of damage a laser can cause is largely determined by power AND the length of exposure to the target, a "dancing spot" of two variable feet will likely not cut the mustard, but it might just cause enough extra heat load to disable an aircraft or a missile. Since most aircraft and airborn weapons are built to operate at near-maximum heat-load, you needn't cut them in half, you only have to heat them up a little bit more. So don't expect us to see Star Wars-style laser beam fights anytime soon, but you can reasonably expect for anti-missile defense and air-to-air offense systems on the JSF to include lasers that will disable dangers. This information was made public at the 2004 Dallas IEEE MetroCon. The speaker was LM's own Mike...something...Jones, I think...

In any event, the JSF is truly a revolutionary design and marks the crowning achievement of currently known fighter-jet innovation. Thank god they're on our side...

[edit on 11/24/2004 by thelibra]


reply posted on 24-11-2004 @ 01:13 PM by jetsetter
This may clear up some things:

F-35 internal weapons


F-35 external weapons


F-35 weapons bay


It is also not surprising that the weapons to be carried by both the F-35 and F-22 are comparable to those carried by the F-16 and F-15, respectively. Both the F-15 and F-22 were designed primarily for air-to-air combat and feature a corresponding weapons load of air-to-air missiles. As discussed in a previous question about the F-22 weapons carriage capacity, the aircraft is equipped with four internal bays. Two small side bays are designed for the short-range AIM-9M Sidewinder air-to-air missile while the two center bays were each sized around three medium-range AIM-120C AMRAAM missiles. The F-35, being a much smaller aircraft, has only two center bays. The location and size of these two bays, as well as six external wing pylons, can be seen in the following image. The diagram compares the weapons stations on the CTOL and largely identical short takeoff and landing (STOVL) variants of the JSF versus the carrier-based (CV) model that has a larger wing.

General layout of weapons bays and external hardpoints on the JSF variants
Compared to the JSF, the F-22 Raptor is indeed larger in size and internal volume. Nevertheless, the F-22 suffers from one key limitation. Its center bays were designed around the AIM-120 AMRAAM that is only about 12 ft (3.65 m) in length and has a maximum fin span of about 1.5 ft (0.45 m). These dimensions are quite sufficient for the aircraft's primary role as an air superiority fighter. However, the end of the Cold War forced the Air Force to change priorities and give the F-22 a stronger ground attack capability. Unfortunately........................
More at www.aerospaceweb.org...


[edit on 11/24/04 by jetsetter]
Pages: <<  5    6    7    8    9  >>    ^^TOP^^



Eerie Second World War RAF fighter plane discovered in the Sahara
  Posted 16 days ago with 8 member flags
Amazing video of 747 lifting in place in extreme wind conditions
  Posted 0 days ago with 8 member flags
Stealth chopper based in Nevada
  Posted 15 days ago with 4 member flags
HIFiRE Scramjet Research Flight Will Advance Hypersonic Technology
  Posted 14 days ago with 2 member flags