F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

[asianobserve]

F-35 Aggressor Squadron To Be Activated At Nellis Air Force Base

The aircraft is uniquely suited to replicate a wide range of threats with unprecedented high fidelity. I have talked with sources about this in the past and they have noted that the F-35's software alone should be able to be manipulated to replicate the sensor, sensor fusion, electronic warfare, and communications capabilities of adversary threats. In other words, applications could be designed to limit various aspects of the F-35's capabilities—and enhance others synthetically via data-link—to better mirror that of the aircraft it is masquerading as. In addition, it can be equipped with bolt-on radar reflectors that may be able to be manipulated to better replicate certain radar signatures of enemy aircraft, including those that aren't even stealthy at all.

So, we are talking about an aggressor iPhone here compared to the flip phones of the past. One day it can be a Su-35, the next a J-20, and the next it can replicate an enemy stealth bomber on a nuclear strike mission, and do so potentially with unprecedented fidelity.

The Panther's integrated electronic warfare system could also allow the F-35 to mimic the bad guy in various ways and provide the ability to fool allied sensor systems. In particular, the F-35's little known, but hugely important advanced towed decoy systemcould give the aircraft the ability to appear as something, or some things, it is not one moment and disappears entirely the next.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...dron-to-be-activated-at-nellis-air-force-base


Now, that's training! The IAF should take advantage of this training opportunity.

 

[Immanuel]

Canada changes fighter jet rules to allow F-35 bid
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/nati...a-changes-fighter-jet-rules-to-allow-f-35-bid

Trumpster being the 'Don' again, this one goes with F-18 Block 3 or F-35.

 

[Immanuel]

F-35 Aggressor Squadron To Be Activated At Nellis Air Force Base
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...dron-to-be-activated-at-nellis-air-force-base
Now, that's training! The IAF should take advantage of this training opportunity.

Very interesting indeed. It would be lovely to send out LCA Tejas, MKI and Rafale during the next Red Flag.

 

[Defcon 1]

Very interesting indeed. It would be lovely to send out LCA Tejas, MKI and Rafale during the next Red Flag.

Don't understand why we don't do it every year? Do we have to pay for participating in red flag?

 

[Armand2REP]

Don't understand why we don't do it every year? Do we have to pay for participating in red flag?

Use of the facilities is free of charge, but you must pay for the transport and operation of your own equipment.

 

[Armand2REP]

Very interesting indeed. It would be lovely to send out LCA Tejas, MKI and Rafale during the next Red Flag.

The logistics of that wouldn't be worth it. One type at a time.

 

[Defcon 1]

Use of the facilities is free of charge, but you must pay for the transport and operation of your own equipment.

Then I don't understand why US and India don't it every year. We operate one of the biggest and most advanced fleet of Russian aircraft, next to the Russian themselves. Instead of making costly modifications to their f35s to simulate Russian aircraft, Americans can use the real thing. Both countries will gain from the experience

 

[Armand2REP]

Then I don't understand why US and India don't it every year. We operate one of the biggest and most advanced fleet of Russian aircraft, next to the Russian themselves. Instead of making costly modifications to their f35s to simulate Russian aircraft, Americans can use the real thing. Both countries will gain from the experience

Even France doesn't go every year. The US has all of the tactical data they need on Russian aircraft. I think you have to be invited to go. It is after all training for US joint air forces first, NATO second and others third.

 

[BON PLAN]

If China can hit a moving target ship with it in the middle of the ocean then I will take it as a threat. If it hasn't done a real world test, it isn't validated. If it is not validated, it is not operational.

First atomic bomb was untested before, but it succeed.

I don't see why, in the 21st century, it would not be possible to detect and locate a carrier (thanks to spy satellit or spy plane) and fire at it a ballistic agile classical head with a RF seeker. Or more deadly a tactical nuclear agile head with seeker.

 

[BON PLAN]

USN F35 experience don't seem so nice and fruitfull....

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mi...96483/air-force-navy-next-generation-fighter/

 

[Armand2REP]

First atomic bomb was untested before, but it succeed.

You never heard of the Trinity Test?

I don't see why, in the 21st century, it would not be possible to detect and locate a carrier (thanks to spy satellit or spy plane) and fire at it a ballistic agile classical head with a RF seeker. Or more deadly a tactical nuclear agile head with seeker.

According to Chinese media it uses a data link for mid-course guidance and a radar seeker for terminal homing.

The first problem to overcome is the reliability of data links, no ICBM uses them for good reason as they are unreliable. If you ever watch a Space X launch you will see their cameras dropping feeds all of the time because of spotty reception. If an ICBM misses one update it will be so far off course it won't be able to get back to target.

The second problem is a radar seeker. The nose cone has to be thick enough to withstand reentry which is far thicker than any normal missile cone. In order to transmit and receive through it the radar would have to be very powerful, not to mention it has to detect objects at several hundred kilometers in order to have time to alter its trajectory. It is a ballistic missile traveling at Mach 20 and impacting at Mach 10 which leaves little room for error.

 

[BON PLAN]

You never heard of the Trinity Test?




According to Chinese media it uses a data link for mid-course guidance and a radar seeker for terminal homing.

The first problem to overcome is the reliability of data links, no ICBM uses them for good reason as they are unreliable. If you ever watch a Space X launch you will see their cameras dropping feeds all of the time because of spotty reception. If an ICBM misses one update it will be so far off course it won't be able to get back to target.

The second problem is a radar seeker. The nose cone has to be thick enough to withstand reentry which is far thicker than any normal missile cone. In order to transmit and receive through it the radar would have to be very powerful, not to mention it has to detect objects at several hundred kilometers in order to have time to alter its trajectory. It is a ballistic missile traveling at Mach 20 and impacting at Mach 10 which leaves little room for error.

Exactly. Before Trinity, no one really knew if it would be fruitless or not.

 

[Armand2REP]

Exactly. Before Trinity, no one really knew if it would be fruitless or not.

Exactly, which is why the Chinese ASBM is not operational, they haven't had a test to validate its operation. Trinity validated the Manhattan project and a month later they nuked Japan with it.

 

[BON PLAN]

You never heard of the Trinity Test?




According to Chinese media it uses a data link for mid-course guidance and a radar seeker for terminal homing.

The first problem to overcome is the reliability of data links, no ICBM uses them for good reason as they are unreliable. If you ever watch a Space X launch you will see their cameras dropping feeds all of the time because of spotty reception. If an ICBM misses one update it will be so far off course it won't be able to get back to target.

The second problem is a radar seeker. The nose cone has to be thick enough to withstand reentry which is far thicker than any normal missile cone. In order to transmit and receive through it the radar would have to be very powerful, not to mention it has to detect objects at several hundred kilometers in order to have time to alter its trajectory. It is a ballistic missile traveling at Mach 20 and impacting at Mach 10 which leaves little room for error.

No need of a full flight enveloppe data link.
À DF21 will fly nearly 15 minutes. Give it the estimated location of the target at launch, then refresh it when the warhead is descending, after the main aero braking phase. It will be enough to ease the job of the RF seeker.
To transmit a position is quite easy. No need of a high rate of transmission as a camera Flux.
The nose cone has to be sharp for the re entry phase, at a very high Mach, but once the speed is slower after the up atmosphere braking phase, you can imagine the tip ot the cone to be removed so as to give the seeker a clean and proper surface to operate.

Remember Pershing 2. Same process on a lighter and smaller range missile, but it was 40 years ago.

 

[BON PLAN]

Exactly, which is why the Chinese ASBM is not operational, they haven't had a test to validate its operation. Trinity validated the Manhattan project and a month later they nuked Japan with it.

No.
Trinity is a plutonium bomb. Usefull to test Nagasaki bomb.
Hiroshima little boy was a uranium bomb, with another detonation principle.

 

[BON PLAN]

Exactly, which is why the Chinese ASBM is not operational, they haven't had a test to validate its operation. Trinity validated the Manhattan project and a month later they nuked Japan with it.

Not to be operational don't mean it will not be deadly and effective in real use.

 

[Armand2REP]

Not to be operational don't mean it will not be deadly and effective in real use.

Just as in all things military, a thing isn't operational until it has been validated. This is procurement 101.

 

[bhramos]

#Japan rules F-35 disappearance as ‘mystery’ after #US fails to find the aircraft. It's too much stealth...

 

[bhramos]

.............................................

 

[asianobserve]

'Turkey continues efforts on joint F-35 jet project'
https://www.google.com/amp/www.hurr...nues-efforts-on-joint-f-35-jet-project-143465