F35 - Money well spent.

So the maintenance rumours are true, then? :-D
Guilty m'lud!

Corrected and I've signed up for an Army band concert by way of punishment.

On the Tiffy I meant!
D'oh! Apologies...

I really must stop posting when I'm tired and first thing in the morning!

But you're correct, a targeting pod would normally be carried on the centreline.

Regards,
MM
 
Last edited:
Every time I see a fully loaded Typhoon I’m impressed.

Not bad for a Jaguar replacement...
Plus loadouts such as that barely affect performance!

Regards,
MM
 

ECMO1

Old-Salt
I do wonder exactly how does a weapon with a range of sixty plus nautical miles that simply flies in a set direction, pops up, goes active with its own radar, and aims at the largest radar reflection, fit into the modern battlespace or modern ROE.
While not the biggest fan of the Harpoon, what you describe is the Block I, not the Block II in common service. The addition of GPS gives it the capability to fly to waypoints to set up a multi-axis attack from a single launching platform.

I think the argument was that SM-2 is supersonic, so it hits with far greater kinetic energy. It was mentioned here.
One of the problems with the SM-2 is that it is semi-active, so the surface ship has to be close enough to illuminate the target with its SPG. But if you have nothing else (Arleigh Burke DDG Flight IIA) why not? Often wondered at the thinking that gave the DDG Flight IIA helicopters (long range eyes) but removed the stick (Harpoon). Anyway, SM-6 is much better for ASuW than an SM-2 if you are going to use a SAM in that manner.

Otherwise agree with MM that LRASM and NSM are badly needed because generally the western navies are way out-ranged by the potential opposition. That said, where do they get their targeting information? Same problem for them with regards to white shipping. Actually, could be worse given the longer ranges.
 

Yokel

LE
I thought that a US warship fired a Standard (or several) at an Iranian vessel during Operation Praying Mantis, and another one got Harpooned by an A-6E Intruder. My apologies for getting it a bit wrong about Harpoon - I am thinking of seeing a poster of the flight profile.

Could it be that the Western naval mission of sea control, so we worry about friendly and neutral vessels getting hit, but Russia/China/Iran/etc do not have this worry as their mission is sea denial - deny it to everyone?
 

Yokel

LE
The National Interest continues to be all over the place in its attitude towards the F-35 (all varients), and the aircraft carrier per se. However, this must be a scoop.

Match made in heaven

The combat exercises, which have involved F-35C joint missions with F-18 Super Hornets, E-2D Hawkeye surveillance planes and EA-18G Growler electronic warfare aircraft, were designed to help the Navy prepare for how the introduction of the F-35C will change combat, impact war strategy and drive new concepts of operation.

Missions have included “defensive counter air” and “anti-submarine” warfare, among others, Capt. Matt Norris, from the Joint Strike Fighter Operational Test Team said in a Navy statement earlier this year during Carrier Air Wing assessments on board the USS Abraham Lincoln. Formal Operational Testing has continued into the Fall to ensure the emerging aircraft can fully perform the full range of war operations.


Who knew the F-35 has an ASW role?
 
Somewhat conjectural, but an interesting possibility nonetheless.

'For all the yelling and shouting over the Department of Defense’s much-maligned F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, there’s an unusual, often overlooked footnote in the trillion-dollar project’s history: its origins as an experimental Soviet fighter that only fell into Lockheed Martin’s lap because a desperate Russian aerospace company needed some cold, hard cash.

'Before the F-35, there was the Yak-141 ‘Freestyle’ multi-role vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) fighter born during a tumultuous period in Russian military history. Though the Yak-141’s first flight in 1987 was a revolutionary contribution to the development of VTOL systems, the hovering death bird was largely developed as the Soviet Union came apart at the seams, and the newly-broke Russian military was in no position to continue development of the new aircraft after the Berlin Wall.

'The Yak-141 manufacturer, Yakovlev, suddenly was faced with the reality of capitalism: namely, you need money to do cool things. And nearly 30 years after the first flight of the Yak-141, the U.S. Marine Corps is taking off vertically from carriers with its F-35Bs. Here’s how the experimental Soviet fighter gave birth to the most controversial aircraft of the modern era.'


 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Somewhat conjectural, but an interesting possibility nonetheless.

'For all the yelling and shouting over the Department of Defense’s much-maligned F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, there’s an unusual, often overlooked footnote in the trillion-dollar project’s history: its origins as an experimental Soviet fighter that only fell into Lockheed Martin’s lap because a desperate Russian aerospace company needed some cold, hard cash.

'Before the F-35, there was the Yak-141 ‘Freestyle’ multi-role vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) fighter born during a tumultuous period in Russian military history. Though the Yak-141’s first flight in 1987 was a revolutionary contribution to the development of VTOL systems, the hovering death bird was largely developed as the Soviet Union came apart at the seams, and the newly-broke Russian military was in no position to continue development of the new aircraft after the Berlin Wall.

'The Yak-141 manufacturer, Yakovlev, suddenly was faced with the reality of capitalism: namely, you need money to do cool things. And nearly 30 years after the first flight of the Yak-141, the U.S. Marine Corps is taking off vertically from carriers with its F-35Bs. Here’s how the experimental Soviet fighter gave birth to the most controversial aircraft of the modern era.'


It's no secret that the fan technology owed much to the Yakovlev but R-R's expertise has been vital to delivering the -B.
 
The rotating nozzle did, but the Yak-141 used lift engines (2x RD-41s). The idea of the rotating nozzle wasn't new - Convair (Convair/General Dynamics, to be pedantic) came up with it for their Model 200 proposal (which also had two lift jets) - but Yakovlev got it to work (the model 200 being cancelled before it got beyond anything other than a mock up)
 
The idea that anything is truely novel in engineering is farcical.

I recall a comment along the lines that any new idea takes at least three refinements to be successful but the market at any given time will support two at most.
Worth bearing in mind as it means that most things have been tried before, but their failure doesn't necessarily mean they are still wrong.
 

Yokel

LE
Somewhat conjectural, but an interesting possibility nonetheless.

'For all the yelling and shouting over the Department of Defense’s much-maligned F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, there’s an unusual, often overlooked footnote in the trillion-dollar project’s history: its origins as an experimental Soviet fighter that only fell into Lockheed Martin’s lap because a desperate Russian aerospace company needed some cold, hard cash.

'Before the F-35, there was the Yak-141 ‘Freestyle’ multi-role vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) fighter born during a tumultuous period in Russian military history. Though the Yak-141’s first flight in 1987 was a revolutionary contribution to the development of VTOL systems, the hovering death bird was largely developed as the Soviet Union came apart at the seams, and the newly-broke Russian military was in no position to continue development of the new aircraft after the Berlin Wall.

'The Yak-141 manufacturer, Yakovlev, suddenly was faced with the reality of capitalism: namely, you need money to do cool things. And nearly 30 years after the first flight of the Yak-141, the U.S. Marine Corps is taking off vertically from carriers with its F-35Bs. Here’s how the experimental Soviet fighter gave birth to the most controversial aircraft of the modern era.'


NationalInterest.Org strikes again! This PhD paper (dated 1990) shows an impression of a future advanced V/STOL with nozzles, but that was a limiting factor for the Rolls Royce Pegasus engine and Harrier/Sea Harrier.

Are USMC really taking off vertically from 'carriers' - because all the footage I have seen has involved a STO deck run?
 

ECMO1

Old-Salt
I thought that a US warship fired a Standard (or several) at an Iranian vessel during Operation Praying Mantis, and another one got Harpooned by an A-6E Intruder.
You’re correct. From Wiki (which agrees with some other sources). Iranian Combattante II IRN Joshan: USS Simpson responded to the challenge by firing four Standard missiles, while Wainwright followed with one Standard missile. All missiles hit and destroyed the Iranian ship's superstructure but did not immediately sink it, so Bagley fired a Harpoon of its own. The missile did not find the target. SAG Charlie closed on Joshan, with Simpson, then Bagley and Wainwright firing guns to sink the crippled Iranian ship.

Later: Iranian frigate Sahand departed Bandar Abbas and challenged elements of an American surface group. The frigate was spotted by two A-6Es from VA-95 while they were flying surface combat air patrol for USS Joseph Strauss. Sahand fired missiles at the A-6Es, which replied with two Harpoon missiles and four laser-guided Skipper missiles. Joseph Strauss fired a Harpoon. Most, if not all of the shots scored hits, causing heavy damage and fires. Fires blazing on Sahand's decks eventually reached her munitions magazines, causing an explosion that sank her. End Wiki.

For War-at-Sea against a target that didn’t have much in the way of air defenses, we loved the Skipper. Basically an Mk-83 with a LGB kit and a rocket motor shoved up its derriere to give you a bit of standoff range. And the Mk-83 was a lot heavier than any other ASuW weapon and could cause a lot more damage.
 

Yokel

LE
I have seen pictures of the Skipper somewhere. What target was it intended for - enemy supply vessels perhaps?

I remember that there was an issue with NATO relying on laser guided weapons in Kosovo in 1999 due to precipitation causing the laser reflected to be attenuated and refracted, so I have always wondered about how they would cope with things like sea spray.
 
Last edited:
I have seen pictures of the Skipper somewhere. What target was it intended for - enemy supply vessels perhaps?

I remember that there was an issue with NATO relying on laser guided weapons in Kosovo in 1991 due to precipitation causing the laser reflected to be attenuated and refracted, so I have always wondered about how they would cope with things like sea spray.
Kosovo 91?
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
I remember that there was an issue with NATO relying on laser guided weapons in Kosovo in 1991 due to precipitation causing the laser reflected to be attenuated and refracted, so I have always wondered about how they would cope with things like sea spray.
Hence GPS?
 

Yokel

LE
Hence GPS?
The thing is for a ship there is uncertainty over her position as she moves. If she is a carrier she then has to give navigation information (including uncertainty) to aircraft on deck. Then as they fly they have uncertainty and errors in there positional data. Assuming that a target vessel is detected using radar, the aircraft then has to try to convert range and bearing into longitude and latitude. The GPS receiver in the weapon then introduces some more uncertainty.

Hence active homing using radar, or homing on reflected laser energy, was preferred.
 
The thing is for a ship there is uncertainty over her position as she moves. If she is a carrier she then has to give navigation information (including uncertainty) to aircraft on deck. Then as they fly they have uncertainty and errors in there positional data. Assuming that a target vessel is detected using radar, the aircraft then has to try to convert range and bearing into longitude and latitude. The GPS receiver in the weapon then introduces some more uncertainty.

Hence active homing using radar, or homing on reflected laser energy, was preferred.
That is out of date (by decades) tosh
 

Top