F-35 as air defence interceptor? F-35 as underrated all-rounder?

Member for

8 years 2 months

Posts: 4,731

Except for ASM-3, ASMP, Rampage, AARGM-ER, AGM-69, Black Sparrow, Blue Sparrow, Silver Sparrow
are those missiles 700kg class and single fighter can carry multiple of them to Mach 1.5 speed. there is no point of carrying high speed missile if it inhibit fighter from going supersonic. I already show you current warhead size is sufficient so they are making bigger warhead.

the largest single missile system programeme for strike called Brahmos only interested in increasing speed not making it slower. with current technology Brahmos can fly upto Mach 5 in newer version. but higher speed than that will need new materials and engine.
https://www.livemint.com/Politics/k9wh7UsmZjtNj0IspwOWsO/Brahmos-will-breach-mach-7-barrier-in-next-decade.html [LEFT][COLOR=#000000][FONT=Georgia][SIZE=18px]He said the missile, which currently travels at mach 2.8 or 2.8 times the speed of sound, will touch mach 3.5 soon and mach 5 in three years
[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]

Member for

3 years 10 months

Posts: 1,081

Also the nice Ventral area aircrafts have in comparison to missiles is drastic. I don't think there are any airborne jammers as far as I know on aircrafts that can jam HF or stealth material that can absorb HF. I am sure the readings of an aircraft and missile to the amount of surface area they have can be measured out.
As said earlier, at 2000 km, the 2 degrees beamwidth will be 87 km in diameter,so the area of resolution cell is 5944 km2, you think the slight difference between a fighter and missiles will make a difference when the cell is that big? No, it won't, you can't even separate aircraft in a formation apart.
OTH radars provide multiple skip zones to cover for those blind areas
No they don't, when the approach angle reaches a certain limit, the wave will penetrate the ionosphere and can't bounce back. There is good reason when you look at the coverage illustration of OTH-B radar, it is always a cut fan shape rather than the full shape [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"large","data-attachmentid":3847154}[/ATTACH][ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"large","data-attachmentid":3847155}[/ATTACH] ​​​​​​​
you made a general statement saying "any normal" cruise missiles can fly both high and low I point out some cruise missiles that don't.
"Can perform a certain task" # "Will be used in such fashion" For example: B-52 can fly at low altitude, but no one use it that way, inefficient and doesn't fit doctrine MOP can destroy tank, but no one will use it as an anti tank weapon, it a waste and too much collateral damage. Similarly, if you want, you can make a Delilah fly at low altitude, but there is no point.
One more thing where in the image does it show it can fly 600 meters(I must be blind)?
Yes, AGL stand for Above Ground Level [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"large","data-attachmentid":3847156}[/ATTACH]
The new MALD decoys that are not out yet
Actually, it had been out and done several flight test in August 2018 Unlike ROFAR that you talked about all the time, MALD-X had actually been tested in real world.
But if that is as how low it can fly you can still distinguish it from a tomahawks 30-50 meter altitude estimation.
What make you think Tomahawk, JSM, JASSM ..etc can't fly at high altitude? Besides, what do you think the range resolution of OTH-B radar is?

Member for

3 years 10 months

Posts: 1,081

E
are those missiles 700kg class and single fighter can carry multiple of them to Mach 1.5 speed. there is no point of carrying high speed missileif it inhibit fighter from going supersonic.
Funny that you would say that since Flanker can't carry multiple Brahmos nor can it reach mach 1.5 with multiple Brahmos light about your question AARGM-ER is small enough to be put internally [ATTACH=JSON]{"alt":"Click image for larger version Name:\tB9BC16DF-4D74-43BE-BD41-269030BF0780.jpeg Views:\t1 Size:\t53.9 KB ID:\t3847158","data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"3847158","data-size":"medium"}[/ATTACH] ASM-3 is pretty small also [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"3847159","data-size":"medium"}[/ATTACH] Rampage: [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"medium","data-attachmentid":3847161}[/ATTACH] sparrow series are bigger but they have far longer range and better speed than Brahmos and KH-31
already show you current warhead size is sufficient so they are making bigger warhead.
You haven't
the largest single missile system programeme for strike called Brahmos only interested in increasing speed not making it slower. with current technology Brahmos can fly upto Mach 5 in newer version. but higher speed than that will need new materials and engine.
hypersonic Brahmos hasn't finished developement yet and it isn't the biggest missile program either
Profile picture for user panzerfeist1

Member for

1 year 8 months

Posts: 376

GarryA I got some very good source information your going to like that I can proudly say this will be my last post regarding this topic. "As said earlier, at 2000 km, the 2 degrees beamwidth will be 87 km in diameter,so the area of resolution cell is 5944 km2, you think the slight difference between a fighter and missiles will make a difference when the cell is that big? No, it won't, you can't even separate aircraft in a formation apart. " I found a very good answer for this and I am sure you will be surprised. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/dae...133bffae46.pdf PG6 " the resolution cell size is large, approximately 10 km by 10 km(example of the problem you suggested). Therefore, the signals from small targets that are approximately 100 m long are swamped by the clutter and are thus not detectable without resorting to other means, such as Doppler filtering. But it seems that pg 7 has the solution to this problem you mentioned. "By using EVA with an increased subtending angle of ±5° (Fig. 7(b)), the resolution cell size along the cross-range direction becomes as small as 80 m, more than a 100 times improvement in resolution. As a result, most of the beam can be focused on a target, so that the target signal becomes much stronger and sharper compared to the case without EVA. It should be noted that the resolution is determined by the subtending angle, regardless of the locations of the scatterers along the range direction. Also, the distribution of the scatterers can be sparse, but the separation between adjacent scatterers must be random to suppress the grating lobes. " "No they don't, when the approach angle reaches a certain limit, the wave will penetrate the ionosphere and can't bounce back. There is good reason when you look at the coverage illustration of OTH-B radar, it is always a cut fan shape rather than the full shape" "This coverage is achieved using 5-to-28-MHz radio waves that reflect from the ionosphere. ROTHR is a land-based, high-frequency (HF) radar which can cover a 64-degree wedge-shaped area at ranges of 500 to 1,600 nautical miles." I am assuming anything below that 500 nautical miles you have said is a blind spot and cant be covered correct? I realized there was a 60 degree limit for some OTH radars meaning you can not get a 70, 80 or 89 degree coverage to get that blindspot covered but there is something that I believe we have both missed(although it benefits my point anyways of no blind spots). http://www.radartutorial.eu/07.waves/wa51.en.html http://www.radartutorial.eu/07.waves/pic/OTH-SW.big.jpg The red waves are gigahertz and green waves that you see on that image are the HF waves. and they can cover those remaining 500 nautical mile blind spot by simply just not needing to use the ionosphere. "Yes, AGL stand for Above Ground Level" Alright I figured it out. It says 2k which makes me suggest 2000 feet therefore 609 meters hence your 600 meter statement. Thanks. "What make you think Tomahawk, JSM, JASSM ..etc can't fly at high altitude?" I only found out information that the Tomahawk has the capability to climb up 100 meters(unless you got something else). While JSM gives the option of a high altitude release and low altitude release depending on ranges. Although in my opinion its more preferable to have low altitude missiles that can use buildings or hills as cover from radars and missiles along with the benefit of being below the radar horizon

Member for

3 years 10 months

Posts: 1,081

I got some very good source information your going to like that I can proudly say this will be my last post regarding this topic. I found a very good answer for this and I am sure you will be surprised. PG6 But it seems that pg 7 has the solution to this problem you mentioned.
Yes, that a very good source, far better than internet tabloid But looking into the study, they clearly mentioned that you need a large amount of scatters distributed along the beam path to achieve this resolution, seem too convenient ? besides a resolution cell of 80 meters in optimum condition is still far larger than the physical size of any fighters [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"3847168","data-size":"large"}[/ATTACH][ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"3847169","data-size":"large"}[/ATTACH] ​
I am assuming anything below that 500 nautical miles you have said is a blind spot and cant be covered correct? I realized there was a 60 degree limit for some OTH radars meaning you can not get a 70, 80 or 89 degree coverage to get that blindspot covered but there is something that I believe we have both missed(although it benefits my point anyways of no blind spots). http://www.radartutorial.eu/07.waves/wa51.en.html http://www.radartutorial.eu/07.waves/pic/OTH-SW.big.jpg The red waves are gigahertz and green waves that you see on that image are the HF waves. and they can cover those remaining 500 nautical mile blind spot by simply just not needing to use the ionosphere
I didn't miss that, you will noticed that i wrote OTH-B in my previous post There are two kinds of OTH radar with very different operating principles The Sky wave OTH radar, also known as OTH-B, they overcomes the earth curvature limitation by using very low frequency so they can “bounce” (scatter) their wave off the ionosphere, this is the kind of OTH radar with 2000-5000 km detection range and 900-2700 km blind range https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GVPdJzfiJE The Surface wave OTH radar, also known as OTH-SW, they overcome the limitation of the earth curvature by using a very low transmission frequency from 1.6-3 Mhz (could be up to 20 Mhz). These electromagnetic waves tend to bend around edges or curves, they are coupled to the conductive ocean surface forming a “ground wave” that can bend over the horizon and will follow the curvature of the earth, this is the kind of OTH radar without blind range but the maximum detection range is only around 300-400 km and they need to be on the shoreline because they relies on the conductive characteristic of the ocean. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3f9JpDmrmMc http://www.radartutorial.eu/07.waves/wa51.en.html https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com/2016/04/12/radar-electronic-countermeasure/ Even if you can merge the two, you still have the blind range.
Although in my opinion its more preferable to have low altitude missiles that can use buildings or hills as cover from radars and missiles along with the benefit of being below the radar horizon
At extended range, it better to cruise at high altitude because the drag is less so your missile can fly further
Attachment Size
image_259960.png 315.32 KB
image_259961.png 111.12 KB

Member for

4 years 1 month

Posts: 815

I assume both of you realise that skywave propogation only works for certain periods of a day... It is not a 24/7 radar and therefore has significant tactical limitations.

Member for

6 years

Posts: 2,012

I want to add that OTH radars are early warning radar but not all early warning radar are OTH. This is VHF early warning radar [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"medium","data-attachmentid":3847232}[/ATTACH] This is OTH radar [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"medium","data-attachmentid":3847233}[/ATTACH] OTH radars are much bigger, the whole array is several km long and they are stationary

Member for

1 year 9 months

Posts: 550

Under normal conditions only frequencies below 30MHz are capable of forming a skywave for OTH capability. However, ionospheric modifiers can be used to transmit higher frequencies.

Member for

6 years

Posts: 2,012

[USER="77048"]St. John[/USER]
ionospheric modifiers can be used to transmit higher frequencies
Do you mean weather altering machine?
Profile picture for user LMFS

Member for

1 year 8 months

Posts: 484

I don't think anyone would argue that OTH radars can't detect LO targets (aircraft, cruise missiles) at long range. Does that have tactical implications? Does it negate the employment of LO aircraft? In other words "who cares?"
Maybe I miss your point, but to me a VLO plane without surprise has lost most of its advantages. Higher frequency radars can be cued in its direction with increased power and reduced noise threshold for increased performance, interceptors can be sent in its direction for identification and even missiles with active seeker can be launched against them. All that is tactically relevant I think...

Member for

3 years 10 months

Posts: 1,081

Maybe I miss your point, but to me a VLO plane without surprise has lost most of its advantages, interceptors can be sent in its direction for identification and even missiles with active seeker can be launched against them
We are talking about a huge fixed radar system that a few miles in length and have a blind area that is between 900-2700 km in front of it.
Higher frequency radars can be cued in its direction with increased power and reduced noise threshold for increased performance
There is a limit for duty cycle, and i don't think OTH with their massive skip zone will be useful at all for cueing unless your high-frequency radar can detect stealth aircraft from > 900 km and your missiles can attack aircraft from that distance, which is pretty much wishful thinking
Profile picture for user LMFS

Member for

1 year 8 months

Posts: 484

[USER="71228"]garryA[/USER] of course there must be overlapping between the OTH radars, you don't want an early warning system that loses track of the aggressor 1000 km before reaching your country...

Member for

8 years 2 months

Posts: 4,731

[USER="71228"]garryA[/USER] I don't know you put irrelevant pics. none of your pics shows the multi-shot capability of high speed missiles nor the launch speed of aircraft nor any manufacturer link for such information. Plus that Japanese engineering is joke. just look at Fukashima and its aviation industry. its country is no longer capable of breakthrough research. so why even post such pics with draggier aircraft with fuel tanks. The Brahmos with increase speed of between Mach 3.5 to Mach 5 is not same as hypersonic brahmos. Brahmos has order book of $4.5b in 2018 and to that past 20 years of procurement. its huge project just integration complex in India is 40 acres. plus 20k people from NPO working on technologies developed based on it. [quote] https://www.ibtimes.co.in/indias-brahmos-cruise-missile-will-breach-mach-7-barrier-decade-768046 The company has an order book worth over $4.5 billion,[/quote] [quote] http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2018/january-2018-navy-naval-defense-news/5908-india-to-develop-new-long-range-variant-of-brahmos-missile.html The IAF is reported to have placed orders worth approximately USD650 million for the BRAHMOS-A. [/quote] you will be hearing about Brahmos for next 50 years atleast. it will have much longer and versatile life than MIG-21.

Member for

3 years 10 months

Posts: 1,081

I don't know you put irrelevant pics. none of your pics shows the multi-shot capability of high speed missiles nor the launch speed of aircraft nor any manufacturer link for such information.
For once, use your brain like normal people, you could have easily search for the information by the name i gave, the photo is to illustrate their size. For example: AARGM-ER is the next version of AGM-88 which can fit inside F-35, in which case it has a negligible impact on drag, and similar to AGM-88, it can also be carried by normal aircraft pylon an F-35 should be able to carry 6 AARGM-ER: 2 internal + 4 external, while F-16 is limited to 4 (same number as AGM-88) [ATTACH=JSON]{"alt":"Click image for larger version Name:\t4%20harms.jpg Views:\t1 Size:\t91.1 KB ID:\t3847348","data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"3847348","data-size":"medium"}[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=JSON]{"alt":"Click image for larger version Name:\trN0uecJ.png Views:\t1 Size:\t297.9 KB ID:\t3847349","data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"3847349","data-size":"medium"}[/ATTACH] For Rampage,it take likes 2 seconds to Google the production video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb8M6IeSiAE [ATTACH=JSON]{"alt":"Click image for larger version Name:\t4D38575200000578-0-image-a-5_1528970593016.jpg Views:\t1 Size:\t30.7 KB ID:\t3847350","data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"3847350","data-size":"medium"}[/ATTACH] The photo of ASM-3 speak for itself. [ATTACH=JSON]{"alt":"Click image for larger version Name:\tten-lua-khong-doi-ham-xasm3-co-gi-dac-biet_14614724.jpg Views:\t1 Size:\t45.9 KB ID:\t3847351","data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"3847351","data-size":"medium"}[/ATTACH] Now, where is the photo of Flanker with multiple Brahmos? where is the evidence that it can reach Mach 1.5 with Brahmos?, you said yourself that supersonic missile are useless if the aircraft can't carry multiple of them and can't reach Mach 1.5 with them, so now by your logic clearly Brahmos and Kinzhal is useless???
The Brahmos with increase speed of between Mach 3.5 to Mach 5 is not same as hypersonic brahmos.
It is the hypersonic Brahmos, and it is under development, they initially set the Mach 7 goal, but then realized that they can't reach that and thus they changed the objective to Mach 5

Member for

8 years 2 months

Posts: 4,731

None your pics prove supersonic launch of missiles. Kh-31/Kh-58 not have same role as Kinzal/Brahmos even though Kh31/kh58 are multirole. Even existing stock of brahmos missile can be upgraded to long range version. show me other missile whose range can increase so easily to existing stock? Mach 3.5 to Mach 5 Brahmos is not same project as hypersonic Brahmos. Zircon already at Mach 8. Don’t assume stuff when you lack scientific insights. Did you drop that argument about size , scope and procurement of Brahmos project? or its continuity to infinity. [quote] https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/03/true-brahmos-unleashed-today-next-1000-km-weapon.html True’ BrahMos Unleashed Today, Next 900-km Weapon “It was a successful test, where we launched the BrahMos to a range in excess of 400 km. Shortly, existing BrahMos units will be converted to the ER capability, and future units will too, As reported earlier here on Livefist, a ‘final’ BrahMos version, sporting a range of over 900 km, will complete modifications and be ready for a first test by the end of 2019. [/quote] http://www.brahmos.com/newscenter.php?newsid=207

Member for

3 years 10 months

Posts: 1,081

None your pics prove supersonic launch of missiles
Oh really? even the one where F-35 carried AARGM-ER internally and doesn't affect its top speed at all. and where have you put the evidence that Flanker can fly at Mach 1.5 while carry multiple Brahmos ? oops you couldn't because it doesn't exist where did you prove that Flanker can fly at Mach 1.5 while carrying multiple Kh-31? oops you didn't either
Kh-31/Kh-58 not have same role as Kinzal/Brahmos even though Kh31/kh58 are multirole.
Your original claim is:
there is no point of carrying high speed missile if it inhibit fighter from going supersonic
Now that you realized that Flanker can't carry Brahmos and reach supersonic, you try to go back on your words. It not that easy. You made a dumb argument, you should own it
Mach 3.5 to Mach 5 Brahmos is not same project as hypersonic Brahmos
It is whether you like it or not
Zircon already at Mach 8
Irrelevant, Zircon is a different missile and can't be carried by fighter. If i was to use your kind of "logic", i could also argue that Sparrow is already Mach 8-10.
Don’t assume stuff when you lack scientific insights.
That quite ironic coming from the guy who didn't know 6*6 =36
Even existing stock of brahmos missile can be upgraded to long range version. show me other missile whose range can increase so easily to existing stock?
AARGM-ER [ATTACH=JSON]{"alt":"Click image for larger version Name:\tAARGM_Er_Range_Extension.png Views:\t1 Size:\t374.9 KB ID:\t3847363","data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"3847363","data-size":"full"}[/ATTACH] Sparrow [ATTACH=JSON]{"alt":"Click image for larger version Name:\tCapture.PNG Views:\t1 Size:\t360.3 KB ID:\t3847364","data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"3847364","data-size":"full"}[/ATTACH]
Did you drop that argument about size , scope and procurement of Brahmos project? or its continuity to infinity.
nope, i didn't I just couldn't be bothered when you started to speak your usual retarded nonsense like it is the biggest project or that Japan is bad at engineering
Attachment Size
AARGM_Er_Range_Extension.png 374.88 KB
Capture.PNG 360.34 KB

Member for

1 year 9 months

Posts: 550

Do you mean weather altering machine?
No, I mean ionosphere altering machines, although some foil hat fashionistas claim that those machines alter the weather too. Sunspot activity and certain weather conditions can also duplicate this affect, which is why you get E-skip, F2-skip and Tropospheric propagation.

Member for

6 years

Posts: 2,012

[USER="77048"]St. John[/USER]
No, I mean ionosphere altering machines
Ah you mean HAARP, they are massive too [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"large","data-attachmentid":3847444}[/ATTACH]
Attachment Size
5982412_web1_AP18239858492316.jpg 707.63 KB

Member for

1 year 5 months

Posts: 333

On this a particular mention to XB-70 #43 post that explain how state-ot-the-art avionics of F-35 with its emphasis on sensor- and data-fusion can be a real help in many scenarios involving both A2A than A2G.

Above all because he IMHO correctly point how this capability is not exclusive to it but can involve all planes of the same gen (and I would add also other planes actually in production/deep modernization process).

I would put a less emphasis on internal carrying of weapons, planes like Mig-31 or Typhoon carry their missiles in semi conformal recesses and also in other planes designed for aerial combat there is always been the research of the least possible impact of weaponry to general performances, so an advantage exist but is not so decisive.

I appreciate the compliment, Marcellogo. This thread started out with promise, but now it's gone. And I didn't think I was emphasizing internal weapons storage too much, but I can understand different interpretations of what I wrote. I mainly stressed the comms and sensors. In the event of a stealth bomber attack, detection ranges would be very short and so a tight "picket" would be needed. And the sensors and comms would be crucial. And with large stand off bombers, the missiles would spread out over 100s or even 1000s of square miles. That is too great an area for one aircraft to cover and so they will need to signal one another and work as a team once again. I only briefly mentioned the internal weapons of the F-35 because many modern fighters appear to get the best of the F-35 without taking them into account. They even the odds to a point. Anyways, this thread is pretty much dead.

Member for

7 years 9 months

Posts: 4,165

What is the standard envelope for F-35 to lauch AMRAAM from inner storage?