Wednesday, May 15, 2019

A snippet:
Because the F-35 is highly integrated, it isn’t so easy to describe where the EW system ends and other parts on the electronic architecture start. Everything gets channeled through a central processor that sorts out diverse inputs at the rate of a trillion operations per second, and then the most appropriate on-board systems are used to address threats as needed. For instance, a “distributed aperture system” of six infrared cameras scattered around the airframe might detect surface-to-air missile launches originating from a particular location, leading to a pilot’s decision not only to dispense flares but also jam radars in the same area using the fighter’s multi-function radar.

Executing that kind of complicated response from a legacy fighter would take precious time, and might not be feasible at all given design limitations. Moreover, a legacy fighter would lack the advantage of an integrated stealth design, making it much more vulnerable even with EW upgrades. No aircraft can be invisible in every electromagnetic frequency, but the F-35 is designed to be so hard to detect in the frequencies used by targeting radars that an enemy would need to be nearly within visible range to even attempt a kill (very few enemies would be able to get that close without being shot down).
There are many arcane features of the F-35 EW system that I don’t have space to describe here, such as the towed decoy that distracts incoming missiles and the digital library that stores details about all known threats. Suffice it to say that when you take into account all the electronic features of the F-35 fighter and then combine them with the stealth qualities of engine and airframe, you end up with an invincible combat aircraft piloted by an operator with unprecedented situational awareness. This is why F-35s typically kill over 20 adversary aircraft for every friendly loss in exercises aimed at honing pilot skills.

7 comments:

  1. All true, but keeping them in the air (readiness rate) has been a problem for them and the F-22

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Technology is great.........when it works

      also, making a system more complex adds more possibilities for failure

      Delete
  2. NOTHING is 'invincible' - and if the opposition has a 30 to 1 advantage they CAN take those 20-1 losses and still carry the day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Russkies don't have as much operational as we do and we are down flyables and pilots.

      Delete
  3. F35 is supposed to be the "less expensive alternative" to the F22? Sure. I believe that, don't you?
    has anyone done a DACM test between a F35 and F22? and what are the results?

    ReplyDelete
  4. These things are junk. All the parts manufactured by different companies and thrown together. Overly complicated, they've been plagued with issues, and pilots don't like flying em.

    ReplyDelete
  5. when the dust settles it may become a ok strike aircraft. it's no fighter by any means you can observe. bomber because it needs a bunch of external fuel so where went stealth? . it's not an interceptor because it's slow, short time/ranged, and limited in fire power to defend the fleet.
    I look at as the Viet Minh coolie walking a load of mortar shells south for weeks on end finally sticking them down the tube to hit the hated invaders and finding out it was a dud all along. that's pretty much how I see the F-35. in the scheme of things, another R. S. McNamara boondoggle well above the par of the F-111 Aardvark. I bet a lot of people did not see that coming either, except maybe Adm. Crowe. and that weapon system turned out to be the best medium bomber ever built.

    ReplyDelete