Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
Different capability, this is for smaller targets at longer ranges (comparable to LRASM/JASSM-ER) and will provide multi-missions effects including direct hit or jamming.
View: https://twitter.com/AirPowerNEW1/status/1753472788839403705?s=20
Maybe, maybe not.I'm talking about the fact that it concerns the F-35 A and the F-35 C and that it's not as general as that because the F-35 B is not concerned. But it seems to me that the UK only buys F-35 B, so it's not for the UK.
UK MOD told to consider advantages of operating mixed
The UK parliament’s Defence Select Committee was told that the 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review set out plans for the UK to buy 138 F-35B Lightning IIs. As of May 1, 2023, the UK had taken
Certainly not for Rafail.
This partly explains my theory of JSE being the main delay rather than TR-3 itself.
The document describes the situation from the point of view of the instruments used to evaluate operational tests (OT) or development tests (DT), but I'm eagerly awaiting the DOT&E report on IOT&E tests, which will give us an idea of the maturity of the software and the possibility of the programme passing milestone C.
From my point of view, the recent past delays are justified by the JSE, and I suppose that the F-35 team was using this excuse to hide the delays caused by the software. But for me the TR3 delays and especially the Blk 3F and Blk 4 delays are much more important and will explain the future delays. If you read the whole report, you'll see that the latest version of Block 3F is version 3FR6, which in the table is also marked 30R00 because of a change in nomenclature for software that can support Blk 4. It was with this version that they should have carried out the IOT&E, but they were obliged to go up to 30R08 to carry out the IOT&E pre-tests, i.e. the tests that didn't need the JSE to be carried out.
The unfortunate thing is that only 3FR6 is stable; the other versions can only perform the tests for which they were developed and are unstable if you try to integrate them with TR3. This is typically what happened when they moved to TR2.
So I wonder how the tests went with JSE, which are the most complex and generally require the simultaneous implementation of all the capabilities.
The work that remains to be done is to make version 30R08 as stable as 30R00 with TR2, which means that it is capable of implementing all the capabilities, and when this is achieved, to integrate this version with TR3 until it is stable to obtain version 40R00, which will be able to pass the tests with the JSE correctly.
The JSE configuration for IOT&E seems to be for a much more earlier version though. So the report we are waiting for will not cover 30R08 and beyond. We will have to grope in the dark again.
Ship radar, SAM radar, SAM comms, SAM command module etc. Aircraft/ammo on runway.... VLS stack, missile tubes on ship deck. Many high value targets are quite fragile.
I don't agree:
The aim of IOT&E is to be able to be sure of the quality of prototypes and therefore to be able to authorise the mass production of aircraft. But the Americans are no longer going to produce TR2 aircraft, so it would make no sense to authorise mass production of TR2 aircraft. Parts of the formal IOT&E were carried out with 30R02.04 and 30R04.52. The 30 series is interesting because it is compatible with TR2 and blk4 and therefore deserves to be ported to TR3, which will work with blk 4.
I think that the completion of this series, which will go beyond 30R08, will make it possible on the one hand to pass the IOT&E tests, on the other hand to retrofit TR2 aircraft and finally to be the 40R00 base for the 40RXX series of TR3-compatible software.
It's funny. Both P&W and Honeywell do not want new systems.
But if it's done, then B5 onwards will be completely different aircraft, like the F-16 B30.
Almost every target is fragile to 75 lbs of explosives. You only need bigger weapons for ships and bunkers.
Yeah, I've already mentioned that. JSE and FRP were originally with TR-2 hardware. So TR-3 would mean full B3F and FRP clearance when acceptance tests begin, which I'm expecting to happen this year.
Of course, they still need to find answers for deficiencies they find in the JSE, including future ones. Hence the new B5 jets, with full B4 capabilities and future-ready with a new cooling system and perhaps NGAD engine.
Even if I'm wrong about TR-3, and regardless of whether the F-35 B4 becomes deficient or not, pretty much all relevant contracts have been signed. Now what's relevant to France, India, ME etc is the Rafale F5+ vs F-35 B5+.
We are just using the same data to make different points.