Question: Could the F35s be radarless because it is more efficient to obtain detailed sensory coverage from another source and transmit the details to each F35?
Hey William, good question, and yes, the F-35 is absolutely designed to fight as part of a network. It can receive sensor data from other F-35s, AWACS, ships, ground systems, and other aircraft. That’s one of the jet’s major strengths. But that’s different from saying the radar is optional.
The radar is still one of the F-35’s core sensors. It helps generate its own targeting-quality picture, supports air-to-air and air-to-ground modes, contributes to electronic warfare, and gives the pilot an independent sensor when datalinks are jammed, degraded, unavailable, or tactically unwise to use. A radarless F-35 could still fly. It could train. In an emergency, it might even operate while receiving data from other platforms. But it would be tactically limited and more dependent on other aircraft doing the sensing for it. Thanks for reading!
Another question: Could the F-35 with new radar provide an enhanced ground attack capability as it would be lethal to troops as well as to electronics?
Not long before the Falklands war, the Blue Fox radar intended for the Sea Harriers was running late, and the Harriers were delivered with lumps of concrete in the nose to maintain the correct centre of gravity. The squadrons operating them became known as the Blue Circle squadrons named after a leading brand of cement. Luckily Blue Fox made it into service before the Harriers headed off to the South Atlantic.
Wes, aside from your excellent coverage of this fascinating SUBJECT, this is some of your finest actual WRITING -- a real pleasure to read.
A thought experiment, for your comment: Improvement in stealth seems to mitigate absolute need for speed. Present development of lightweight, deep cycle, high-discharge batteries (e.g., sodium) perhaps coupled with capacitors might provide a lot of wattage, at least for awhile, obviating the need to get all the juice from a jet engine. Add space for batteries, subtract space for fuel no longer needed to generate a huge amount of power, maybe a wash on weight? (Not talking about battery-powered flight, just power for microwave and cooling needs.) Should the offensive potential of the new radar pan out, the whole thing begs to be fitted on a slower, long loiter, stealth-ish UAV (probably large) THAT DOESN'T COST $100,000,000 PER COPY. At lower cost, we could provide several as overwatch for fighters that don't have the new radar.
Sure, put all the kit on the Lightning II if it fits, but if the basic radar unit already exists why not bolt it onto other platforms with a lower cost per unit. If willing to compromise on stealth, this fits the mission set of the AC-130. It seems like we can have a few fast and stealth microwave weapons aboard F-35s, or a whole bunch of slower ones. If the tech works, then even the slowest should be able to defend itself. Spit-balling here....
A dead weight made of what? A block of metal under a cover designed to be transparent to radar signal might not be good for stealth..
Cooling off 80Kw might not be possible without some significant redesign.. There must be a reason why that portion is running late. Will is be possible to retrofit these new fighters? (To those scoffing at that comment, check the sad story of the Boeing 777X early planes.)
Even if the radar issue gets sorted out, the block 4 numerous software issues prevent that version to be mission ready.
Will the F350 program costs slowly erase the US budget advantage?
So bottom line, we've got at least six F35s sitting on their asses waiting to be useful until something- radar with or without death ray- is installed in them and we can't install the older but not by any means obsolete radar in them. I can't remember who said that if at least one of our giant, legacy defense contractors doesn't go broke in the next few years, we've got a problem. Was it you, Wes?
Question: Could the F35s be radarless because it is more efficient to obtain detailed sensory coverage from another source and transmit the details to each F35?
Hey William, good question, and yes, the F-35 is absolutely designed to fight as part of a network. It can receive sensor data from other F-35s, AWACS, ships, ground systems, and other aircraft. That’s one of the jet’s major strengths. But that’s different from saying the radar is optional.
The radar is still one of the F-35’s core sensors. It helps generate its own targeting-quality picture, supports air-to-air and air-to-ground modes, contributes to electronic warfare, and gives the pilot an independent sensor when datalinks are jammed, degraded, unavailable, or tactically unwise to use. A radarless F-35 could still fly. It could train. In an emergency, it might even operate while receiving data from other platforms. But it would be tactically limited and more dependent on other aircraft doing the sensing for it. Thanks for reading!
Another question: Could the F-35 with new radar provide an enhanced ground attack capability as it would be lethal to troops as well as to electronics?
Not long before the Falklands war, the Blue Fox radar intended for the Sea Harriers was running late, and the Harriers were delivered with lumps of concrete in the nose to maintain the correct centre of gravity. The squadrons operating them became known as the Blue Circle squadrons named after a leading brand of cement. Luckily Blue Fox made it into service before the Harriers headed off to the South Atlantic.
I had read the radar wasn’t shipping because of a shortage of GaN semiconductors due to China supply chain problems.
Wes, aside from your excellent coverage of this fascinating SUBJECT, this is some of your finest actual WRITING -- a real pleasure to read.
A thought experiment, for your comment: Improvement in stealth seems to mitigate absolute need for speed. Present development of lightweight, deep cycle, high-discharge batteries (e.g., sodium) perhaps coupled with capacitors might provide a lot of wattage, at least for awhile, obviating the need to get all the juice from a jet engine. Add space for batteries, subtract space for fuel no longer needed to generate a huge amount of power, maybe a wash on weight? (Not talking about battery-powered flight, just power for microwave and cooling needs.) Should the offensive potential of the new radar pan out, the whole thing begs to be fitted on a slower, long loiter, stealth-ish UAV (probably large) THAT DOESN'T COST $100,000,000 PER COPY. At lower cost, we could provide several as overwatch for fighters that don't have the new radar.
Sure, put all the kit on the Lightning II if it fits, but if the basic radar unit already exists why not bolt it onto other platforms with a lower cost per unit. If willing to compromise on stealth, this fits the mission set of the AC-130. It seems like we can have a few fast and stealth microwave weapons aboard F-35s, or a whole bunch of slower ones. If the tech works, then even the slowest should be able to defend itself. Spit-balling here....
The above argument works against a microwave weapon.
A dead weight made of what? A block of metal under a cover designed to be transparent to radar signal might not be good for stealth..
Cooling off 80Kw might not be possible without some significant redesign.. There must be a reason why that portion is running late. Will is be possible to retrofit these new fighters? (To those scoffing at that comment, check the sad story of the Boeing 777X early planes.)
Even if the radar issue gets sorted out, the block 4 numerous software issues prevent that version to be mission ready.
Will the F350 program costs slowly erase the US budget advantage?
I know the plane has a special paint that helps with its radar signature. Would those microwaves start frying some element of that?
So bottom line, we've got at least six F35s sitting on their asses waiting to be useful until something- radar with or without death ray- is installed in them and we can't install the older but not by any means obsolete radar in them. I can't remember who said that if at least one of our giant, legacy defense contractors doesn't go broke in the next few years, we've got a problem. Was it you, Wes?
Meanwhile the Ukrainians are iterating and redeveloping products to fight the new forms of warfare in weeks and months.
But then they are not trying to keep shareholders happy