What is up with the F-35? Part II

[citanon]

A missile plume is much easier to spot than jet exhaust, but if the DAS system is tracking ballistic missiles at 800+ miles, I'm confident that it will pickup stealth jets approaching well before either aircraft's radar begins to have a meaningful influence on the fight considering the low RCS of both platforms.

Remember what matters there is that the missile is way above atmosphere so the IR from its plume will not be absorbed or scattered. For most of the distance the IR is just having r^2 attenuation until you get to significant atmospheric density.

Then you have the size of the missile plume plus the temperature, which gets into a few thousand degrees Kelvin. With the F22, even with it being at 60,000 feet, for most of the approach (100 nm to 10 nm distance with a 3 nm elevation change) you're going to be seeing the plane from the front, with significant atmospheric scatter. So you are not really seeing the exhaust, which is blocked by the body of the airplane and being cooled by that weird nozzle shape that helps mix in atmospheric air. All you actually see is the surface heating on the leading edges of the skin, which is no where near 3000K and a much smaller silhouette than the rocket plume. So you are looking at one to two orders of magnitude or more decrease in total luminosity with much more absorption and scattering, which makes me suspect that, depending on atmospheric conditions, we are talking about detection ranges in the 10s of nautical miles region when the geometry becomes more favorable and scattering and absorption gets reduced.

So the question is can a team of F22s detect F35s at around ~20 nautical miles. How would they do it? I suspect we can't get an answer to that based on non-classified information.

[SteveDaPirate]

Remember what matters there is that the missile is way above atmosphere so the IR from its plume will not be absorbed or scattered. For most of the distance the IR is just having r^2 attenuation until you get to significant atmospheric density.

Then you have the size of the missile plume plus the temperature, which gets into a few thousand degrees Kelvin. With the F22, even with it being at 60,000 feet, for most of the approach (100 nm to 10 nm distance with a 3 nm elevation change) you're going to be seeing the plane from the front, with significant atmospheric scatter. So you are not really seeing the exhaust, which is blocked by the body of the airplane and being cooled by that weird nozzle shape that helps mix in atmospheric air. All you actually see is the surface heating on the leading edges of the skin, which is no where near 3000K and a much smaller silhouette than the rocket plume. So you are looking at one to two orders of magnitude or more decrease in total luminosity with much more absorption and scattering, which makes me suspect that, depending on atmospheric conditions, we are talking about detection ranges in the 10s of nautical miles region when the geometry becomes more favorable and scattering and absorption gets reduced.

So the question is can a team of F22s detect F35s at around ~20 nautical miles. How would they do it? I suspect we can't get an answer to that based on non-classified information.

I think 20 miles is to short by at least half and probably significantly more.

The Eurofighter's PIRATE IRST claims to detect a subsonic fighter sized target at 90km from the front, and 145km from the rear while the Rafale's OSF claims to detect a subsonic fighter sized target at 80km from the front and 130km from the rear at 20,000 ft. In the absence of good numbers I think it is safe to assume the F-35's IR detection capabilities are fairly comparable to the Euro systems in performance.

At 40,000 feet atmospheric density is reduced by 75% compared to sea level and 99% of atmospheric water resides below 45,000, so the Raptor's playground at 60 grand shouldn't have much in the way of IR attenuation to reach an F-35 poking around at 30,000. Additionally, clouds above 25,000 ft tend to be cirrus clouds that are IR transparent, so while IR sensors may suffer from weather and atmospheric conditions down low, they aren't really much of a factor with regard to an F-35 picking up an F-22. Ambient air temperature also falls rapidly as altitude increases, with around -56 C at 40,000 ft, which provides even greater contrast towards objects operating up there.

We don't have many specifics regarding the F-22 obviously, but another aircraft that played around at similar altitudes and speeds is the MiG-31. It is known to heat up to 760 degrees Celsius during intercepts from aerodynamic heating alone. While I expect that the F-22 has some IR reduction measures the MiG-31 lacked, just the shock cone from traveling at high speeds will provide good contrast with the ambient air. The combination of high altitude and high speed will almost certainly make the F-22 a beacon in the dark for IRST systems, even with a head on approach.

The best writeup I've seen on the issue is here: https://defenseissues.wordpress.com/...d-performance/

[Stitch]

Can the F-22 and F-35 even talk to each other though, I thought that was some time away?

That is, and has been, one of the major criticisms of the F-22 design, that it was deliberately designed initially without Link 16 capability; the argument was that Link 16 transmissions are detectable, which would negate the F-22's stealthiness, and broadcast it's location to enemy receivers. The F-22 uses it's own proprietary intra-flight datalink (IFDL) among other Raptors, but is only able to receive, not transmit, Link 16 transmissions. The timetable for F-22 send-and-receive Link 16 capability has been moved up, but it's still at least 4 years away. As of right now, the Raptor has to use encrypted radio transmissions to communicate with other platforms. The US Air Force is working on several interim solutions (including the Talon Hate pod mentioned in this thread), but the F-22 won't be fully capable of sending and receiving encrypted Link 16 communications until at least 2020.

[GGTharos]

I don't have the research handy, but there are far better scientific papers on the tactical effect of stealth and IRST sensors in particular, and they don't paint this happy 'make the IRST the primary sensor instead of the radar' picture that this site paints.

This writeup isn't good for anything but learning some facts, but irrelevant in terms of actual tactical impact because it, by necessity, makes huge assumptions about certain things. Let's just say there are reasons why the IRST will still be the secondary sensor to the radar for a long time to come.

The best writeup I've seen on the issue is here: https://defenseissues.wordpress.com/...d-performance/

[SteveDaPirate]

Let's just say there are reasons why the IRST will still be the secondary sensor to the radar for a long time to come.

I'm not disputing that at all. Radar provides a lot of functionality beyond simply detecting and tracking other aircraft and missiles, and in most use cases it dramatically outranges IRST.

[citanon]

I'm not disputing that at all. Radar provides a lot of functionality beyond simply detecting and tracking other aircraft and missiles, and in most use cases it dramatically outranges IRST.

The problem with IRST is that It's scanning the sky with a speckled drinking straw. If you knew exactly where something was coming from and stared at that part of the sky for a good long integration time that's one thing, if you don't know where to look it's another.

An IRST needs a radar to cue it. The f35 has an advantage there because the irst is fused with the radar, but then an f22 that's getting pinged might well know frOm it's advanced radar warning equipment, but if you keep the radar turned off you may never find each other.

These are some pretty complicated scenarios that they will have to game out.

[gf0012-aust]

That is, and has been, one of the major criticisms of the F-22 design, that it was deliberately designed initially without Link 16 capability; the argument was that Link 16 transmissions are detectable, which would negate the F-22's stealthiness, and broadcast it's location to enemy receivers. The F-22 uses it's own proprietary intra-flight datalink (IFDL) among other Raptors, but is only able to receive, not transmit, Link 16 transmissions. The timetable for F-22 send-and-receive Link 16 capability has been moved up, but it's still at least 4 years away. As of right now, the Raptor has to use encrypted radio transmissions to communicate with other platforms. The US Air Force is working on several interim solutions (including the Talon Hate pod mentioned in this thread), but the F-22 won't be fully capable of sending and receiving encrypted Link 16 communications until at least 2020.

which is kind of ridiculous when you consider that Link-22 is in the short queue and that its far more capable than Link16 *(naturally)

eg Link-22 will allow JSF/Growler/"Eared up bigs" be able to talk to similarly fitted air warfare and CEC kitted skimmers, and land platforms such as the M1-Ann's

I attended ewarfare briefs on the capability of Link-22 and the partnering community 7 years ago when I was working on a specific battlecoms capability.

I struggle to understand the debate around Link-16 when Link-22 is the gamechanger and will have an immediate broad footprint across NATO as most of the board member countries are NATO + a bag and coterie of observers from smaller NATO and "NATO friends"

Using IRST as a primary tool ignores its limitations, - the discussion is more about IRST being a companion tool (with pods and packs) or organic (JSF) - and then finally assisted abilities which include high power IR assets. Its the linking of long range assisted capability that at the moment is track management but where it can be finessed to a level of targeting management that will have an exponential impact

[bfng3569]

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Sec...3731473773308/



Lockheed reports successful F-35 integration with Aegis system

The F-35 Lightning II and the Aegis weapon system worked together during a live-fire exercise.


By Geoff Ziezulewicz | Sept. 13, 2016 at 9:45 AM



Lockheed Martin reported Tuesday that the F-35 Lightning II and and the Aegis weapon system worked together for the first time during a live-fire exercise. Image courtesy Lockheed Martin


WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE, N.M., Sept. 13 (UPI) -- Lockheed Martin reported Tuesday that the F-35 Lightning II and and the Aegis weapon system worked together for the first time during a live-fire exercise.

The joint exercise Monday between the company, the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Marine Corps was the first live-fire missile test that successfully demonstrated the integration of the F-35 to support Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air, the company said in a statement.

During the test, an unmodified Marine Corps F-35B acted as an elevated sensor and detected an over-the-horizon threat.

The jet sent data through the aircraft's Multi-Function Advanced Data Link to a ground station connected to Aegis on the USS Desert Ship, a land-based ship.

The target was then engaged and intercepted with a Standard Missile 6.

Lockheed said the test reflects how the 5th-generation fighter can be a force multiplier.

When the capability is fully realized, it will increase situational awareness using Aegis and the F-35 together to better understand the maritime operational environment.

"Using any variant of the F-35 as a broad area sensor, the aircraft can significantly increase the Aegis capability to detect, track and engage," Lockheed said.

[Albany Rifles]

When the capability is fully realized, it will increase situational awareness using Aegis and the F-35 together to better understand the maritime operational environment.

"Using any variant of the F-35 as a broad area sensor, the aircraft can significantly increase the Aegis capability to detect, track and engage," Lockheed said.

That just dramatically increased the lethality of the Gator Carrier Task Forces. Linking the Marine F-35Bs with the escorting CG/DDGs...wow.

[gf0012-aust]

That just dramatically increased the lethality of the Gator Carrier Task Forces. Linking the Marine F-35Bs with the escorting CG/DDGs...wow.

when on stream. the USN in real terms has almost doubled its force projection capability at the fleet/task force insertion level

the other game changer across the purple space will be Link-22.

the opportunity for JSF to take on the active sensor role as in being "the", "part of" or "the extended" array asset adds in capability opportunitys such as Link22 land assets (M1 derivatives) and enhanced munitions, skimmers with smart weapons

the purple capability magnification issues are pretty extraordinary (think of the array potential for ASW, ISR and A/EW)

[Albany Rifles]

I am way out of my league but my quick thoughts this is the equivalent of when we went from IR night vision with IR searchlights to thermals. Huge leap in capability.

[SteveDaPirate]

Last year, a Lockheed Skunk Works, Aegis, F-35 technical team did tests at Lockheed’s JSF plant in Fort Worth, Texas last year to pull MADL data to a ground station that would represent the link to a Baseline 9 cruiser or destroyer, Potts said.

“It was absolutely breathtaking, the Aegis display in our labs as soon as [the test F-35] turned his radar on looking north… He picked up the conga line, if you will of aircraft going into [Dallas Fort Worth Airport],” he said.
“The display just exploded with hundreds of ranged tracks, so we knew it would work.”

https://news.usni.org/2016/09/13/vid...are#more-21593

"Hundreds of tracks" says some good things about the APG-81. NIFC-CA is shaping up to be a huge leap forward for fleet defense in addition to attacking in A2/AD environments.

[jlvfr]

https://news.usni.org/2016/09/13/vid...are#more-21593

"Hundreds of tracks" says some good things about the APG-81. NIFC-CA is shaping up to be a huge leap forward for fleet defense in addition to attacking in A2/AD environments.

This may bode well for future sailes of the B model. Italy has 2 heli-carriers that could use them, Spain has one, and both have Harriers (but I have no idea if they intend to replace them), Australia is planing 2 heli-carriers as well, and Japan has 2. Could the F-35 allow them to dispense with AWACs?



Note: I know it can't replace a Hawkeye-like plane (or the UK's heli version), but it's better than nothing.

[Albany Rifles]

This may bode well for future sailes of the B model. Italy has 2 heli-carriers that could use them, Spain has one, and both have Harriers (but I have no idea if they intend to replace them), Australia is planing 2 heli-carriers as well, and Japan has 2. Could the F-35 allow them to dispense with AWACs?



Note: I know it can't replace a Hawkeye-like plane (or the UK's heli version), but it's better than nothing.

Don't think so. Don't forget, AWACS crews not only provide early warning they also to battle management...running the BARCAP, etc. A single seater would be overwhelmed even in an integrated environment in my opinion.

It would best be used in a strike operation.

To your point, however, it definitely will expand and enhance the capability of the AWACs impact.

[SteveDaPirate]

I guess the question becomes, if F-35s can supply the picture of the battlespace and transmit it back to the fleet, could the battle management function be housed in a conference room aboard ship?

I doubt the F-35 will be replacing the E-2, but for navies that don't operate dedicated AEW aircraft I can see the possibility of gaining a lot of the utility AEW aircraft provide via good networking between F-35s and the fleet.