Nearly invisible to radar, the F-22 still creates an incredible stream of heat. However, you still have to know where to look. It hardly matters how precise your new weapons are, if you lack the ISR reach to find targets. EO/IR sensors work by converting the IR heat signatures, that are naturally emitted by every object, into electronic signals. Algorithms can then use it to identify the electromagnetic radiation fingerprint of every large, hot and fast objects of interest. This passive operation is the key advantage of EO/IR sensors to avoid detection and becoming targets themselves. Air has a very low emissivity, carbon particles have a high broadband emissivity, and water vapor emits in very specific bands. Carbon buildup on hot engine parts is a cumulative situation, and there are very few bright, shiny parts inside exhaust nozzles after a number of hours of operation. The ability of a substance to absorb electromagnetic (EM) waves depends on two material properties called permittivity and permeability, which are the capacity to store electrical or magnetic energy, respectively. The RAM filler, meanwhile, is typically particles composed of or coated with a lossy material. Hybrid RAMs can be created with a front layer of graded dielectric and a back layer of magnetic material to attenuate radar reflections from VHF to Ku-band. From 1914 into the 1940s, the key to success in air-to-air combat was in knowing how to fly into a position where you would see the enemy first. However, the very capable F-22 was excessively costly even for a wealthy country like US. F-35 situational awareness demonstrated that the usual measures of a superior fighter aircraft's speed and maneuverability, no longer matter as much as see the other aircraft first. USAF today has only 55 combat-coded fighter squadrons in total, including active duty, guard and reserve. To surprise the enemy, the following (signal-to-noise ratio) characteristics are required: 1. visual invisibility: no visible engine smoke, physical size, camouflage (reduce the signal) 2. electronic invisibility: stifling increased noise due to usage of active sensors (radar, laser), radio communications & uplinks 3. infrared IIR invisibility (reduce the heat signal imprint, at a specific aspect angles, to advanced optronic sensors, as much as possible) 4. also cruise speed advantage while muffling the sound from the revolving parts of the aircraft (with advance engine modulation of compressor or turbine at both the ends). Stealth technology became a factor when high-altitude and high-speed strategic fighters became less relevant once missiles became capable enough. The way to avoid sophisticated radars & missiles is to fly in terrain-following (TFR) ultra-low altitudes and with high maneuverability. US found that stealth was useful, but was not as important as situational awareness. Stealth is perishable. US have also realised that regular development takes too long & gets outdated quickly. While pitching for an advanced system to Air Force, it's better to leave with a 'lasting impressions' on a conceptual level with powerful marketing, salesmanship and a little pizzazz, even if it doesn't tell the whole story technically. “If you can afford to buy something, but you have to keep it in the parking lot because you can't afford to own and operate it, then it doesn't do you much good”. J-20 and F-35 need to be kept in climate-controlled hangars (with controlled power supply) when not on missions. Its requirements are more than even the modern hangar for commercial Propulsion Controlled Aircrafts (PCA). India requires a high-altitude, high-speed bomber & precision bombs with the primary mission to kill off terrorists in enemy territory itself, before they ever get the chance to face our jawans in close-combat. Bombers pilots are far more expensive to train, too. Planform return lobe structure is defined by the radiation pattern lobes resulting from surface wave reflections, which occur at the leading and trailing edges of the airframe's major surfaces. The objective of lobing is to concentrate this unavoidable radar return into specific directions so as to minimise frontal/aft/beam aspect return and maximise scintillation in the direction of the lobe. Scintillation is a measure of how rapidly the size of the return varies with angle, the greater this variation, the more difficult a target is to track. Basically the Luneberg lens is a passive radar augmentation device used to increase the radar reflectivity. It's made of concentric dielectric shell, made of polystyrene. A low observable (LO) fighter can escape detection only if it keeps its radar switched off, or under emission control (EMCON). To penetrate contested airspace and attack targets, the LO fighter relies on an AWACS positioned in the rear, which streams the air and ground situation over a directional and encrypted data link. The LO fighter uses its sensor fusion capability to fuse the information obtained from the AWACS sensors with the information obtained through its own passive (ESM, EO) sensors to track and engage adversary targets. Even if the target is detected on enemy surveillance radars, the “kill chain” of the weapon system can still be incomplete for it to work properly without high-frequency engagement radar. (Hence, new systems are designed from the outset for sensor fusion — when different sensors detect and track the same target, the track and identification data are merged automatically.) Given that fighter jets require tails, wings and other structures necessary to performance, they are naturally inherently less stealthy than a high-altitude bomber. Stealth fighter jets are more vulnerable to lower frequency surveillance radars due to vertical flight control surfaces such as tails and wings. But some things are similar on both types. They have leading and trailing edges of the wing and tail have identical sweep angles (a design technique called "planform alignment"). The fuselage and canopy have sloping sides. The canopy seam, around the bay doors, and other surface interfaces are sawtoothed. Special attention had to be paid to engines and inlets because from the front these contribute most of a fighter’s RCS. The engine is hidden deep. It is likely that emissivity control will predominantly be employed on surfaces other than those exposed to engine exhaust gases, i.e., inlets and aircraft external parts. Lower-frequency acquisition radars do not provide what Pentagon officials call a “weapons quality” track needed to guide a missile onto a target. “Even if you can see an LO [low observable] strike aircraft with ATC radar, you can’t kill it without a fire control system”. The problem with VHF and UHF band radars is that with long wavelengths come large radar resolution cells. That means that contacts are not tracked with the required level of fidelity to guide a weapon onto a target. These limitations can be overcome with signal processing in Phased array radars — particularly high-powered active electronically scanned arrays (AESA). “Right now, something is wrong with a light panel on that jet. Since maintenance needs to get into that panel, we have to pick the radar absorbent material off and clean all the fasteners out, so they can fix the light,” Air Force low observables (LO) aircraft structures technician said. “Once the light is fixed, we will re-bind the coating and material again to make it 100% ready.” A Lockheed patent claims composites with CNT-infused (with ferrite nanoparticles) fiber RAM mats used on the F-35 are capable of absorbing EM waves from 0.1 MHz to 60 GHz, “nearly a black body across . . . various radar bands”, with particular effectiveness in L- through K-band. Fibers can have differing CNT densities along their lengths and homogenous fibers can be layered or mixed and of continuously varying densities at specific depths for broadband absorption. The patent details a method for growing carbon nanotubes (CNT) on any kind of fiber with unprecedented precision in control of length, density, number of walls, connectivity and even orientation. The fibers can be disposed with “random orientation” in materials and feature a “non-directional weave”. Interestingly, the CNT-infused fibers layer can be composed, so an attached computer can read the induced currents in the fibers, making the layer a radar receiver. The fiber mat would replace many RAM appliques by being cured into the composite skin, making it durable. The goal was to make the intensive procedures unnecessary. Magnetic absorbers, which have some permittivity but far greater permeability—magnetic energy storage—are typically carbonyl iron (a pure powdered form of the metal) or iron oxides, also called ferrites. These materials can be impregnated into rubber or dissolved into a paint, and ferrites are often sintered into tiles. Layered magnetic materials can reduce RCS by 10 dB from 2-20 GHz with 0.3 in. of depth. There are at least 3 types of RAM: resonant, non-resonant magnetic and non-resonant dielectrics large volume. Non-resonant magnetic RAM uses ferrite particles suspended in epoxy or paint to reduce the reflectivity of the surface to incident radar waves, without increasing IR signature. A major advantage of non-resonant RAM is that it can be effective over a wide range of frequencies, whereas resonant RAM is limited to a narrow range of design frequencies. A sealant does have to be periodically reapplied. Aircrafts are often fitted with a Luneburg lens device on its ventral side during peacetime operations that enhances its cross section on radar (so the real radar cross section is not found out). During Operation Focus of the Six Day War, Israeli pilots flying the French built Mirage III interceptors were able to routinely dominate the formidable MIG 21's of several Arab air forces. When the pilot training advantage is taken away, dogfights between Western and Soviet/Russian aircraft becomes much closer. In several of the Indo-Pakistan conflicts, the Soviet equipped Indian Air Force kept toe to toe with the American supplied Pakistani Air Force. Flying into heavily defended enemy airspace is a risky business. High and low altitude anti-aircraft defenses are numerous. Radars are all over the place. One approach is to sneak in with small (one to four) groups of planes. Coming in low, a few hundred meters high or low enough to singe the tree tops, the enemy has little time to react before you are past him. Zipping along at 200 meters a second, there is not much for the enemy to see, or shoot at. Using electronic mapping and navigation devices, the target is found (most of the time), the munitions released and an equally rapid exit made. Few aircraft are capable of this approach and the most modern detection and weapons systems (like what Russia has in Syria) are designed to handle it. Only the U.S. Airforce & Navy provides a survivable aircraft capable of conducting electronic warfare in contested airspace. Air-Superiority (F - fighter)The F22 stealth fighter costs as much as $678 million per copy. Plus the F-22′s small production run of under 200 planes make it the Me-262 Sturmvogel of its time. The Me-262 was the world’s first production jet fighter, with performance that could dominate any allied propeller plane. Yet the 200 or so Me-262s produced were swept from the World War 2 skies, by 2,000+ P-51 Mustangs, P-47 Thunderbolts, etc. The rear-aspect view of the aircraft is not as stealthy, clearly an intentional trade, eliminating the heavy 2D nozzles of the F-22. In this respect, both the T-50 and J-20 reflect the philosophy behind the pre-1986 Advanced Tactical Fighter studies that preceded the F-22, based on the theory that a fast, high-flying, agile aircraft is relatively immune from rear-quarter attacks. In fact, the PAK FA might be slight more maneuverable in certain situations as it features 3D thrust vectoring engines (pitch and yaw) as opposed to only 2D (pitch) engines featured on the F-22A. By 2012, the F-22 accident rate was 6 per 100,000 hours flown, including some crashes but the rate came down year by year, as they always do. "Presently, the flat nozzle has two inherent snags which, in principle, have not been dealt with yet. Firstly, the turbine is round but the nozzle is flat with a distance between them being small. The distance cannot be increased because this would lead to an increase in the overall length of the aircraft, a loss of thrust, etc. While transforming the circular gas stream into the flat one, the nozzle, developed by Mr. Ryzhov, was losing 14-17% of thrust. Unfortunately, the gas stream cannot be "bent" as we would like it to. It has its own laws too. So far, no one has managed to transform the circular gas stream into the flat one without losing thrust. The very same snag was hit by the Americans in developing their F-117 featuring a non-afterburning engine. Such engines lose approximately 15% of thrust too. However, the F-117 is a specialised Stealth aircraft with the main requirement of ensuring "invisibility". It does not need a real good thrust/weight ratio. That is why the Americans put up deliberately with an unavoidable loss of thrust but benefited from reduced signatures. Secondly, the other primary problem is weight. The circular TVC nozzle produces only tensile stress while the flat one exerts bending stress as well. Those stresses require special measures to be taken to ensure the nozzle strength in order to avoid deformation of the nozzle. Those measures mean additional weight. The flat nozzle made of metal is heavier than the circular one by approximately half a tonne. The problem can be circumvented through the use of the "carbon-carbon" materials which have low specific weight and can stand high temperature. To preventing carbon-carbon units from burning they are covered by a thick layer of fire-resistant ceramics are used only in manufacturing the control surfaces of rocket engines. The latter are actually disposable since their operation never exceeds 40-50 seconds while an aircraft engine service life amounts to 1,000 hours or more. This requires advance material technology." F-22 Raptor can enter an area fast and low and unchecked for a certain amount of time, do it's task and get out. The United States has spent nearly $80 billion to develop the most advanced stealth fighter jet in history. Ultimately, it is a result of a fundamentally flawed idea that enemy capabilities should be matched symmetrically. Its production ended at 187 planes because of the high cost. American developers are now seeking to apply their stealth, and other technologies, to the development of combat UAVs. The operational doctrine of the F-22 is based on the F-22 flying around without its radar on and not making any other electronic emissions either. At the same time it is vacuuming up the electronic emissions of enemy aircraft, triangulating their position and then pouncing at a time of its choosing. The world has moved on from that. Detection in other parts of the electromagnetic spectrum has improved a lot over the last 20 years. Chief of these is infrared search and track (IRST) which enables an F-35 to be detected from its engine exhaust from over 100 kms away. The latest iteration of the Su-27 Flanker family, the Su-35, has IRST and L band radar on its wings. L band and lower frequency radars can see stealthy aircraft over 160 kms away. Thrust Vectoring can contribute to create certain advantages but only in a limited portion of the flight envelope at velocities well below “corner speed”, wasting valuable time in manoeuvring the aircraft to achieve a suitable condition . In WVR (Within Visual Range) arena, the large F-22 tends to lose too much energy when using thrust vectoring during a sharp turn when naturally the energy it loses makes the then slow moving stealth combat plane quite vulnerable for a short time. The F-22's thrust-vector control system cannot provide roll or yaw control because the engines are too close together. According to some, F-22 allegedly has sustained turn rate of 23-24 degrees per sec. As 28 degree per sec sustained was made by an USAF colonel, it most probably was a mistake – possibly intentional; thus, second figure is more reliable (28 degrees per second is probably instantaneous turn rate).
F-22A Block 20 (top) & F-22A Block 30 (middle) 38 ton F/A-22 or F-22 'Raptor' is a single seat, twin-engine, all-weather fifth-generation fighter aircraft that uses stealth technology. It is arguably the most capable fighter that can achieve local air superiority, but it's also the most expensive to built and maintain. The F-22's most unique advantages are the altitudes at which it can operate — in excess of 60,000 feet. It flies at 1,900 km/hr and has a top speed of 2,400 km/hr. Each F-22 ended up costing over $400 million. It costs $10.9 million to train F-22 pilots. F-22 has a readiness rate of only 49% to 51% until 2018 which was being increased by 10% more with increasing maintenance costs in 2019. And at current readiness levels, only around 64 of the fifth-generation fighters are ready to fight at a moment's notice. During exercises, it is fitted with a special radar reflector to appear on the radar screens of friendly aircraft. The F-22 Raptor’s “super-cruise” capability allows it to maintain extremely high speeds (Mach 2.25 or Mach 1.5), while fully loaded, without engaging its afterburners. This sets the F-22 apart from the competition in terms of both speed and loiter time. F-22 can achieve a maximum lift-to-drag ratio of 8.4 The Air Force declared the F-22 stealth fighter operational in 2006, but waited 8 years to finally send the jets into combat. During that first year F-22 could not fly at night, in a cloud, within 25 miles of lightning, and had a good deal of other software related issues. It's the first operational stealth fighter built in aviation history that combines super-cruise, super-maneuverability, stealth, ground attack, electronic warfare, signals intelligence and sensor fusion in a single weapons platform. However, the F-22 Raptors can’t do without AWACS support. To stay invisible, they attack with their radar switched off, relying entirely on targeting data provided by the “flying eye,” that has to fly within 400kms of the combat area. F-22, its capabilities, as superior as they are, may not justify the much higher costs. The F-22 costs more than three times as much as the aircraft it was to replace. Just the production costs of the last F-22s built were $153.2 million. Each F-22 jets cost at least $146.2 million. If you add unit cost and per-plane lifecycle cost, the F-22 has a combined cost of $678 million per fighter. A total of 186 F-22 Raptors were built, of which only about 123 are capable of the jet's full spectrum of combat roles. It has some of the most advanced EW sensors of any aircraft in service. The U.S. Air Force has a special program for that called RAMMP (Reliability And Maintainability Maturation Program) which will cost nearly $2 billion by the early 2020s to pay for 10,824 upgrade kits for 162 F-22s. After every flight, a lot of special tape and paste has to be touched up because access panels had to be opened. The F-22 was designed primarily as an air superiority fighter envisaged to penetrate high and fast, deep into Soviet held airspace and have the energy performance advantage to outperform the new Soviet designs in BVR and close combat, and engage and disengage at will, so that strike aircraft can demolish Soviet ground-based air defences and defended assets. It has super agility at all speeds, altitudes and angles of attack. When high-altitude limitations are not in place (due to safety concerns) the type fights from a higher perch than F-15s and F-16s, and is more frequently supersonic. High and fast missile shots impart the AMRAAM with greater energy, and give the missile more range. During the late Cold War the US Air Force originally planned to procure 750 F-22, however, post-Cold War 187 F-22s ultimately produced for service. The F-22 was designed, in the late ’80s and early ’90s, keeping in mind 10 types of missions and with an 8,000-hour airframe life. Real life-flying experience shows that the F-22 can be safely flown without modifications out to 12,000 hours at the low-end and as many as 15,000 hours on the high-end. The F-22 airframe will easily make it to 2060. However, major structural upgrades are part of another program costing over $300 million. Large, powerful and sophisticated, the APG-77 is also beneficiary of almost unlimited funding to keep it at the top of its game. The APG-77 is an active electronically scanning radar and has an impressive 1500 transmitter receiver modules. The degree of sensor fusion in the F-22 is very high-in particular the relationship between the F-22’s radar and EW suite, further enhances the APG-77’s effectiveness. One of the main advantages of this radar is the Low Probability of Intercept, designed to not be conspicuous to enemy radar warning receivers. Without low probability intercept modes, the aircraft is incredibly vulnerable to being jammed and tracked by enemy radars. Radars equipped with LPI modes are much more difficult to jam and track. Some wondered the degree to which modern AESA-based RWRs would be able to detect LPI radar, but international training exercises show that LPI does work, with opponents having little warning of an impending Raptor attack. The APG-77 is said to have a range of about 250 km, which enables it to detect its adversaries long before they even know what’s happening. It can also provide fire control for the AIM-120, which would allow it to shoot down a hostile aircraft 100 km away, without the F-22 even revealing itself to enemy radar. This radar can also act as a jammer by overloading sensors of hostile aircraft and missiles. The APG-77 will be upgraded to enhance its detection range to 400 km using narrow beams. The Raptor will achieve first look and first shoot capability against stealthy opponents, including the PAK FA. This will give the Raptor a tremendous advantage against the PAK FA and other future stealthy opponents. Both the AN/APG-77 AESA featured in the F-22A and the AN/APG-81 AESA featured in the F-35 are equipped with low probability intercept modes. One of the most vital but rather unknown sensors are the AN/ALR-94 radar warning receiver (RWR) and the AN/AAR-56 Infrared and Ultraviolet Missile Launch Detector. The RWR, which is distributed around the aircraft, is a passive radar detector which enables the F-22 to detect hostile radar emissions without revealing itself. It has a range of over “432 km”. It is widely known that the F-22 stealth aircraft is stealthy in X-band and upper S-band. Because the main wings and the rear wings exactly line-up, it also appears much smaller on radar. VHF radar can't do fire-control, but they can see you. With low-frequency radars, they can tell which way to look, and they can scramble their super-cruising aircraft out to you. F-22 will only be able to fire at BVR with help from other assets as it complete lack of optical sensors, unless refitted with imaging IRST or video camera. Even if it does prove able to fire from BVR, at such ranges the missile’s kill probability will be low, and it will still be giving itself away. It also has inferior rearward visibility.
Forward-swept wing design (failures due to cost, material & engine tech)
Stealth is highly useful for specialist mission aircraft like B-2. The fact is ($130-$150 million) f-22 has max. 50% fighter availability rate. Stealth also has a recurring cost. F-35 is 60% costly to maintain than F-16. American developers are now seeking to apply their stealth, and other technologies, to the development of combat UAVs. India needs to have better availability & less expensive 5th gen fighter designed for the IAF missions. India was faced with bearing 50% of R&D cost, while 98% of Su-57 will be built inside Russia & its source codes will tightly be controlled by Russia (not India). Russia was also insisting that India forego the entire licenced-production effort. India can still buy a matured Su-57 when its AESA radar & the engine are ready. Su-57 needs new engines which is in development stage. It currently cannot super-cruise without afterburner. Su-35 can super-cruise. If India own the fighter frame, then HAL can add any weapon or sub-system that India needs, Russian or Western. Sukhoi Su-57 PAK FA (T-50) special mission aircraft, the combined project also has the code name Perspective Multi-Role Fighter (PMF) for the Indian version, which has different avionics and weapon suite. Instead of buying PAK-FA (T-50), Russia is planning to continue production of advanced Su-30 and Su-35 Flanker variants. Russian development and manufacturing problems indicate the T-50 will not be a lot cheaper than the F-22. Few F-22s were built because of the high cost and only 16 Su57 were built. After Su-57s successfully completed combat trials, Russia concluded that, although the intent and purpose of the Su-57 program had changed since development began, which means the Su-57 would only be used for specific missions. Su-57 is not a strike fighter, but an interceptor, that was designed to fight-off invading strike fighters inside friendly air-defences. The 34 ton Su-57 is a blended wing-body design, resembling the Su-27 in one key respect: the core of the structure is the “centro-plane,” a long-chord, deep-section inner wing to which the rest of the air-frame components—the forward fuselage and widely separated engine nacelles, wings and tail surfaces—are attached. Compared to the Su-27, however, the centro-plane is deeper between the engines, to accommodate weapon bays. Its fuselage and nozzle shaping in the prototypes shares the same deficiencies as the F-35. There have been promises by Russia that the Su-57 will evolve into a more stealthy design, but now it seems with it entering production, those enhancements haven't emerged. India is unwilling to accept the promise that it would become more so in the future, it’s hard to imagine how any of those options would necessarily meet its requirements. If the Su-57 can only deliver limited low-observability, with it only being considered "stealthy" in very narrow frequency bands and only from certain aspects, the goals of the expensive initiative won't be met. It seems that major structural changes that are needed cannot be met in the existing Russian prototypes. IAF wants iron-clad assurances on the stealth capabilities, engine performance, sensors and weapons fit of the aircraft. India has already spent about $5 billion. Between 2010-23, HAL and Sukhoi spent $295 million each on a “Preliminary Design” phase. Sources said the investment of USD 6.7 billion (Rs 44,800 crore) would give India only 4 prototypes of the FGFA T-50 aircraft, and it will have to pay another USD 1 million (Rs 7 crore) for each plane which we would be ready for induction only after the year 2027-28. The overall cost of the project for the IAF is likely to come out to USD 24 billion (Rs 1,60,000 crore) which is almost the double the amount the force had planned. India is willing to induct only 12 of these planes into the IAF. Now, the two sides are required to sign an “R&D Contract”, which the MoD told parliament on July 5, 2013, would “define the total scope; the work share and responsibilities of each side; and the financial implications of the programme.” With the Indian participation (Code-named Project 79L) under the Perspective Multi-role Fighter (PMF) programme, Russia now had the billions of dollars it will take to carry out the development program. The preliminary testing program conducted by Sukhoi has so far involved 6 prototype airframes, including four flying, one static and one systems test airframe. More than 450 flights have been carried out to date under the program. The Indians are, by a contract signed in 2001, supposed to pay 25% of the development cost of the fighter, and for this they do not only get all the prototypes, but also their own especially made HAL FGFA, which is an upgraded version of the Su-57, featuring more than 43 improvements, among others better avionics, better stealth, and the capability to mount Indian missiles and rockets on the hard-points. At least, that was the plan. "Russia has already given the draft R&D contract to Sukhoi & HAL. It will include the cost of designing, infrastructure build-up at Ozar, prototype development and flight testing. So, India will have scientists and test pilots based both in Russia and Ozar during the R&D phase up to 2019. HAL will subsequently begin manufacturing the fighters," “Let's be clear: the HAL-Sukhoi program isn't a joint effort,” says an air force officer with Bengaluru-based Training Command. “The airframe will be identical to the ones the Russians currently have in flight-test. Our decision to go with a single-seat configuration is principally to avoid potential time overruns that will almost certainly be part of designing such a configuration. The maximum that HAL will do is insert a few systems of our choice and play lead integrator for the 'MKI,'. India's work-share in the FGFA T-50 project had been reduced to just 13% from the earlier envisaged one of 50%. HAL will contribute only tyres, basic navigational instrument VOR-DME, coolant for the radar, laser designation pod and heads-up display. India has conveyed its deep concerns to Russia about being denied "full access" to the FGFA T-50 project despite the fact that it is supposed to be an equal partner in financing it. Yet, with so much riding on the FGFA T-50 program, the IAF has taken aback the MoD with its complaint that it would not be good enough to destroy targets located within enemy territory. Two elements, i.e. incomplete technology/subsystems and no domestic orders at launch; leave the Su-57 as an expensive and uncertain proposition for prospective customers, including India, which has a spate of competing priorities to manage in the short and medium-terms. The IAF’s three top objections to the Su-57 were: (a) The Russians are reluctant to share critical design information and work share with India; (b) The fighter’s current temporary AL-41F1 engines are unreliable and do not provide sufficient thrust for the airframe, leaving the aircraft at a significant disadvantage (Russian officials have already clarified that the Sukhoi Su-57’s current engine, the AL-41F1, is a temporary solution to allow the flight-test programme to continue); and (c) It is very expensive. Russia announced in late 2015 that it would only induct a squadron (18-24 aircraft) of Su-57 fighter aircraft, and procure additional Sukhoi Su-35S aircraft instead. The original deal involved Russia procuring 250 and India 144 aircraft at a cost of around $30 billion by 2022. As a result, India threatened to abandon the project in its entirety. Russia in turn made a number of concessions including an offer to cut down its financial contribution from $6 to $3.7 billion for three PAK FA T-50 prototypes and substantial technology transfers. India wants a guarantee that it will be able to upgrade the fighter jet in the future without Russian support, which would require Moscow sharing source codes (sensitive computer code that controls the fighter jet’s various systems — the key to an aircraft’s electronic brains). Russia has apparently repeatedly refused to give full access to the mission software and flight computer code. As combat aircraft become increasingly software-driven in general, both to run their basic flight systems and to manage sensors, targeting, and other data management and transfer functions, this will only become more of an issue for any countries collaborating on advanced designs. India initially wanted around 30 or 40 twin-seat aircraft to be used as trainers. But since PAK-FA was a single-seater, the Russians sought an additional $8 billion for the trainer version. The move was scrapped as India settled for training on simulators. "Russian state's core interest in the Su-57 is to create a supposed match for Lockheed’s F-22 Raptor (in terms of aerodynamically and kinematically). This is something the business-minded Indian air force is not keen to finance. Back in early 2006, Russian president Vladimir Putin integrated all of Russia’s aviation companies into a single, state-owned holding — the United Aircraft-building Corporation. Over the time, UAC absorbed more than 20 aviation companies, and re-organized these into four aircraft-manufacturing divisions. One for combat aircraft, one for military transport aircraft, one for civilian aircraft and one for aircraft components. In the course of the streamlining, most of the state-owned enterprises became joint-stock companies. However, the government owns at least 90% of shares." Tom Cooper Just like the American F-35 stealth fighter, the Su-57 is designed with the idea that 60% will be sold to India but 98% will be built inside Russia and its source codes will tightly be controlled by Russia (not India). In contrast, Rafale fighter jet was designed in such a way that throughout its service-life, the fighter will never be required to go back to France for deep overhaul and any kind of upgrades is going to be in the form of modular plug-n-play type, which can be done by the crew at any base. Another issue is Su-57 cannot do deep-strike bombing in defended airspace. In 2018 Russia deployed two (or possibly four) Su-57s to Hmeimim Air Base in Syria. As Russia had little tactical need for stealth attack jets over Syria, the stealth fighters returned to Russia after only a week or two abroad.
N036 Byelka or Belka radar developed by Tikhomirov NIIP Institute Sukhoi engineers reportedly build each Su-57 by hand, resulting in crude workmanship. While the T-50 is the stealthiest aircraft the Russians have (which they admit is not true 5th Gen), it is not nearly as stealthy as the F-22, or even the F-35 or B-2. The Russians are apparently going to emphasize maneuverability instead of stealth. The Russian military appears more accepting of a defensive fighter that is stealthiest when soaring head on towards interlopers at the edge of their radar coverage. India, however, would prefer an all-aspect stealth aircraft that can also penetrate defended enemy airspace to take out key targets. India wants more stealthy airframe and would prefer a two-seat aircraft. The radar cross-section for the PAK FA fighter surface area, according to the Russians, is between 0.5 and 1 square metre but the IAF isn't quite sure that will be the case. In any case, there is a belief in IAF that it should be 0.2 metre square. The fifth-generation F-22 fighter radar cross-section is between 0.3 to 0.4 square meters. In order to achieve this level of stealth, designers moved all weapons to the inside of the plane and also changed the shape of the air intake channels, also lining its walls with a material that absorbs radio waves. Footprint and radar signature matter. Potential customers, including the Russian Air Force, were not interested in purchasing a "developmental aircraft" because that's what the Su-57 was without the fully functional Izdeliye 30 engines. The problem India has is that the Su-57 clearly isn't meant to be anything like the US F-22 stealth fighter, yet it seems, Russian officials constantly make claims otherwise. The deal initially negotiated was to make a stealth fighter jet tailored for India. It also included production facilities in India. The Su-57 sports an advanced 101KS 'Atoll' infrared search and track sensor in the traditional position on Russian fighters—installed atop the aircraft's nose, near its windscreen. Although this placement clearly hurts the Su-57s radar signature where it matters most—in the forward hemisphere—an IRST is among the best technologies available for detecting and engaging stealth targets from afar. Being able to pierce deep into the most sophisticated integrated air defense networks during some sort of expeditionary operation isn't Russia's top priority. An advanced IRST was also promised for the F-22 as part of the Advanced Tactical Fighter Program, but it was axed due to cost-cutting measures as the program moved from prototype to a production configuration. The Su-57 could be used to establish local areas of air superiority against 4th gen aircraft, and get close enough to a stealth optimized aircraft to become a problem, especially with passive forms of detection like IRST. There was no discernible Russian desire to build an advanced sensor fusion platform that could integrate with other ISR infrastructure, or for the aircraft to serve as an ISR platform for the rest of the force. They were not seeking a stealth optimized strike and recon platform for penetrating strikes. There is a stronger interest in making long range guided weapons low-observable rather than planes. The Su-57 can carry the latest generation of Russian stand-off guided missile to intercept high value air assets such as AWACS. The Su-57 appears tailored to plug gaps in the Russian air defenses, engage enemy stealth aircraft within its own air defenses, guided to target by ground-based low frequency radars, leveraging its own low observation properties to get closer to the adversary, and a mix of on-board sensors that can help with detecting low observable aircraft once within close range (IRST). The Su-57 is not meant to be a direct rival for the F-22 or B-2 because the Russian aircraft is not as stealthy as either due to the lack of precision machining technology. The prototypes are clearly not designed to be a stealthy fighter but rather designed as ‘extreme agility’ fighters that are superior to Su-35S. The Su-57 is intended to outperform F-22 Raptor aerodynamically and kinematically. Su-57 is being portrayed as a semi-stealth specialist aircraft to be built in small numbers. Small fleets of any airplane type are prohibitively expensive to sustain, but when it comes to high-end fighters, the costs can be crushing. The most crushing fiscal aspect of fielding a predominantly stealthy manned fighter force is that the cost of operation, especially as the platform ages, it will be far greater than the vast majority of the aircraft they replace. New Delhi has suggested to Moscow that 65 Su-57 fighter jet can be supplied off-the-shelf deal, while $11 billion R&D contract to improve upon the aircraft can carry on simultaneously for 8 years. Moscow is allegedly demanding $7 billion from India as part of a work-sharing agreement currently under negotiation includes the transfer of highly-sensitive Russian defense technology. India is not in a position to pay this kind of money. Before moving on, India wants a guarantee that it will be able to upgrade the fighter jet in the future without Russian support, which would require Moscow to share Su-57 fighter's source codes. The Russians want to sell their Su-57 to India and other foreign customers. On January 15, 2014, at a MoD meeting to review progress on the FGFA T-50, the deputy chief of air staff (DCAS), the IAF’s top procurement official, said the engine was unreliable, its radar inadequate, its stealth features badly engineered, India’s work share too low, and the fighter’s price would be exorbitant by the time it enters service. Russia also wants to use existing engine as a midterm solution rather than develop a new modular engine. Unfortunately India's work share will also not involve development of stealth coating or stealth airframe design aspects. Commonly used RAM technology to date is the iron ball paint which contains tiny spheres coated with carbonyl iron or ferrite. World’s first purpose built stealth aircraft F-117A used electrically isolated carbonyl iron balls of specific dimensions suspended in a two-part epoxy paint. Foam absorber, Jaumann absorber, Carbon nano-tube and Split-ring resonator absorber systems and are the other known stealth coatings known and in use till date. The Su-57 uses planform alignment to get invisible to radar. Russia simply lacks the production capability to build these aircraft with tight enough tolerances to achieve stealthy operational fifth-generation platforms. While the Su-57 is the stealthiest aircraft the Russians have, it is not nearly as stealthy as the F-22, or even the F-35 or B-2. The Russians are apparently going to emphasize maneuverability instead of stealth. A mature Su-57 production has the potential to compete with the F-22A Raptor in VLO performance from key aspects, and will outperform the F-22A Raptor kinematically. But if the maneuverability and advanced electronics live up to the promises, the aircraft would be more than a match for every fighter out there other than the F-22. Su-57 makes a clear statement, which diverges fundamentally from Western thinking, that the idea that the Within-Visual-Range (WVR) and Beyond-Visual-Range (BVR) air combat are much alike. The principal difference is that the latter relies more heavily on long range sensors and its ability to defeat countermeasures and low observability. India has now told Russia that it would not be participating in the development part of the programme, but would consider purchasing the fighter jets in the future as and when the technology matures and is proven. If Su-57 was sold for under $100 million each there would be a lot of buyers. But it looks like the Su-57 will cost at least $120 million each. It also costs at least 50% more than the Su-27. That would be some $60 million, about what a top-of-the-line F-16 costs. Only 187 F-22s were built because of the high cost. U.S developers are now seeking to apply their stealth, and other technologies, to the development of combat UAVs. Thus, by the time the Su-57 enters service at the end of the decade it may already be made obsolete by cheaper, unmanned, stealthy fighters. The United States, Russia, and China are all working on applying stealth technology to combat UAVs. The two J-20s arrived at low level, one jet sped off to the horizon and left the other to perform a series of simple turns. The brief display, lasting only around a minute, did not involve low-speed passes and the pilots did not open the weapon-bay doors. The routine offered few clues about the jet’s engine, mobility and radar evading properties. "We were impressed with the command and control system that the J-20 belongs to. The Chinese Air Force has a number of other types of aircraft in the East China Sea airspace, and their flight command and control is excellent." China's J-20 ( Wei Long ) 'Fire-fang' / 'Mighty Dragon' (NATO: Fire Tooth) 4+ generation stealth developmental aircraft (also called the Black Eagle) is a single-seat, high-speed, twin-engined fighter with long-range AA missiles. Work on the J-20 began in the late 1990s, and the Chinese went forward on the assumption that it could be 25 years or more before they had a competitive stealth fighter-bomber in service. China revealed that the construction cost for each aircraft was $110 million, and the development of the J-20 has cost $4.4 billion as of 2018. China is building a double-seater version as it has been unable to develop full-flight tactical training simulators for the J-20 fighter, however, it also could be used for chinese loyal wingman drones. Its main weapon systems will be the PL-21 long-range active radar air-to-air missile, the PL-12 medium-range active radar air-to-air missile, the PL-8 infrared-guided air-to-air missile, as well as free-fall general purpose bombs. While flying with open missile bay doors the fighter revealed four PL-15 missiles (reported max. range of 300 km) and two PL-10 radar-homing missiles on either side. It is estimated that it can carry a weapons payload of 10 tonnes. It has 6 external hard-points plus one gun. However, like the F-35, the J-20 currently is capable of carrying four missiles in its main weapons bay whereas the F-22 carries six missiles. Since weapons have to be carried internally, its rather obviously limits weapon carriage capacity compared to non-stealthy configuration. So internal space has to be liberated. It is piloted by one person. If the fighter jet uses Afterburner then it becomes vulnerable to IR-guided missiles & consumes too much fuel. China has been able to develope their engine but the alloys for the blades wear-out much faster than western ones. The J-20 has, so far cost $4.4 billion and that the construction cost doe each aircraft is $110 million. It is estimated that the fighter will weigh 16-19 tonnes empty with a maximum takeoff weight of 36 tonnes. It is thought to have a body length of 21 meters, a wingspan of 13 m and a maximum flight speed of Mach 2.2. Parts of the fuselage are made of alloys that are particularly time-consuming to mold and then fabricate into complex structures. It has divert-less supersonic inlets (DSI) on both sides, an all-moving vertical tail and a canard wing configuration. It is unknown if the J-31 is meant to complement the J-20 stealth fighter. Canards used in J-20 are not found on the US F-22 and F-35 and the Russian Su-57 stealth fighters. J-20 canard's reflected radar signals are very very well blended with its main wing's reflected radar signals, and due to their high swept angle, the first high radar cross-section spike of J-20 actually located at around 50 degrees boresight. This mean it is very easy for J-20 pilots to keep enemy adversary within their stealthy sector. Add to the fact that J-20 has very big antenna aperture, it can be highly lethal in BVR combat. J-20 is aimed at larger area airspace denial rather than an air superiority fighter per se. A senior designer said that the J-20 multi capacities would be used at the most crucial moments during a war and will depend on its production numbers and deployment scale. With China’s J-20 fighters in development, as well as the sheer numbers of third-generation fighters, forming its main strategic combat force, along with early warning aircraft, electromagnetic interference systems and airborne warning and control systems, China will have a clear advantage over Japan in any potential air battle. If the J-20 is equipped with China’s fourth generation active electronically scanned array radar, and this equals the APG-77 with which the F-22 is equipped, the aircraft will be able to detect an F-35A head on at a distance of 50 km, whereas a F-35A will only be able to detect a J-20 head on at a distance of 20-40 km, giving the J-20 the advantage. Perhaps the J-20 as a secondary role is meant a stealthy strike aircraft like the F-117 which was very successful bomb delivering strike fighter. J-20 would have rather played the role of remote sensors, positioned to guide the Air-Air missiles fired from other platforms. J-20 purpose is to push back USN tankers and AEW&C communications nodes beyond 1000 miles to prevent refueling and vastly limiting the operational range and effectiveness of US fighters. Given the severe drop in RCS with fourth-generation fighters, adding concentrated deployment of early warning aircraft and radar is a bottomless pit, as no country has been able to make up for the shortfall in their early warning and anti-aircraft defense systems. Neither the F-35 nor the slow F/A-18 Super Hornet have the operating range to reach the beaches beyond 1000 miles. F-35 with external drop tanks are not stealthy and drop tanks mean you will trade off payload big time. There is an historic precedent for this. The most successful USAAF fighter in the Pacific, during WWII, was the very-long-range (if vulnerable) P-38. The US only has 187 F-22 fighters. J-20 has been designed as a mechanical platform that remains scalable and adaptive. Increasingly, the U.S. military has made stealth one of its highest priorities, both in terms of new acquisitions and the retrofit of older aircraft. In short, stealth is the centre-piece of the U.S. air superiority strategy. Faced with the prospect of aerial stealth proliferation, states in the 21st century are looking for anti-stealth defence options. China's J-20 programme is seen as an attempt to complete with stealth. China for the first time, this project relied on their own resources, or whether use of technology and consulting assistance to other countries, particularly Russia. However, it lacks the capable sensors to see targets at long range, which Russian do not possess. At present, each of the four released prototypes of the J-20 have differed substantially, as the Chinese continue to manage the steep learning curve of manufacturing stealth technology. It does represent a major leap for Chinese stealth airframe design. Visually, the J-20 resembles an F-22 front end mated with an SU-47 / MiG 1.42 main fuselage, MiG 1.42 wings and canards, and a tail assembly which bears an uncanny resemblance to the Northrop YF-23. It's a relatively conservatively designed twin-engined machine with trapezoidal wing, two markers and two tilting the horizontal tail. J-20 canards are coplanar to wing, which in combination with their distance from wing leading edge makes them ineffective as lift-enhancing surface. The angle of inclination of vertical tail surfaces and their connection to place trunk full copy leaning sides of the fuselage, giving the front view form one continuous line. This solution simplifies the calculations of radar reflectivity and is used in all modern stealth aircraft. The back end of the J-20 looks like the non-stealthy Mig 1.44, as does the overall layout with delta canards. A major surprise is covered with a one-piece cockpit, similar to that of an F-22. Perhaps the most obvious differences were the new nose design with a dielectric radome for an AESA radar featuring a sawtooth joint with the main fuselage, and the addition of an electro-optical targeting system in a fairing beneath the forward fuselage. The tailfins featured cropped tips; the inlets and DSI (diverter-less supersonic intake) bulges had been redesigned around the nozzles to improve rear-aspect radar cross-section; the leading-edge root extensions between wing and foreplanes were reshaped; the canopy had gained a stiffening bow frame and a slightly more pronounced hump; and the cumbersome main-wheel door design of the initial aircraft had been replaced by a much neater installation. Other changes included enlarged fairings to either side of the engine nozzles. Diamond-shaped windows around the fuselage suggest that a distributed aperture infrared vision system is installed. The sensor suite includes an electro-optical targeting system (EOTS) and a large-array AESA radar, which was developed by the 14th Institute at Nanjing Research Institute of Electronics Technology (NRIET, 14th Institute). Stealth technology has been hard to develop and several sources have cited that catastrophic failures in potential engines for the aircraft have seriously affected the development of the fighters. They are clearly not ready for combat and wouldn't be operational at least before 2019. At the moment, it's just a flying shell with a hint of low observable capabilities. It was surprising when it was declared ready for service in 2017 but not so surprising when production was quietly halted because of unspecified problems. Pre-production J-20s were flown in a wide variety of climates during 2017 which may have revealed unanticipated problems requiring fixes that are still in the works. Operating a low-observable aircrafts also requires costly and lengthy maintenance. Chinese officials have stated that final version could be between 500 and 700 aircraft. There are 2 technology demonstrators (2001 and 2002), 6 prototypes (2011 to 2017) and several pre-production models. {The 2011 is “Black Ribbon” and the 2014 is “Galacticos”. 2101 is the ninth J-20 fighter.} The 3rd prototype J-20 has something worth a mention: a revised nose section, similar to that of the F-35, with an IRST/EOTS – used to hunt low observable aircraft, and a metal finish that loosely reminds the radar absorbing Haze Paint first used on F-16s. According to several reports it has a new air intake design and shorter engine nozzles. The first 6 series production aircraft are 78271 to 78276. Engine inlet ducts are shielded with the engines located well inside the aircraft. This is because incident radar energy can bounce off the rotating blades and give away the aircraft’s presence. In order to avoid detection from the ground, the exhaust nozzles are located on the upper surface of the wing. Further, the aircraft’s hot exhaust gases are mixed with cooler air thus reducing the infrared signature useful to infrared seeking missiles. In order to cool the hot exhaust nozzles, different materials are also used. Going the stealthy way means a lot of compromises. However, what the J-20 fighter lacks a is a bigger, reliable super-cruising engine, which the Russians will be probably hesitant to supply for fear of it being reverse engineered. Hence, a Chinese indigenous one is in need. At the moment the J-20 is believed to use the same engines that the Su-27/30 series of aircraft use – the Russian Saturn AL- 31. Further, there is no evidence of an Active Electronically Scanned Array Radar (AESA), without which its performance would be meaningless. Until these technologies fructify, he feels that the J-20 would just be a hollow threat. As in the rest of the world, and there will be a phase of EMD (engineering and manufacturing development) take at least 10 years, and serial machines can hardly get to the real surgical operation before 2020. J-20 also lacks any IR signature reduction measures. Building the J20 requires a disproportionate number of skilled workers. Parts of the fuselage are made of alloys that are particularly time-consuming to mold and then fabricate into complex structures. It was surprising when the J-20 was declared ready for service in 2017. Production was quietly halted in 2017 because of unspecified problems. The potential problems with the 36 tons J-20 mainly has to do with stealth materials on the air-frame and engines. China has been developing the supercruise-ready 150kN-thrust WS-15 engine Emei since the 1990s for a larger aircraft like the J-20 but has not been able to get the engine to work effectively in a wide variety of climates. Officials also confirmed rumors that a WS-15 exploded during a static ground test in 2015. China still is far away from mastering the production technologies for superalloys, thermal barrier coatings, powder metallurgy, and single-crystal blades using rare-earth metals. WS-15 reliability problems are still not completely resolved. J-20 engine power is about the same as the F-15C, while the F-22 has 65% more power. With the afterburner turned on, the J-20 has more power than the F-15C and nearly as much as the F-22. But because the afterburner consumes so much fuel you can't use more than a few minutes at a time. The afterburner also generates a lot more heat which makes an aircraft more visible to heat sensors. Worse for the J-20, is the fact that its engine power is about the same as the F-15C, while the F-22 has 65% more power. With the afterburner turned on, the J-20 has more power than the F-15C and nearly as much as the F-22. Because J-20 afterburner consumes so much fuel you can't use more than a few minutes at a time. The increased fuel consumption at low level dramatically reduced operating ranges. The afterburner also generates a lot more heat which makes an aircraft more visible to heat sensors. It will have a combat radius of 1,500 km. Its cruise speed will likely be around Mach 1.6. It will likely have a maximum altitude of 20,000 m and a range of 4,500 km (carrying two subsidiary fuel tanks). As of now, J-20 will not be deployed close to the Indian border, and it is vulnerable to India's first-wave hit. Stealth essentially means designing an aircraft so that it remains undetected by radar, infra red or visual means. It also includes technologies for reducing noise and smoke. Why stealth? With increases in radar detection ranges, higher power radars and more sophisticated signal processing, it became practically impossible for aircraft to avoid radar detection. One solution was to fly below the radar horizon. However that required special training. One solution was to use jamming – decoying the enemy radar into believing that the threat was coming from another direction. This required dedicated and expensive equipment and training. Moreover the enemy too was developing countermeasures and jamming was therefore not always effective. Another such alternative, passive radar, appears a cost-effective counter to stealth. Passive radar is a receive-only system that uses transmitters of opportunity. Integrating a system of netted receivers, passive radar can detect, track, and target piloted and un-piloted stealth systems and provide cuing for anti-air weapons systems. A passive radar system emits no radio energy and can be well camouflaged in both urban and rural landscapes. One of the most significant counters to stealth, namely conventional very high frequency (VHF) and ultra high frequency (UHF) radar, has been around since World War II and is still in use today for long-range air surveillance. Most LO techniques are designed to defeat acquisition and fire control radar in the X band, which uses centimeter wavelength. Poor resolution in angle and range, however, has historically prevented these radars from providing accurate targeting and fire control. One of the earliest methods used was to coat the surface with radar absorbent material (RAM). The Germans used this on their U-boats to avoid detection by allied aircraft in WWII. However, such materials are not durable and are maintenance heavy. Some form of RAM is still used today. Really significant RCS reduction requires a radical redesign of airframes. Curved surfaces usually reflect only a portion of the incident energy back in the direction of the transmitter, while flat surfaces reflect a major portion of the incident energy. Sometimes the incident energy is trapped in the cavity formed by aircraft surfaces or ducts. This causes resonance and more energy reflections in all directions - obviously undesirable. On 27th March 1999, the downing of an F-117 'Nighthawk' over Serbia only highlighted to the United States the importance of stealth. The pilot ejected and was rescued. It was the first time one of the much-touted "invisible" fighters had ever been hit. "At the time, our intelligence reports told of Chinese agents criss-crossing the region where the F-117 disintegrated, buying up parts of the plane from local farmers" says Adm. Davor Domazet-Loso, Croatia's military chief of staff during the Kosovo war. We believe the Chinese used those materials to gain an insight into secret stealth technologies ... and to reverse-engineer them" Domazet-Loso said in an interview. A drugs bust conducted by undercover agents in the US has uncovered a plot to export sensitive military technology to China. Taiwanese nationals Hui Sheng Shen and Huan Ling Chang were both suspected of attempting to smuggle drugs and counterfeit goods through a port in New Jersey, US, but have since been accused of conspiring to export technology relating to F-22 fighter jets and several US-built UAVs. The pair were recorded in taped conversations claiming to be working with an adviser to a high-ranking Chinese government official looking for technology relating to Global Hawk, Reaper and Raven drones, as well as stealth technology relating to the F-22 fighter jet. Shen and Chang later revealed that their contacts were connected to a Chinese version of the Central Intelligence Agency, and that Chinese government money would be used to make acquisitions of the sought-after technology. Ming Suan Zhang was charged in Federal Court for “attempting to illegally export aerospace-grade carbon fiber“, and faces up to 20 years in prison. Allegedly, Zhang and unnamed accomplices tried to obtain the carbon fiber and have it exported out of the US to China. Luckily for the US, the company that Zhang contacted was actually a front business for Homeland Security and the “buyer” Zhang talked with was actually a US agent. Duck-tail is surprisingly vyklonené upwards as the machine J-10. While this is partly to help improve maneuverability and buoyancy (generation of airborne viruses), but on the other hand, the significantly increased radar reflections. Not only from the front view, but also from sides and angles that are typical for ground radar radiation. This would again suggest links between the project Yakovlev MFI as comparable American JAST concepts made by Lockheed Martin, built just for that duck-tail from the front view in the same plane as the angle of the wing leading edge. The US has long suspected China of attempting to copy sensitive information relating to technological advances, particularly in the field of stealth technology. In 2005, a former Northrop B2 design engineer was arrested for selling highly classified data about the B-2 and its stealth design to China. The development of China's Chengdu J-20 fighter jet has been met with claims of stolen stealth designs from the B-2 Spirit programme, while China has also been accused of cyber espionage after a number of hacking attempts on Lockheed Martin computers. Although the Russian military had stopped the development work of the world's first supersonic V/STOL fighter aircraft, Jacques -141; the R-79 -300 engine, which developed for the aircraft has not been abandoned. Recently reported that China had already received the technical information of this type of engine & R-79-300V vector control engine nozzles, related production technology and an engine product. Russia has also sold hundreds of AL-31 series of turbofan engines to the China. PW1200G engine will power Japan's first jet aircraft developed by Mitsubishi's Mitsubishi Regional Jet MRJ ATD-X stands for ‘Advance Technology Demonstrator - X’ & “DMU” stands for “digital mock-up”. British Aerospace Tempest prototype flew in 1986. With no American tech in the BAE (along with European Leonardo and MBDA) Tempest fighter, the builders can export its technology with anyone (e.g. Japan) without restrictions from the US who often impose it, on those using some of their tech. The new platform will replace RAF Typhoon, which entered service in 2003 and was developed by Airbus, BAE and Leonardo. Japan's $366M Mitsubishi ATD X2 (ShinShin aka "Spirit of the Heart") technology demonstrator developed domestically (when U.S. Congress debarred American F-22 for exports) by the Ministry of Defense Technical Research and Development Institute (TRDI). It is a 5th generation fighter technology demonstrator prototype for F3 research purposes, to replace their current F-2 & F-15 fighter jets, later in the decade; and to complement the F-35 stealth fighters. The F-3 will succeed the F-2, a derivative of the F-16 Fighting Falcon jointly developed by Mitsubishi Heavy and Lockheed Martin more than two decades ago. JASDF (Japan Air Self-Defense Forces) planners had been attempting to acquire the F-22 Raptor jet fighter to F-15 Eagle fighter planes. Proposals from Lockheed (combining elements of its F-22 and F-35), Boeing and BAE were “judged not to have met our needs” which puts Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, in the lead for a military contract worth more than $40 billion. It has a length of 46-feet with a wingspan of 29-feet. It is a twin-engine design which will utilize two Ishikawa Heavy Industries low-bypass turbofan engines for optimal thrust. Engineers are well into preliminary development of a surprisingly powerful turbofan for the twin-engine fighter, which would enter service around 2030 as the F-3. Key aims of the engine project are to achieve the extremely high temperature of 1,800C (3,272F) and to keep the power-plant slim in order to reduce airframe frontal area. The latter point is one of several features that suggest an intention to build a super-cruising fighter, which now looks doubtful amid the emphasis on range over speed. National requirements such as the preference for range over speed may nudge Japan toward going it alone. It has been estimated that developing the F-3 could cost $12 billion (without exports $40 billion), and the Japanese parliament provided $703 million in the 2021 defense budget to start work. The prototypes will finish tests by 2018 and at least a decade away from the first production aircraft. The experimental X-2 is expected to make its maiden test flight in 2015. It will begin service in 2035. Japan 26th DMU is a prototype of the F-3 fighter may have moved a little away from the bias toward long-range and endurance over flight performance that marked the previous preliminary design. The firing systems on the prototype still require a substantive amount of code deciphering in order to function correctly–and the task has proven to be abysmally complex, even for the world’s top engineers and researchers in Japan. The aircraft is to replace the fleet of F-2 fighters as early as 2028. Japan admits that it will take about a decade to get the X-2 into service, assuming all the technical and fiscal obstacles can be overcome. Japan’s Technical Research and Development Institute is still looking into, infrared stealth, fiber optics, self-repairing flight control technologies, building air-to-air radar into the actual skin of the aircraft itself, and battlefield data networking in order for the fighter to be considered complete. Something that will set the new Japanese Fighter apart from the previous fighters are the thrust vectoring paddles. These game-changing paddles extend from the engine exhausts. This will enable the flying machine to allow the pilot to control the direction of the exhaust. Japan has already developed the Mitsubishi AAM-4B, a long-range air-to-air missile with an active electronically scanning array (AESA) radar as a seeker complete with homing functionality. The 2011 design, 23DMU, looked somewhat like a scaled up ATD-X. As is common in stealth aircraft, snaking inlet ducts shielded the engine faces from radar energy, which they would otherwise reflect strongly. The tail of 23DMU had the usual four surfaces, with the fins angled outward. The result of the 23DMU design effort was quite a deep fuselage and a lot of radar-reflecting side area, which the designers sought to reduce in 24DMU by flattening the aircraft. They moved the engines outboard and fed them with straighter ducts, relying on blockers—radial baffles mounted ahead of the engines—to help obstruct radar energy. Just two stabilizers were mounted as a V-tail much like that of the Northrop YF-23, the aircraft that the U.S. Air Force rejected when it chose the F-22. Interceptor & Striker (A - attack)A multi-role combat fighter is different from a strike fighter. The strike fighter is typically a attack fighter aircraft that can also employ air-to-ground munitions. The multi-role fighter is designed to equally perform both aerial combat and ground attack. In 1967, President Lyndon Johnson praised the output of the spy satellites, claiming that their lesson was that “we were doing things we didn't need to do. We were building things we didn't need to build. We were harboring fears we didn't need to harbor.” In the 1960s, Germans developed three jet VTOL aircrafts in case the Soviets attacked, including the EWR "VJ 101C" fighter, the Dornier "Do 31" transport, and the VFW "VAK 191B" fighter. As with most of the early VTOL designs, they were technically interesting but not judged practical for operational use, and never entered production. The VFW VAK 191B was an experimental German VTOL nuclear strike fighter of the early 1970s intended as replacement for the Fiat G.91. The VAK 191B was similar in concept to the British Harrier, but was designed for a supersonic dash capability (Mach number 1.2-1.4) at medium to high altitudes. It was judged that having a single engine would create too much drag, but the two lift engines were dead weight in cruise, and the small cruise engine gave a poor thrust to weight ratio. It also had very small highly loaded wings. By contrast, the Harrier had a much higher thrust-to-weight ratio, it was effective as a dogfighter, and had larger wings which were put to good use in rolling short takeoffs. The designers settled on an aircraft that combined pivoting wingtip engines with fixed vertical-lift engines buried in the fuselage. It was a simpler solution than the one used in the British Harrier. But like today’s F-35B, it possessed a disadvantage in that the fuselage lift power plant—a lift fan in the case of the F-35B—amounted to dead weight during cruise flight. This badly hurt its performance. The blazing hot afterburner was also too close to the ground in vertical flight. A similar “downwash” problem has caused problems for the F-35B when taking off from the decks of amphibious assault ships. Tests revealed that the wingtip jets were troublesome in VTOL mode. While the VJ 101 came to naught, the engine apparently inspired the Soviet R-79V-300 used years later in the Yakovlev Yak-141 V/STOL fighter project. The same concept of an afterburning turbofan with vectoring nozzle is now powering the F-35B According to French and Edgren, the American plan to use the F-35 as a long-range combat platform – using BVR missiles – is fatally flawed because US air-to-air missiles do not have a splendid record in war. Despite the F-35’s designers’ preference for long-range combat, avoiding dogfights may prove difficult. The F-35 is a large aircraft, but most of its internal space is taken up for fuel. There’s precious little internal space for carrying bombs and missiles. Secondly, if the missiles are carried on external hard-points, it nullifies whatever little claimed stealth it has. This problem will be exacerbated by the F-35’s limited ability to generate sorties, i.e., fly missions, to repeatedly deliver its weapons to targets over the duration of a campaign. F-35 has got lengthy maintenance duration due to heat management concerns. Sortie generation rate is the number of duration and missions an aircraft can undertake in a given time. The heavy maintenance necessitated by the complexity of the aircraft derogates its possibility of high sortie generation. The F-135 engine is already inadequate to meet the F-35’s cooling needs. The engine can provide enough cooling for the F-35’s systems, but doing so requires more heat and stress on the engine, increasing maintenance and cost. 91% of engines delivered have been late. Taking deliveries of F-35s before the aircraft had completed testing (a strategy they called "concurrency"), for instance, turned out to be a serious mistake. F-35A fighter jet engine's overheating problems that is significantly reducing its service life. The coolant lines with defective insulation broken down or ruptured on 15 F-35A, belonging to the USAF (13 aircraft) & the Royal Norwegian Air Force (2 aircraft), were provided by a new vendor without carrying out the most elementary quality controls. It resulted in a loss of power to the engine. It will require cutting some holes in wings. We also have access panels on the wings. The non-conforming insulation on 18 coolant lines will be stripped and replaced with conforming insulation. The F-35 uses its fuel for cooling its electronics. The aircraft won't start if its fuel is too warm. Also, there is a “low-risk potential” that air in the fuel system could over-pressurise an F-35’s fuel tanks. The design flaw impacts all three F-35 variants operated by the US service and international buyers. It is more difficult to have long cable runs from the power supply to the aircraft. The air-refuelling probe tips are breaking too often, resulting in squadrons imposing restrictions on air-refuelling. It is unlikely that the program will achieve the OR (Operational Requirements) threshold at maturity. Most notably, the program is not likely to achieve the Mean Flight Hours Between Critical Failures. It also has (vibration and acoustic) stresses affecting the weapons bay. https://breakingdefense.com/2023/09/only-55-percent-of-f-35s-mission-capable-putting-depot-work-in-spotlight-gao/ https://www.thedefensepost.com/2023/09/26/half-f35-mission-capable/ Difficulty sustaining the F-35 engine is contributing to a higher cost per flying hour. The overall F-35 fleet-wide monthly availability rates has climbed to 74% in 2019, up from around 50%-55% over the years. As of October 2014 F-35 was only able to achieve 61% of planned sorties (51% for F-35C, 55% for the F-35A and 72% for F-35B) due to maintenance issues. Each variant of F-35 has fallen short of its reliability and maintenance targets set for the current stage of development, and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has characterized engine reliability as “very poor”. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2023/11/21/upgraded-f-35s-fly-with-partial-software-as-dod-hunts-for-delivery-fix/
The Pentagon announced a $34 billion contract in 2019 with Lockheed Martin for 478 F-35, the largest contract yet for the F-35 fighter program. The program had an initial acquisition cost of $406.5 billion. In 2001 the U.S. believed 5,100 F-35s would be sold, but the rising costs and increasing delays drove that down to 2,500 by 2018. The F-22 is more maneuverable and has two engines instead of one in the F-35. F-22 production was capped at less than 200 aircraft. The F-35 was designed to have “affordable stealth” and much more effective sensors and electronics. The stealth coatings in the F-35 are far cheaper (and easier) to maintain than those in the F-22. The success of smart bombs in Iraq and Afghanistan has also made it clear that fewer aircraft will be needed in the future. Another deal-breaker is the long time it takes to modify the F-35 software and certify non-U.S. weapons for use. In 2013, a single Air Force's F-35A costs a whopping $135 to $148 million. One Marine Corps F-35B costs an unbelievable $251 million. A lone Navy F-35C costs a mind-boggling $337 million. Average the three models together, and a “generic” F-35 costs $178 million. These are just the under-estimated production costs of the airframe alone. Total development cost is now put at $70 billion, which comes to nearly $30 million per aircraft. F-35A cost 60% more than the F-16s (and more than 50% than F-15X) to operate, now that is down to 40% to maintain per flight hour, but It's still bad. A lack of readily available spare engine parts from East Hartford-based Pratt & Whitney has at times kept a sizeable portion of the global F-35 fleet grounded. (In 2013, it cost the US Navy, $19,000 an hour to operate its AV-8 vertical takeoff or F-18C fighter aircraft.) Initially, the F-35 operating costs were supposed to be the same or lower. These costs include buying and maintaining the aircraft, and purchasing spare parts. Now the Air Force and Navy agree that the costs of the "cheaper" F-35 are actually higher. The F-35, at least for the navy, is headed in the same direction. The navy calculated that it would cost 63% more to operate the F-35C (which will replace the F-18C) and the F-35B (which will replace the AV-8). The navy can go ahead with the more recent F-18E and keep refurbishing, or even building, the AV-8. The navy recently began examining the possibility of buying fewer F-35s, in the long run, and replacing them with combat UAVs, like the X-47B. https://breakingdefense.com/2023/09/only-55-percent-of-f-35s-mission-capable-putting-depot-work-in-spotlight-gao/ Developing, integrating and testing more than 8 million lines of code on a supersonic stealth fighter was no small task. From the program’s outset, the software team has focused on developing 6 key software releases known as Blocks:
Although early-model F-35A trainer aircraft could be updated with the latest software blocks and components, the flying branch may find it easier and cheaper to simply retire some trainers early and accept delivery of newer, combat-ready F-35As that already have the latest software and hardware installed and ready to go. Absence of just one system jeopardises the effectiveness of the entire network-centric “systems of systems” put together by The Air Superiority 2030 Enterprise Capability Collaboration Team. ALIS software is as an automated supply system integrated with the aircrafts mission planning software systems. It was created to handle F-35 aircraft maintenance more conveniently, however, it was not considered ready for users and has already cost over half a billion dollars to develop. Lockheed-Martin, the manufacturer of the F-35, has been give a new contract to build a new version of ALIS that works. Building, maintaining, and making ALIS more resistant to attack was itself a multi-billion dollar project. Fixing it is difficult because so many suppliers are involved and the demands of foreign users have made the task even more difficult. The new ALIS system has been renamed ODIN, and it takes advantage of new software development tools to incorporate all the new F-35 performance data that ALIS sometimes choked on. It is also a key component of fleet management, to collect data on all F-35s each user nation operates. F-35 was developed not only in the United States, but also in its allies as an integrated strike fighter that is intended to replace fighters, fighters and ground attack aircraft. Therefore, it is pointed out that the operation of cloud-based ALIS is a safety risk. Israel has refused to depend on Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) exclusively for F-35I ADIR AS-1 maintenance and other services. ALIS is considered a liability rather than an asset, and users spend more and more time working around ALIS rather than with it. There are many more suppliers than are actually needed, and that security in any networked supply system is only as strong as the weakest company connected to the network. Failure to protect ALIS puts all F-35 at risk. When the code is working, it takes 24 hours to upload data from each plane into a new ALIS ground computer. So when an F-35 deploys to a new base, an entire day is lost as the data is passed to the new ALIS. And only one plane at a time can upload. So if the 12 F-35’s of Hill Air Force Base’s first “operational” squadron deploy to combat, it will take nearly two weeks to start maintaining the full squadron with ALIS. The code delay is the latest—and possibly most damaging—setback for the Pentagon’s ambitious and controversial plan to replace almost all of its Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps fighters with three different versions of the F-35 at a cost of more than a trillion dollars over the next 50 years. If the F-35’s code doesn’t work, then neither does the F-35. To complicate matters even further, the program is losing testing personnel right at this critical juncture. Saddled with thousands of dysfunctional F-35s, the Pentagon could lose command of the air. One possible solution is to strip some features from the Block 3F software—say, compatibility with certain high-tech weapons—and wait to add those capabilities back to the F-35 on later software blocks. It’s no exaggeration to say that the future of U.S. air power rests on these 8 million lines of code. The F-35 can operate up to 30 days at a time without hooking up to ALIS. The nightmare scenario would involve an opponent causing a disruption during an actual crisis by either actively feeding bad information into the ALIS system or otherwise disabling some portion of it or its overarching architecture. The interconnected nature of the arrangement might allow a localized breach to infect larger segments of the F-35 fleet both in the United States or abroad, or vice versa. It’s not hard to imagine the time and energy needed to sort out real inputs and outputs from fake ones hampering or halting operations entirely under the right circumstances. Why would an enemy use a $500,000 air-to-air or surface-to-air and put their personnel and equipment at risk in an attempt to down an F-35 when a simple worm may be able to do the same to a whole fleet of F-35s? Ultimately, there will be a standard gateway off of the program that we can all work with, but in the interim each nation is thinking to bring a gateway along and have that integrated. Of course, the very nature of ALIS means these concerns go both ways. In addition to just cutting off access to future software upgrades and other data, the U.S. could seek to use the system as a vector for a cyber-attack to completely disable the jets. The pilot reported that flying the F-35A Low-Rate Initial Production Lot 6 was more “draining” than his previous aircraft, the F-15E. The report said the F-35’s unique air system, which requires a “work of breathing,” has that effect on many pilots. The pilot’s experience is “supported by emerging research” on the F-35A’s systems that “there appears to be a physiological toll taken on a pilot’s cognitive capacities as a result of breathing through the on-demand oxygen system,” the report said. The pilot reported that on a scale of 1 to 10, his cognitive degradation was “4 out of 10 on a routine basis.” The F-35 is the first combat fighter to eschew a traditional HUD (head's up display) in favour of HMD (helmet mounted display). The F-35 instead has a very fancy helmet. In a nutshell, this extraordinarily expensive and complex hat gives pilots x-ray vision, allowing them to look through their own aircraft. The helmet projects information from a 360-degree infrared camera onto the pilot's visor (along with symbols showing other information like speed and altitude). The result is that a pilot can "look" down and see what the sensors directly beneath the plane are picking up about what's happening down below. The helmet system means that F-35 pilots can simply turn their heads to see what's going on. The pilot doesn't need to maneuver. However, these high-tech helmets were bulky and buggy. During low ambient light, the night vision camera in the pilot helmet, display wonky horizontal green lines or striations, obscuring the horizon. I’m going to have some F-35s doing air superiority, some doing those early phases of persistent attack, opening the holes (by destroying enemy air defences), and again, the F-35 is not compelling unless it’s there in numbers,” the general says. “Because it can’t turn and run away, it’s got to have support from other F-35s. So I'm going to need eight F-35s to go after a target that I might only need two (F-22) Raptors to go after. But the F-35s can be equally or more effective against that site than the Raptor can because of the synergistic effects of the platform. The Pentagon asked Lockheed to re-engineer the plane's design to change certain components. There are US laws, regulations, and policies which are diametrically opposed to such a strategy. The 8 foreign partner nations are separated into three tiers defined by their financial commitment. The UK is the only tier one partner. The other partner nations can attend program reviews but are not allowed access to non-disclosure related content. There are various reasons for these restrictions, including foreign capability limitations, and the risks of a rogue nation and information exploitation. Also there are other foreign buyers which are not partners. They will probably know nothing about the peculiarities of the airplane they are procuring, and their loss of capability. There are very strict controls on U.S. tech and all foreign partners will not have full access to software codes on the plane, particularly those to maintain and upgrade the aircraft. In contrast, Rafale fighter jet was designed in such a way that throughout its service-life, the fighter will never be required to go back to France for deep overhaul and any kind of upgrades is going to be in the form of modular plug-n-play type, which can be done by the crew at any base. The F-35 has less capable downgraded version for its international partners (except F-35I ADIR AS-1), but still have commonality as much as possible with America's version of the fighter jet. The active mode of operation of certain parts of operating software (made by US-based OEM) in Western military aircrafts, that are necessary to perform at max levels, requires crypto-keys regulated by the strict US export-control laws. The CCL categories include electronics, computers, telecommunications, information security, sensors and lasers, navigation and avionics, and aerospace and propulsion. The Munitions List (USML) includes weapons, munitions, missiles, military electronics, fire control, Range Finder, and Optical and Guidance and Control Equipment. Restrictions inherent in the US export control process are not simple. They are diverse and include several executive agencies and Congress. The National Disclosure Policy describes the authorizations process for DoD export policy. The Secretary of Defense and the Undersecretary are the principal adjudicators of export decisions. But other agencies are involved in disclosure, special access, cryptological capabilities, the Buy American Act etc. These restrictions apply in addition to domestic DoD acquisition laws and policies. The F-35A was up against an F-16D (a two-seat version of that plane) with two external fuel tanks hanging off its wings and F-35A was in a clean configuration without any internal payloads. F-35 was unable to perform beyond a defensive move that required it to loose energy with the implications of losing the fight unless the F-16 pilot made a gross error. All this was due to the under-powered engine of F-35. To make matters worse, the test pilot on F-35, owing to a cramped cockpit, found it almost impossible to turn his head to see behind the plane, which was a mandatory mode of observation in a dogfight. The F-35 was also at a distinct energy disadvantage – the Test pilot of F-35 revealed that he couldn’t target the F-16 with the F-35’s 25mm canon and when having to escape F-16’s aim, the F-35 wasn’t able to do that either. Titanium bulkheads have been retained in the other two F-25 variants for the Air Force and Navy but the F-35B bulkheads were changed to aluminum in 2004-2005 in order to reduce 3,000 pounds that would help the F-35B meet its performance requirements. Aluminium Alloy 7085 is used in the construction of the F-35 and is reported to have increased susceptibility to intergranular corrosion which can lead to metal stress and cracking. Dehumidifiers is recommended be used around the clock. In 2010 fatigue cracks were discovered at nearly the 1,500 hour mark in the aft aluminum bulkhead of a F-35B ground test aircraft and was thus placed on a two-years probation. The bulkhead was redesigned even though it was said to be impossible in the given time-frame without adding extra weight. Then in 2014 extensive cracks issues were uncovered, the problem still exists. It's not yet clear how aircraft to be made under the eighth production contract. The “good news” is that it only impacts the Marine Corps “B” model. Lockheed spokesperson said so you'll never see these cracks" again. In 2015 the cracks have appeared again and the bulkheads needs redesigning. Cracks formed on the f-35B's bulkhead, where the fuselage attaches to the main landing gear, due to stress concentration. Lockheed has said that its decision to convert the bulkhead structure from titanium to a aluminium alloy in order to reduce weight (and increase range) was not a factor. Prologue Largely because of the Marines “jump jet” demands, even the best-manufactured JSF is a second-rate dog fighter despite its vaunted ability to evade detection by radar. Convinced by Lockheed and DARPA that the universal STOVL jet concept could work, in 1996 Congress directed the Pentagon to organize a contest to build the new plane. General Dynamics, Boeing and Lockheed drew up blueprints. The main idea was to develop a fighter with just one swappable component — the downward-blasting second engine — a single airplane design could do the jobs of the Marines’ vertical-launching Harrier and of the faster, farther-flying conventional planes of the Navy and Air Force. Fundamentally, the problem is one of lift. A plane taking off vertically gets no lift from the wings. All the flight forces must come from the downward engine blast. Forcing the motor to do all the work results in three design drawbacks: a big, hot engine with almost no safety margin; an unsafe airframe that must be thinly built with tiny wings in order to keep the plane’s weight less than the down-thrust of the engine; and minimal fuel and weapons load, also to save weight. A complicated system of shafts, gears and doors activates to reveal the horizontal lift fan installed in the center of the aircraft just behind the cockpit. Together, the fan and nozzle produce more than 40,000 pounds of thrust, enough to lift the nearly 20-ton aircraft straight up off the ground. In vertical mode the Harrier carries far fewer bombs than conventional fighters and also lacks their flying range. And the concentrated downward blast of the Harrier’s vertical engine nozzles melts asphalt and kicks up engine-destroying dirt, making it impossible to operate from roads or even manicured lawns. The original X-35 from 2001 had the advantage of being strictly a test plane, with no need to carry weapons. But the frontline F-35 needs weapons. And to maintain the smooth shape that’s best for avoiding detection by radar, the weapons need to be carried inside internal bomb bays. Bomb bays would normally go along an airplane’s centerline, but the F-35's center is reserved for the 50-inch-diameter lift fan. Hence, STOVL and stealth are incompatible. The extra width violates an important aerospace design principle called the “area rule,” which encourages narrow, cylindrical fuselages for best aerodynamic results. The absence of area rule on the F-35 increases drag and consequently decreases acceleration, fuel efficiency and flying range. The bulky lift fan, fitted into the fuselage just behind the pilot, blocks the rear-view from the cockpit — a shortcoming that one F-35 test pilot said would get the new plane “gunned every time.” That is, shot down in any aerial dogfight by enemy fighters you can’t see behind you. The video resolution (scanning 360 degrees) is far worse than the naked eye and completely inadequate for picking up the distant, tiny, minimal contrast dots in the sky that represent deadly fighter threats ready to kill you. Ironically, the fan and other vertical-launch gear threatened to make the new plane too heavy to take off vertically. Lockheed poured more people, time and money (billed to the government) into a redesign effort that eventually shaved off much of the extra weight — basically by removing safety gear and making fuselage parts thinner and less tough. But the redesigned JSF, while somewhat lighter and more maneuverable, is also less durable and less safe to fly. Due to the complexities of designing such a fighter and due to the weight problem, Boeing had decided to use two delta-wing aircrafts (which were extremely maneuverable). The Boeing efforts were dubbed the X-32A and X-32B. For VTOL characteristics, the X-32B was used. It made use of a similar direct-lift engine function to that of the Harrier II. The engine was a conventional derivative of the F-22 reheated turbofan, designated F119-PW-614C. It required the engine to be moved from its conventional rear position to just behind the cockpit. This was done to balance the weight of the aircraft to make it controllable when hovering. To help pay for the overruns, between 2007 and 2012 the Pentagon decommissioned nearly 500 existing A-10s, F-15s, F-16s and F/A-18s — 15% of the jet fighter fleet — before any F-35s were ready to replace them. To add insult to strategic injury, one of the most modern Chinese prototype warplanes might actually be an illicit near-copy of the F-35 — albeit a more intelligent copy that wisely omits the most compromising aspects of the U.S. plane. The J-31 does not have a lift fan or even a space for a lift fan. The omission apparently allowed Chinese engineers to optimize the new plane for speed, acceleration, maneuverability and flying range — and to add good pilot visibility and a second rearward engine. It’s possible that in some future war, America’s JSFs could be shot down by faster, deadlier, Chinese-made JSF clones. Data Fusion: The F-35s have difficulty managing and fusing their own data, let alone that of their wingmen or surveillance assets further away. Test pilots have reported their F-35s are creating false multiple tracks when all of their sensors are turned on. For example, when a radar and an infrared sensor detects the same enemy plane, the two sensors display it on the helmet-mounted sight as two enemy planes. The same thing happens when two or more sensors detect the same ground target. It is bad enough that each individual F-35 computer struggles to create a clear picture of what is going on in the battlespace for the pilot. But the false target problem is compounded when multiple F-35s try to share data through what is called the Multi-Aircraft Data Link. What has been described as one of the F-35’s greatest advantages has yet to live up to expectations—and, to the contrary, has been increasing the pilot’s workload Electronic Attack: F-35 automates a huge amount of sensor management. F-35 is chock-full of electronic sensors like Synthetic aperture radar, Digital Radio Frequency Memory, multi-spectral infra-red, Distributed Aperture System. It is, in theory, supposed to do things that are currently done by are Navy radar and electronic warfare planes, like the E-2 Hawkeye, EA-6B Prowler, E-8 JSTARS, E-3 Sentry AWACS, and the RC-135 family of aircraft. Collectively, these aircraft are part of a class of things called "enablers." Enablers don't fight directly, but they enable other jets to get on with their main job: blowing stuff up. Aircraft big enough (think commercial airliner size) to slog around the big radar an E-3 Sentry uses are going to be lousy at air-to-air combat; meanwhile, any aircraft agile enough to be a decent dogfighter is going to be too small to carry a massive radar. Certainly, the small physical size and available power of the F-35 places hard limits on how well it can perform the roles normally played by specialist enabler aircraft. There's just no way an airframe that size can carry as large an antenna or generate as much power as a larger aircraft or one that doesn't have to carry weapons and other gear. Even if the F-35 isn't filling the full range of roles of dedicated aircraft and can't perform those missions quite as well as specialist planes, it's still a significant step to get that recon, jamming, and combat gear all loaded on the same jet. To use jamming, also known as “electronic attack,” or EA, you have to be certain that the radar has detected you. Otherwise, jamming is going to reveal your presence and identify you as a stealth aircraft, since the adversary can see a signal but not a reflection. It also has an expandable radar decoy—BAE Systems’ ALE-70. Both are last-ditch measures to disrupt a missile engagement, not to prevent tracking. F-35 can emit frequencies which can confuse and disable Russian anti-aircraft systems such as the advanced S-400, which uses radar to lock onto enemy aircraft. More recently, it has emerged that the U.S. Navy is worried because new Chinese warships carry the Type 517M VHF search radar. VHF radar can't do fire-control, but they can see you. With low-frequency radars, they can tell which way to look, and they can scramble their super-cruising aircraft out to you. Stealth is not dead but excessive reliance on a single-point design is not a good idea too. An F-35 strike force under AWACS cover would be able to detect and engage non-stealthy Russian kinematic performance fighters like MiG-35, Su-30, Su-35 - well before the Russian fighters detects its presence and strike the first shot. With its networking stealthy ISR abilities, groups of F-35s or armed drones can coordinate their tactics and share data—which is an advantage. F-35 has the capability to send a focus beam down a computer virus to any kind of receiver (enemy's radio and radar) and effectively blind it or shut it down. It does not have to be connected to the Internet. Additionally, F-35 has very high acceleration and "Angle-of-Attack". It has "instantaneous turn rate" ability at different speeds optimized for performance. An F-35 squadron can carry inherent within it an electronic attack force, a missile defense tracking capability, a mapping capability for the ground forces, ISR and C2 capabilities for the deployed force and do so in a compact deployment package. In addition, an F-35 fleet can empower Air Defense Artillery (ADA), whether Aegis afloat or Patriots and THAAD Batteries, the concept of establishing air dominance is moving in a synergistic direction. An F-35 EW capability along with it’s AA and AG capability will introduce innovate tactics in the SEAD mission. Future versions could have electronic surveillance equipment, sending data back home, or even the means to inject viruses into computer networks. Also look forward to things like the Israeli IAI Harop, a hybrid missile/UAV that can circle overhead for long periods of time, waiting for a whiff of electronic scent and guiding itself in. https://www.aviationtoday.com/2018/04/18/f-35cs-cant-receive-spare-engines-carriers-without-v-22s/ Trends from the database of air combat since 1965 show the rise of long range missiles which can now often outperform most traditional fighter aircraft, although stealth and electronic warfare help even the score. Attributes such as speed, thrust-to-weight ratios, and turn radius are even less important to success today and in the future. The advantage is on enhanced sensor performance, signature control, networks to achieve superior SA [situational awareness]. Some elements of the new battle force could be unmanned as well to take better advantage of the big aircraft’s endurance. Combatants will rely on Infrared Search and Track Systems (IRST) because Digital Radio Frequency Memory (DRFM) jammers will disrupt search radars. So enemies will be looking for heat with those IRST sensors and fast planes will be easier to spot because higher speeds mean higher heats from engines and along leading edges and other aircraft surfaces. J-31 Shenyang (export: FC-31 or F-60) Falcon Hawk is the Project 310 or "Gyrfalcon" is due to enter operational service in 2025. It is a carrier-based, low-cost stealth, technology demonstrator, developed for exports to friendly nations for around $70 million per piece. There is also an unmanned version. It is unknown if the J-31 is meant to complement the J-20 stealth fighter. The design is similar to the F-35, but without the F-35B’s STOVL requirements (which severely crippled the F-35's aerodynamics). With because its has twin engines, the tail design is obvious different. It has a long bay to carry 6 ton weapons payload on 6 external hard-points and 4 precision-guided munitions internally. Its maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) of 28 tonnes. The length had been increased from 16.8 metres to 17.5 metres. It can also carry a lot of fuel. It is currently powered by two smoky Russian-made RD-93 turbofan engines. The RD-93MA has a service-life of 4,000 hours, and a total thrust rating at 94 kN. The FC-31 first flew in 2012 and debuted at Zhuhai in 2014. J-31 will replace the outdated J-7 & Q-5 fighters. Some have suggested that China reverse-engineered the F-35 from old blueprints, that Lockheed Martin had reported them stolen in 2009, from the computers of 6 American aerospace subcontractors. In 2012 British aircraft manufacturer, BAE confirmed that Chinese hackers gained access to classified BAE aircraft design files in 2009. This included data on the American F-35 fighter, which BAE is helping to develop and build. BAE was working on the F-35 fuselage, portions of the wings and tail, the fuel system, crew escape system, life support and integration of British components for the British F-35s. The first prototype did not fly with advanced avionics like an infrared search and track (IRST) sensor and stealth features like swept vertical stabilizers, suggesting its role to be a proof of concept. Unlike the first J031, "31001", which flew with smoky RD-93/WS-13 engines, the second prototype is flying with cleaner burning, likely more fuel-efficient engines. The FC-31's flight routine in Zhuhai, shows that the aircraft "bleeds" too much energy -- so when it enters into a turn, it begins to lose altitude. Even during straight and level flight the pilot has to engage the engine's afterburners in order to keep the aircraft from sinking to a lower altitude. These initial defects in the aircraft's aerodynamic design are some examples that a Russian design team would not have made. Russia has rejected the idea of providing China with advanced radar system because of India's involvement in its development. Designing aircraft for maximum resistance to detection to produce stealth capability was pioneered by the U.S. in the 1970s from a Russian concept that the Russians could not turn into a workable aircraft. The concept of stealth aircraft dates back to the 1960s with the work of Russian mathematician Petr Ufimtsev. RAM would see service in the war aboard German submarines, on which a material called “Sumpf”—rubber infused with carbon granules (some sources say a magnetic filler). It was only a matter of time before another country besides the United States utilized the technology. Such an aeroplane had a reasonable chance of penetrating enemy defenses to hit targets with a high degree of surprise. This is important, as the damage done goes down with the amount of warning the target has. 5 minutes of warning can reduce air base damage 40% to 80% depending on how many concrete aircraft shelters the base has. By 1945, MIT’s Radiation Laboratory experts had developed a rubber material infused with disc-like aluminium flakes called MX-410, which exhibited anti-radar properties. The U-2’s successor, the CIA’s A-12 and U.S. Air Force SR-71, were painted with carbonyl ferrite (which lowered RCS by an order of magnitude) and laced with asbestos to withstand the high surface temperatures at Mach 3. The Blackbird ended up with an RCS equal to that of a Piper Cub, which is about 4 m2. However, none of these configurations prevented Russia from tracking the overflights, which is why the only real protection they had were high-speed and high-altitude. Ultimately, it was the crack team of aerospace engineers at Lockheed's Skunk Works that first capitalized and improved upon Ufimtsev's stealth concepts (how to reduce amount of reflected power, from the body of the aircraft, back in the direction of the radar antenna) and designed the F-117 Nighthawk. The first true stealth aircraft, the F-117 aluminium skin was originally made of a ferrite-loaded polymer sheets. Several improvements were made to develop new RAM skins. RAM putty was used to cover fasteners, seal gaps and smooth uneven surfaces. Cockpit windows were coated with gold to minimize the impedance transition from the skin and block radar from penetrating the cockpit. Doors and access panels were sealed before every flight with metallic tape and covered in RAM. The primary application of VHF-band absorption paint coating method switched to a computer-controlled robotic system to reduce time required to restore stealth after routine maintenance. Stealth (the F-117) worked for the U.S. in the 1990 and 2003 campaigns in Iraq, but in case the Russians can detect and hit stealth aircraft you must be prepared to send in larger groups of aircraft, led by lavishly equipped electronics warfare planes, to ensure successful SEAD and destruction of the target. Since this process tends to destroy a lot of enemy ground defenses along the way, that makes it easier for subsequent raids. The “package” of fighters and support aircraft using SEAD to reach a target is led by aircraft Wild Weasels. These have radar detection and jamming equipment which can either hide the group from enemy radar or prevent the enemy from making accurate use of their ground-to-air missiles. The next stealth aircraft, Northrop Grumman’s B-2. The B-2’s coating included a silver paint. Silver is the most conductive metal, so its application might minimize the effect of gaps while also absorbing currents and blocking radar penetration. Also, around 3,000 ft. of tape was originally required for each aircraft. Changes to the B-2’s RAM scheme since the 1990s have focused on reducing the maintenance burden. Flexible “blade seals” became the conductive bridge for some panels, and certain gaps were surrounded with narrow bands of magnetic RAM. The F-22 continued use of many RCS reduction techniques from the B-2. The low-observable materials developed for the B-2 and F-22, yet their maintenance burdens proved heavy. Their durability disappointed, ballooned support costs and time while restricting aircraft availability. “The target engagement radar or control radar has a very narrow scope, so enemy defenses are trying to search the sky. We are making enemies search the sky looking through a soda straw. When the only aperture of the world is through a soda straw, we can force them into a very narrow scope, so they will never see aircraft going in to deliver ordnance” You should always consider the arms race is a race where once the other sides builds something better to what you have you have to immediately to start development of a new aircraft type that will be sooner or later surpassed by the competition and will make you again to design a even newer and more powerful aircraft and so on, there is no end to such race. Well-meaning but impractical multi-national resolutions cannot curb military-industrial racketeering and the perpetual waging of wars. An effectively way would be to compulsorily give government orders at fixed price to all private banks and private manufacturers or factories. This will eliminate the profit out of war. A plebiscite for war should exclude wealthy politicians who are not willing to send their immediate family members to that war. The F-35 in particular has shocked the defense industry into a new reality. Beyond its merits and failings, the F-35 aims to replace the majority of tactical fighters in the U.S. inventory with one type, sold by one contractor. Not only does this mean that there will be no future fighter aircraft competitions potentially for decades, but it also means all those sustainment and upgrade dollars will be migrating away from a diversified fleet supported by many manufacturers and right into the pockets of a single major contractor. Like the B-2, the F-35 has became too big to fail near past of no return, sending the program into what is now deemed a Pentagon death spiral; a feedback loop where a weapon is too expensive to buy because you don't buy enough of them and you don't buy enough of it because it is too expensive to buy. (In the end, the $45B Advanced Technology Bomber project that took well over a decade to field ended up producing just a measly 21 air-frames. The cost of each of those airframes, with the price of development amortized across the small fleet: About $2.2B each.) If a fighter can turn faster than its opponent, it will find it easier to get into a favourable position, -- generally, behind that opponent. An air-plane's ability to turn can be roughly gauged by its wing loading. This is the mass of the aircraft divided by the area of the wings. The bigger the wings, the easier it is for them to push the aircraft in a direction other than that in which it is currently travelling. Note that some aircraft use thrust vectoring, where the jet exhaust from the engines doesn't always go straight backwards but can be tilted up or down (and sometimes also left to right) to increase maneuverability. Engine power also confers advantages in air combat. Most simply, high overall speed can allow a pilot to choose to disengage an opponent by simply outrunning it. This ability to disengage may also apply to incoming missiles, allowing escape from what would be a fatal shot to a slower air-plane. A high-powered fighter is also more likely to maintain a crucial overall energy advantage over its opponent. All air combat manoeuvres (ACM) require a certain amount of physical energy, most simply thought of as airspeed plus altitude. When fighters perform the high-g manoeuvres common in air-to-air combat, they must sacrifice one or both of these qualities, and there are fundamental limits to how much of each can be sacrificed. Altitude can obviously not go below the ground level, and airspeed can not fall below the stall speed of the fighter. If a pilot attempts a maneuver at too low an initial total energy level, he/she will likely stall the air-plane and become an easy target for a missile or gun kill. The fighter's engines add energy at a certain rate; the higher this rate, the greater can be considered the fighter's ability to manoeuvre. Higher engine power allows the air-plane to maintain a high energy level and therefore engage in more aggressive ACM. Conventional thinking in the planning of air campaigns, empirically observable from the Blitzkrieg campaigns of the 1940s through to the recent United States led air campaigns since 1991, places a heavy emphasis on the defeat of opposing airfields by aerial attack, to deny an opponent the opportunity to contest airspace. To achieve this effect, an attacker needs the capability to repeatedly penetrate defended airspace to shut down airfields, keep them shut down, and inflict attrition upon opposing aircraft on the ground. Basically the Russians built the MiG-23 to fight F-105s, F-104s, F-4s, Mirage IIIs and as a technological response to the USAF`s needs for a variable geometry fighter in the form of a cheap soviet F-111sky. The Americans responded with the F-15 and F-14 and much later with the F-16 and F-18, this prompted the development of the Su-27 and MiG-29 and the west then designed the Eurofighter, Rafale Gripen and F-22 to counter the MiG-29 and Su-27 threat. The F-22A may get ‘first look’ with the APG-77, the Advanced Infra Red Search and Track (AIRST) sensor having been deleted to save money, but the PAK-FA may get ‘first look’ using its advanced infra-red sensor. A radar cross-section of only -20 dBSM would deny early Beyond Visual Range (BVR) missile shots using the AIM-120C/D AMRAAM to all current and planned US fighters. Doing any better, like -30 dBSM or -40 dBSM, simply increases the level of difficulty in prosecuting long range missile attacks. The consequence of this is that missile combat will be compressed into shorter distances and shorter timelines. A larger portion of engagements will be at visual range, and most BVR engagements will end up taking place inside 30 nautical miles. Then, the engagement becomes a supersonic equivalent of the Battle of Britain or air combat over North Korea. The outcome will be difficult to predict and will depend on missile capabilities zone and the pilots. Noshir Gowadia and others, whom the US convicted in 2010, provided China with the lock-on range for infrared-guided missiles against the B-2 and information that allowed China to develop a low-signature cruise missile exhaust system. Fighter Experimental Projects - India, Turkey etcNext-generation aircraft would be expected to employ long-range weapons and hypersonic weapons, both of which are expected to be large. They would be expected to have adequate spare power for many critical high-power consuming applications, including Directed Energy (DE) weapons. This would require much larger aircraft, which in turn would essentially need two engines. Two engines would require more fuel. So, a 24 T aircraft that can carry 6,000kg of internal fuel. India will first need to create the private eco-system needed. Without India producing MCA first, it will not be possible to build AMCA. IAF requirement for AMCA is for twin engines that can supercruise without afterburners. American F-414 is capable of max 105kn thrust. A new engine for AMCA, the jv with Rolls-royce, will take atleast a decade to develop. Even Gripen has imported subsystems so its okay to import some things which are not critical and would be expensive to make in small numbers. The avionics & sensors are regardless going to be expensive. F-35 is 60% costly to maintain than F-16. Meanwhile F-22 has 50% availability & needs AWACS for its missions. Stealth is another recurring cost. “If you can afford to buy something but you have to keep it in the parking lot because you can't afford to own and operate it, then it doesn't do you much good”. For IAF to order AMCA needs to have better availability and less expensive. India cannot afford 5th-gen fighters while simultaneously investing in eco-system needed to build in numbers India's second-strike capable nuclear submarines. US have realised that regular development takes too long and technology gets outdated quickly. They are creating advanced manufacturing systems that will be capable of rapidly building expendable 6th generation drone airframes with plug-in upgradable sensors. Swedish company Saab provided the design for Turkish Fighter Experimental Project (TFX)- FX-, at a cost of $20 million. Saab would help ADA develop its planned fifth-generation (Gen-5) fighter, the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA). In this, Saab’s capability is untested, since Europe has no Gen-5 fighter programme. Instead, Saab is part of a European consortium working on an unmanned stealth aircraft, called the nEUROn. Rafale-class Medium Combat Aircraft (MCA) main purpose was to replace the ageing Jaguar & MiG-27 fleet from the Indian Air force. Its original design weight was supposed to be less than 20 ton. AMCA design team led by Dr. A.K Ghosh had completed Low-speed Wind tunnel test, High-speed Wind tunnel test and Radar Cross-Section (RCS) test from 2008-2014. A first look at the aircraft was only available in 2009 when a wind tunnel model was displayed in Aero India 2009 for the first time. It featured two surface aircraft layout with serpentine air intakes with reduced radar cross-section (RCS) for reduce radar exposure to the fan blade and internal weapons bay. The weapons bay is placed on the underside of the fuselage between the nose and main landing gear. This was completely new design based on low observability design elements and with a diamond shaped trapezoidal airframe. The aircraft featured a tricycle landing gear configuration with a nose landing gear leg and two main landing gear legs. It will use stealthy radar-absorbent materials in its construction, including baked in fiber mat. MCA strike aircraft (optimised for precision land attack missions) will evolve into a multi-role AMCA Mk-1 (36 fighters); and into AMCA Mk-2 (90 fighters) when IAF comes up with much more stringent requirements and further optimization for enhanced stealth and special coatings for its polycarbonate canopy. However, the IAF has never operated stealth aircraft before, nor has it had the opportunity to work with purpose-built stealth technologies. So they have agreed that AMCA project be divided into two steps, mk1 & mk2. The AMCA Mk-1 for IAF will be a stop-gap measure before IAF can get its 5.5 gen amca-2 fighters. AMCA will be integrated from the cockpit to accompanying DRDO UAVs and UCAVs through encrypted data-link connections. The electronics alone will be expensive. India cannot afford its 5th-gen AMCA fighter with 30% readiness rate like the $140 million F-22 that has 50% availability rate. "You only have a finite amount of money, and you can spend your money buying new aircraft (but then) you do not have any money to fly them" IAF wants a stealthy optionally-manned fighter that can super-cruise without afterburners for balakot-type strikes inside defended enemy airspace. Around 480 aircraft are estimated to be produced. IAF Air Staff Requirements (ASR):
The AMCA will feature a full-panel-width glass cockpit touchscreen, panoramic cockpit display" (PCD), with dimensions of 60 by 24 centimeters designed by DARE and manufactured by Samtel Group or 44 by 18 centimetres by Elbit Systems with both systems supporting cockpit speech-recognition system (DVI) provided by Adacel which has been adopted on the F-35. A Helmet-mounted display system is under development with Head up display. Control system includes HOTAS Sidestick. In the Paris Air Show 2013, ADA revealed that the AMCA will have Network-centric warfare, vehicle management (including weapons), data fusion, Cooperative Engagement Capability, decision aids, integrated modular avionics, internal carriage of weapons, signature control with sharpening for low observability, AESA radar, IR search-and-track, supersonic persistence, high-speed weapon release and thrust vectoring. The aircraft will use Integrated modular avionics for real time computing. Dr. Saraswat also confirmed the use of Photonic crystal fibres. At Aero India 2015, DRDO Director Dr.Tamilmani confirmed 9 prototypes and will go ahead with construction of the first prototype when funds are allocated in the later part of 2015. He also confirmed that the work on three major technological issues which includes thrust vectoring and with super-cruise capable engines without the use of afterburners, AESA radar which will use Gallium nitride (GaN), IRST and advance situational oriented electronic warfare systems and all-aspect radar warning receiver (RWR), Self-Protection Jammer (SPJ), CMOS, Laser warning receiver (LWR), missile warning suite. While the aircraft is slated to equipped with the Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-301 cannon. The aircraft will Cary missile varying from Beyond-visual-range missile Air-Air missile like DRDO Astra, Derby and close combat Missile like Vympel R-73, Vympel R-27, Python 5 and Helina missile which is under development, depending on the mission, AMCA is also designed to Launch Air-Air and Air-Surface Variant which includes BrahMos A, Brahmos M, Brahmos NG and Nirbhay cruise missile. The aircraft may be used to launch Brahmos 2 mid-range hypersonic missile and HSTDV long-range hypersonic missile, which are under development. For bombing mission, it will carry possible configuration of Sudarshan laser-guided bomb, KAB-500L laser-guided bomb, and OFAB-100-120 Gravity bomb. AMCA will boost capabilities such as Self-protection and self-repair with the help of self-diagnosing and self-healing by distributing the work load to other system from affected to non-affected system. Protection would be provided with the use of Nanotechnology to produce advance composite materials to withstand higher resistance to damage and therefore reducing the damage surface area. Chairman of DRDO D.r. V.K Saraswat confirmed that aircraft will use Self Repairing Flight Control Capability", will be used in the aircraft to automatically detect failures or damage in its flight control surfaces, and using the remaining control surfaces, calibrate accordingly to retain controlled flight. ADA has already developed a special coating for the glass cockpit section to reduce its radar reflection. Engine On 7 February 2014 Dr Tamilmani told reporters on the sidelines of the three-day international meet on Product Life Cycle Modelling, Simulation and Synthesis (PLMSS) at VIT university on Monday,’ he said the aircraft would be equipped with twin engines with super-cruise power and for the first time it would be using the stealth technology. AMCA operational requirements by IAF also specify approx. 110-125 ton of thrust provided by two engines, high-speed interception, super-cruise capabilities, Thrust vectoring, advanced stealth technology, and multi-role capabilities. It can only currently be equipped with the 105-kN thrust version of the GE's F414 (itself an uprated version of F404) called F414 Enhanced Engine (unless they somehow manage to squeeze 120-kN thrust as speculated); as there is no 110-kN class engine available in the world market. It doesn't make economic sense to build a few of a new type of engine for IAF. K 9 or K 10 program is a Joint Venture (JV) partnership with a foreign engine manufacturer (UK's Rolls-Royce). Both these engines are being designed by ADA and developed by GTRE. In 2015, 700 ADA employees were working on the project with 2,000 employees of DRDO and 1,000 employees of HAL supported by over 500 employees of subcontractors of both Indian and foreign firms. Engine designers say an output of 90 KN requires the combustion chamber to be built of high-melting-point alloys (materials that withstand temperatures of 1,800°K). Achieving engine output of 110 KN would generate 2,000°K in the combustion chamber. It also needed further treatment to reduce its IR signature through nozzle design and better bay cooling along with reduction on exhaust temperature from the engine nozzles. It will also feature edge matching, body conforming antennae and a low infrared signature through nozzle design, engine bay cooling and work on reduced exhaust temperature. The Indian Navy wanted ADA to develop a carrier deck version of the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), an indigenous, twin-engine, fifth-generation, stealth fighter that is unlikely to enter service before 2030. In 2019, Indian Navy decided against a navalised variant of the AMCA because it had reasons to believe that the AMCA project was over-ambitious. USAF Acquisition Executive Andrew Hunter said, “We need an aircraft that can perform operations in denied airspace and make sure we have the ability to establish freedom of maneuver. We’ve had successful uncrewed platforms going back decades. It’s challenging to have a platform able to operate in denied air space. We need a platform that is affordable, so we can get some mass and not something too expensive that we can’t afford to lose. We are doing design trades. It needs to be able to assist the mission of the NGAD system, and it will involve weapons carrying capacity to work with a piloted aircraft. It's a classic challenge that we're facing right now, penetrating versus standoff, and that continues to be a challenge. I think for the future, I would argue that we will probably see more standoff kinds of capabilities. But once again, it's got to be affordable, affordable mass on target, essentially. You've got to have the right kill chain and the right command and control to be able to enable that”.
US AirForce lead Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program family of systems for penetrating counter-air capability, will be able to optionally-manned other 5 to 6 (or 8) unmanned aircrafts like expendable 6th Gen loyal-wingman drones with plug-in sensors that "will be adding a challenger to the F-35 and F-15EX programs, potentially putting those programs at risk". Operationally, the CCAs will likely be used for both “stand-off” and penetrating “stand-in” attacks. However, interoperability between service branches may be difficult to achieve. It will be able to carry bigger long-ranged missiles. In the future, these UAVs will have better AI to become autonomous. The manned NGAD aircraft will be optimized for range, payload, and low-observability (stealth), not extreme 'fighter' maneuverability. USAF is exploring new concepts and approach to employ large groups of relatively low-cost, reusable, and ultimately expendable — long-ranged 6th Gen UAVs with just 2 sensors, dropped from next-gen cargo aircrafts and drone light carriers (expeditionary), to perform a variety of tasks in support of joint campaigns. USAF wants a manned single-engine medium-light fighter that carry enough fuel to fly from Guam to China or Italy (one end of Europe to the other) to Russian-NATO border, without refuelling. It will be a competition of rapid altered versions and low-volume airframes manufactured by low-cost composite tooling and robotic production lines. If the design change is huge, then the old platform will be discarded to avoid logistical complexities. US have realised that regular development takes far too long, and it gets outdated quickly. These contracts would be issued every 5 years or less. The crewed NGAD aircraft will likely have just as much in common with B-21 Raider. It will have wide-band jamming, advance self-protection and get near-real-time software updates. Many of its key technologies and features have never been shown in planning or development. This independent closed system will have a high degree of redundancy and even a high failure rate of individuals will not result in an overall failure. The implications of applying pure saturation grids would force the enemy to exhaust its inventory of interceptors & missiles and increase the resiliency of forward-based forces. Its effectiveness during the opening days of a conflict could be profound. "We've already built and flown a full-scale flight demonstrator in the real world, and we broke records in doing it." Dr. Will Roper. Roper would like the Air Force to develop many small batches of jet fighters using the best technology currently available. USAF would also air-drop guidance package for troops on the ground. Officials believe they are closer to finding an optimal mix of long-range precision-strike fire and littoral contested environment with survivable expeditionary capabilities. China is "iterating so rapidly, and I think that forces us to change. If we can change, we can win." In the end, US and its partners in the Pacific Ocean will be successful in overcoming certain fiscal and technological challenges. However, it's critical for the US to be able to pre-position food, fuel, weapons and equipment needed to run an airfield from which it plans to operate. A sobering reality is that the US will suffer significant losses. "The evidence-based possibility that if we were able to change, we probably wouldn't have to fight." At any given time, “there’s as much as 95% excess volume of airspace that isn’t used”. That’s essentially an opportunity cost. I really wish I could fire that long-range missile that’s going to go right though someone else’s lane. If I could validate in real time… that missile corridor is going to be free of any aircraft it might collide with, then that’s an opportunity I’ve created for myself. China has carefully designed its confrontational strategy (sow confusion and chaos by employing deception) to counter America’s traditional way of war. Information superiority aims at reducing one’s own observation to action loop (OODA) while elongating the enemy’s loop. The US has a highly capable war-fighting ability, largely descended from a strategy of technical superiority in platforms. The technological advantage the US has maintained over adversaries is slowly decreasing because high-tech systems and components, are now commercially available. Given the shrinking technological advantage, the historically long timeline and high-cost associated with developing new, large, complex weapon capabilities and platforms are no longer adequate. The current tools available to US field commanders are insufficient to enable them to develop and plan creative operations against changing enemy tactics. Electronic equipments and data storages are getting outdated every 6 months, which is a challenging and expensive process. In the future, you can require every new but simpler things you build to be compatible (on-the-fly) with commercially easily-available (or low-cost, rapid-made) systems-of-systems-enhanced re-useable assets; then create an electronic network and a task force structure optimized to the specific mission. The idea is to replace laborious manual coding with machine-learning C2 algorithms (battle decision aids), so you can connect whatever you need too quickly. That lets you move away, from a fixed and limited list of options, so that you can connect to many pieces that fit together, to form a war-fighting force; where you type in what you want and see the data immediately. However, with this comes inefficiency because of possible duplication of effort. You automate away the button pushing, so the human operator can function on a more cognitive level. Unmanned expendable systems (with adaptive radar/communications algorithms) are sent together to a battlefield grid (could be in any domain), and they pass the coordinates back, which are then relayed to a non-line-of-sight strike system in the rear, which in turn launches its munitions and takes out the emerging enemy target sets. The cost per defensive shot must be significantly lower than the cost per offensive shot. The goal is for smaller elements to fight as a network (coordinated), to create real kill-chains (complete OODA loops) of non-linear overwhelming effects, to deter and defeat adversaries. These aspects can create thousands upon thousands of simultaneous decision dilemmas for an adversary to prepare for. It doesn’t matter what the enemy does, such attacks would be very difficult to counter (i.e. asymmetry to exploit asymmetries). And if you can blind, deceive, or burn out the enemy’s sensors, it doesn’t matter how many missiles he launches or how smart they are. They will miss. Machines will have to blunt an advancing attack and move to counter it, essentially in micro-seconds. In the not-so-distant future, AI-enabled tools will always be on, following every personnel to provide better recommendations. If you have large numbers of expendable platforms (even with higher failure rate or non-secure component systems), you can fight in the open. There is no single point of failure. However, we must lower-cost counters to enemy salvos. Germany’s blitzkrieg tactics in World War II as an example, where an overwhelming force of armour, motorized infantry, artillery, and air power combined to force a local breakthrough that could then be exploited to continue the advance. The US military must transform itself to a new force that can withstand destruction/disruption/failure of US systems operations and prevail in Air-Land Battles with a peer adversary. Next Gen ISR, Bombers & Weapon Systems New digital adaptive cognitive electronic warfare (EW) system technologies use machine-learning algorithms to protect aircrafts against communications jammers, by measuring a variety of data — the power level, frequency and bandwidth of radio signals; and adopt different never-before-seen frequencies, signal characteristics and waveform to avoid being jammed. Essentially, the military’s approach has been to study enemy systems for vulnerabilities, figure out ways of disrupting them and then building a “play-book” filled with different EW tactics. Copying old tech takes the same amount of time as developing new tech. Things move faster in wartime, but the patterns are similar to what happens in peacetime. What it comes down to is that you should not design or use high-tech weapons, without realizing that the enemy, is going to recover some of them when use it during combat operations anywhere. China leads in chemicals, machinery, basic & fabricated metals, electrical equipment, and electronics. Miniature Self-Defense Munition (MSDM) to be dispensed from a fighter jet, hone in on an incoming missile, kinetically engaging and destroying it. It is a hit-to-kill weapon, and so lacks a warhead. It would replace chaff, flares and directional infrared lasers. One project is a miniature, radar-guided missile called CUDA and the other programme is “KICM”. In 2013 Rafael introduced SPICE-250 which is similar to smaller AGM-142 "POPEYE" JDAM version is called the SDB (small diameter bomb) "Stormbreaker" but with a more capable guidance system. Raytheon is developing "Peregrine" interceptor missile (with multi-mode seeker) that is roughly half the size and weight of the Mach 4 AIM-120 missile. Meteor BVRAAM is a new concept in air-to-air weaponry. Its unique air-breathing motor will make it very difficult to evade, and state-of-the-art electronics will make it the most effective air-to-air weapon we have seen. The Meteor (which has two-way data-link) probably outranges every Western weapon, and thanks to its ramjet propulsion it has a great deal of energy, even at the outer extremes of its flight profile, allowing it to chase manoeuvring targets at extreme ranges. It is this ability to retain energy and accelerate in the ‘end game’ that gives Meteor its unique advantage. Meteor has 3 to 6 times the kinematic performance of current air-to-air missiles of its type. Its maximum speed is reportedly Mach 4 and operational range is unknown. The first flight of Meteor was in 2005, from a French Navy Rafale F2. Meteor is scheduled to enter service with the RAF on Typhoon in 2017. Meteor will cost about 2.5 million euros. Characterized by a solid fuel variable flow-ducted rocket (ramjet) and a navigation and guidance system, including an inertial mid-course with a two-way data link, active RF seeker derived from Aster and MICA models providing all together, according to MBDA, the largest No-Escape Zone and all-weather capabilities compared to other BVRAAMs. In each phase, the secure data link allows the missile and launch aircraft, or indeed, other aircraft, to control the approach and terminal guidance for maximum effectiveness. Although it can be a fire and forget missile, Meteor can also be as the sales blurb goes, ‘fire and think’. Meteor operates in 3 phases; first, it accelerates to cruising speed and altitude, then in its mid-course phase, the missile optimises its speed and direction in readiness for the final intercept phase. In the intercept phase, by virtue of its propulsion system, Meteor can accelerate to minimise the chances of the target escaping. Some caution could be expressed about the Meteor, as it is far from being a combat proven weapon. In the early 90s there was an European requirement to replace the Skyflash missile but given the emerging threat, there was a defining requirement for longer-range, ECM resistance and extreme agile missile. (Russian fighters with IRST can see weapon launches at long-range and defeat them either with ECM or simple physics. The ramjet-powered R-77 also complicated matters.) BAE offering, now including Matra, Daimler-Benz LFK, Saab, Alenia and GEC Marconi, became Meteor in 1996. In 1999, France joined the Meteor project with 20% funding. After pulling out in 1998, Sweden re-joined in 1999. In 2000, the UK had selected Meteor. (Aerospatiale joined MBD and MBDA was formed.) Its ASEA seeker may benefit from Japanese technology they have incorporated on the AAM-4B. The fact that Meteor fits inside an F-35 bay and the AAM-4B does not may also have a bearing on the Japanese enthusiasm for Meteor. There is also an *unnamed new two-stage Long-Range air-to-air missile (LREW) concept for future air-dominance to replace AIM-120D AMRAAM BVR missiles are never fired at maximum range due to the probability of kill against fighter aircraft. Their effective range against aircraft in attack is 1/5 of that. Despite the significant investment in BVR capability throughout the Cold War, radar-guided missiles only accounted for 14% of the total kills, and 95% of these kills were within visual range. Over four times as many (58%) were made by heat-seeking missiles. Hypersonic cruise missile & Hypersonic glide missile/projectile The hypersonic PL-13 adopts a double-inlet ramjet engine, which is very similar to 160 km R-77M-PD missiles. The ramjet technology used by China's PL-13 missiles may also come from South Africa. It is the PLARF’s amphibious assault forces that are tasked to be the first to attack and occupy “big island” targets, with the PLA Marines being tasked to invade and occupy the smaller shoals and reefs, deployed from vessels like Type 071 landing platform docks (LPD) and Zubr high-speed hover-crafts (and Z-8 helicopters for Air-Assault and Special Ops mobile raids against coastal defences). This would be followed by landing Tri-Combined-Arms Amphibious Brigades that are tasked to defend their gains. From here, China plans to use its hypersonic glide missiles against U.S. vessels. In addition, on Hainan Island, the PLA Rocket Forces has DF-26 intermediate-range ballistic missiles with EMP warheads, to deny American carrier battle group their network-centric war-waging capabilities.
USAF’s Raytheon AGM-183A air-launched rapid-response hypersonic Attack cruise missile (Mach 3 to Mach 5) based on the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Tactical Boost Glide (TBG) project. Each missile costs $17 million. The U.S. Navy abandoned the custom gun system for Zumwalt and is replacing those two guns with four 2.2 meter missile tubes designed to carry Common Hypersonic Glide Strike missiles. This is a surface-launched versions of Hypersonic Conventional Strike Weapon (HCSW), development is worth up to $928 million, is jointly pursued by the US Army and US Navy. Scramjet engines are unlikely to be powerful enough to help much against the exponentially increasing drag encountered during the dive phase. Scramjets have few moving parts but must cope with very extreme conditions. The lack of adequate materials (that can handle the high heat and pressure), and adequate design tools, frustrated attempts to build workable, and reliable, scramjets. Solid-fuel ramjet motors take time to reach maximum speed in the initial phases, and are thus less agile. Solid-fuel ramjet propulsion based BVRAAM will have a range in excess of 200km and will be designed to takeout high-value slow targets like inflight refueling tankers & “AWACS killer” which usually operate in depth of their own airspace. Project Izdeliye 172 long-range AAM, airframe resemblance the 9K37-M1 (SA-11) its export version is the heavy R-172S-1 missile (also known as KS-172). Another Russian modified version is called K-100-1 missile. Solid-fuel ramjet motors are heavier, nearly 250kgs in weight, hence, it will be limited to a few aircraft types in the IAF fleet. The original work in this area was by the Germans during World War II. Russia and the United States have also developed this technology during the Cold War but neither has deployed it in the form the Chinese appear to favor. In the 1990s the United States proposed reviving work on hypersonic glide vehicle for its Prompt Global Strike. Meanwhile Russia has resumed hypersonic glide vehicle development in 2013. The US Glide Phase Interceptor to protect against hypersonic threats using a multi- layered solution to defend against hypersonic glide vehicles. Blended wing-body (BWB) aircraft
German’s coated the snorkels and periscopes of their submarines with RAM, such as Sumpf and Schornsteinfeger Blended wing body has lift-to-drag ratio 50% greater than conventional airplane, reducing the power needed for take-off. Since a wing is necessary of any aircraft, removing everything else, like the tail and fuselages, results in a design with the lowest possible drag. This enables the entire craft to contribute to lift generation with the result of potentially increased fuel economy and range. However, the BWB shape poses significant challenges that could not be overcome by early attempts to make such an aircraft, including by Northrop in the 1940s. One is low-speed control, which in the absence of a tailfin becomes a complicated issue that can only be addressed by a sophisticated, computer flight-control system. The Northrop Grumman B-2 stealth bomber is an example of a successful BWB design, but as the crash on take-off in 2008 of one example of that $2 billion type apparently demonstrated, any failure of the flight-control system is catastrophic. Cabin pressurisation will pose a problem in the flying wing's much larger cabin. It will require the development of a new pressurisation system. NASA work in the 1990s found that a stitching technique it calls Perseus - protruded rod stitched efficient unitised structure. Collier's project will flight-test a scale-model variant of a BWB concept called X-48C. NASA previously flew the scale model X-48B that was powered by small turbojets at its Dryden Flight Research Center in California. From 2003 to 2005 Noshir Gowadia made six trips to China, conspiring to conceal some of his visits by getting border agents to leave immigration stamps off his passport. The city of his interest was Chengdu, the same city home to the Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group and also the company that developed the Chengdu J-20 stealth fighter. He’s also accused of attempting to sell classified stealth technology to the Swiss government and to businesses in Israel and Germany. 4.7% of B2 bombers have crashed & another 4.7% had engine fires. B-2 pilots set a record when they flew 44 hours. B-21 Raider Long-Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B), the ‘Raider’ name is in honour of the Doolittle Raids of World War II when 80 men, led by Lieutenant Colonel James ‘Jimmy’ Doolittle, and 16 B-25 Mitchell medium bombers which set off on a mission that changed the course of World War II. Northrop's original ATB design had a targeted operational altitude of 60,000 feet, so it is very likely that the B-21 will be a high-flying and extremely aerodynamically efficient weapons and sensor platform. The overall shape of the bomber is similar to the B-2 but the B-21 is smaller in size. The picture suggests that each of the main landing gear rests on two large wheels, instead of four on the B-2, perhaps owing to the B-21’s smaller size and weight. The concept also revealed the cockpit windscreen further back from the nose (lacking the B-2's “hawk’s-beak”). B-21's inlets in particular are notable. The air intakes are straight-edge triangular openings (unlike the B-2's scalloped air scoops) and the intake is clearly more blended into the surface. The B-21 inlets are likely designed to combine a low radar signature with high inlet recovery. You can tell a lot by the wing line, by the inlets. The bottom and the top and the back of the airplane can reveal a lot. A limit on camera mounted on tripods was at exactly 6 feet, lens size was set at 50mm without views of its side or at an angle. The aircraft’s “shadow” on the hangar floor, which confirms the kite-like shape of the aircraft as seen in the original artist’s concept. B-21 is designed to beat the enemy’s AD/A2 capability. The B-21 program is part of a larger ecosystem of new penetrating air capabilities being developed to take on peer-state opponents. Modularity is a strictly enforced Pentagon requirement for the new program. B-21 long-range strike bomber costs $3 billion. In fact, F-22 production was closed to fund this program. It is likely to be an evolution of existing technology — not a revolution — in order to keep the target unit price to about $550 to $564 million each. B-21 is expected to replace a fleet of 76 Boeing B-52H and possibly a portion of older B-1B fleets. USAF plans to buy at least 100 (really wants 220 of these bombers) of the planes for a maximum of $665 million. The inherent survivability of the PLA's impressive underground airbase infrastructure has not been a major consideration in the ongoing debate in the United States on the utility, and indeed intended design, of the replacement heavy bomber aircraft. This aircraft will need heavy “earthquake bombs” that can destroy “super-hardened” deep underground bases built below 500 meters and the ability to repeatedly penetrate what is becoming the most capable Integrated Air Defence System in existence. Nothing less can close such bases down, and China has more than 40 of them with unique and indeed exceptionally robust capability to withstand a large scale counter-air campaign. Lower-frequency surveillance radar allows enemy air defenses to know that an aircraft is in the vicinity, and higher-frequency engagement radar allows integrated air defenses to target a fast-moving aircraft. These frequencies include UHF, VHF and X-band, among others. High-altitude and high-speed strategic fighters became less relevant once missiles became capable enough. The concept with this new bomber is to engineer a next-generation stealth configuration able to evade both surveillance and engagement radar technologies. To defeat low frequency radars operating in the L, UHF and potentially the VHF bands is easier said than done (and could in fact be impossible). Electronic attack capability is necessary to counter low frequency radars operating in the VHF band, which are nearly impossible to defeat with airframe shape and low observable materials alone. B-21 is really a stealth multi-role platform of sorts, not "just" a bomber in the traditional sense, will be able to be more effective across a wide range of missions by operating at higher altitudes. It will do much more in terms of missions than its predecessor, and will prowl the skies more deeply into the stratosphere. The F-35 is stealthy, but it's not that stealthy. It won't be able to dip into enemy airspace unnoticed like the stealthy B-21 will, so the focus is how to make it more effective from further away. The radar is designed to share detailed targeting information via data-link with other aircraft -- one F-35 can hang back and turn on its radar, which gives its position away to the target but keeps it far from danger, while another can sneak in and fire a missile without giving itself away. It means the B-21 will be able to loiter above the tactical aircraft air combat environment below. They could also convey the battlefield information from stealthy assets below up to satellites above, where it can be pushed around the theater and beyond for real time exploitation. In essence, this will allow the B-21 to act in a similar role as a Battlefield Airborne Communications Node (BACN) for stealthy assets. This concept focuses on networks and information sharing, as well as morphing from a platform-centric fires and intelligence gathering strategy to a "distributed" one. Two concepts under consideration are:
B-21 designers followed the B-2 in using a laminar-flow airfoil shape that combined camber for aerodynamic performance with the sharp entry angle required for low radar cross-section. A preliminary comparison of the B-21 and B-2 bomber images suggests a very similar overall design. The four key differences are: shallower, tear-shaped inlets; a narrower fuselage crown with redesigned cockpit windows; a wider, deeper fuselage relative to wing span; and two wheels on each main landing gear versus the B-2's four. The most apparent difference is that the B-21 has a clean diamond-shaped centre body section, in contrast to the B-2’s more jagged rear centre wing outline. The angles that intersect the crew cabin and the fuselage to the wings have become much smoother. A single point at the end of the fuselage replaces the three that bracket the engines on the B-2. Engine exhaust is an important source of detectable heat. The indents in the B-2’s rear centre wing were created by the engine exhausts. B-21's air-intakes of the two engines have been extended forward and the edges angled, presumably to further reduce the aircraft’s radar signature. It appears that the B-21 engines have been integral to the wing and the exhaust is spread out to the edges of the trailing wing but it is unknown if the engine exhausts have been moved below the body, integrated better into the edge of the wing, or omitted from the drawing because it is still a secret. Fuel efficiency and longer range are important features, because they reduce dependency on the Air Force's in-flight refuelling tankers - most of which are approaching 50 years in service. Also, because bomber forces aren't typically based in theater, long-range bombers fly long distances to deliver their weapons and thus face much longer flying hours. More and more, those missiles are going to be smarter and capable of new things, not just blowing things up. Rather than risk people and valuable airplanes, why not just let the missile do the work? It's getting easier to pack missiles full of fuel and electronics, making them more like miniature drones than the old dumb-bombs. Some missiles, like Raytheon's new MALD-J, contain small radar jammers and can be fired almost 600 miles from the target. Future versions could have electronic surveillance equipment, sending data back home, or even the means to inject viruses into computer networks. Also look forward to things like the Israeli IAI Harop, a hybrid missile/UAV that can circle overhead for long periods of time, waiting for a whiff of electronic scent and guiding itself in. One promising development is the High-Speed Strike Weapon, a hypersonic ground attack missile, capable of launching from thousands of miles away and streaking towards the target too fast for anyone to hit. The B-2 Spirit’s stealth comes from a mix of its low-profile shape and a variety of radar-absorbent materials. The B-21 Raider has to have allowances for two feet or more of radar absorbent material coatings on every surface, or the designers are forced to make trades as to which frequency bands they optimize the aircraft to operate in. It both reflects radar away, and soaks radar into its skin. The F-117 attack jet, famous for its role in breaking Iraq’s air defences in 1990, took a different approach. Its faceted surface panels did a better job at scattering radar waves. But it needed a tail to keep it controllable — undoing some of the good of its ungainly angles. The B-21 will probably need a blend of both, as each approach has its strengths and weaknesses. And the aircraft’s ability to remain unseen must last 50 years. Unlike earlier generation aircraft, the B-21 will not undergo block upgrades. To meet the evolving threat environment, the B-21 has been designed from day one for rapid upgradeability. Northrop Grumman not only has a factory designed to build B-2 bombers, but that factory has an award-winning automated assembly line. Furthermore, the Air Force has announced that the initial buy will be in five lots for a total of 21 aircraft, or about four aircraft per lot. Northrop Grumman is uniquely qualified to drive efficiencies out of similar production rates. From the E-2D, to Global Hawk, and Triton, Northrop Grumman is very comfortable producing at that rate. Northrop Grumman has orders to have the first B-21 prototype examples of the new bomber rolling off the production lines in 2025. The X-47B Unmanned Combat Air System Demonstrator (UCAS-D) program will demonstrate the capability of an autonomous, low-observable unmanned aircraft to perform carrier launches and recoveries. Hypersonic Bomber aircraft The United States, Russia, and China are all engaged in a hypersonic arms race. All three nations are developing high-speed aerospace vehicles. India is also developing a hypersonic variant of its BRAHMOS cruise missile. Existing radar absorbent coatings cannot to (we do not have the materials) reduce radar cross-section at high speed." China is developing two hypersonic flight vehicle programs – one believed to be of a post-boost vehicle designed to be deployed from a missile that pursues its target from near space, or some 62 miles from earth. Pentagon’s assessment of Chinese capabilities suggested that China built the world’s largest shock-wave hypersonic wind tunnel capable of generating test flying conditions of up to Mach 9 speeds. “The beauty of the HGV is that it can perform hypersonic precision strikes while maintaining a relatively low altitude and flat trajectory, making it far less vulnerable to missile defenses,” Rick Fisher, an analyst at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, told the Washington Free Beacon. Current American hypersonic research is being conducted through the FALCON program in association with the Pentagon and Air Force. The US is in the process of perfecting Lockheed HTV-2, an unmanned, missile-launched aircraft capable of gaining speeds of up to Mach 20, or 13,000 miles per hour. The US Air Force is also testing the X-37B Space Plane, which has been orbiting earth since December 2012. At the same time Boeing is working on the X-51 WaveRider, a jet-fueled, air-breathing hypersonic rocket developed for the Air Force to be used for hypersonic attack and reconnaissance missions. Russia too has confirmed the development of similar ultrasonic technology. US's Lockheed-Martin made SR-72 is a hypersonic unmanned spy aircraft that could fly at Mach 6, twice as fast as its 50-year-old supersonic manned SR-71 Blackbird, designed using off-the-shelf materials to keep it affordable like the off-the-shelf turbine integrated with a supersonic combustion scramjet air breathing jet engine to power the aircraft from standstill to Mach 6. The new plane offered game-changing capabilities to the military - and a twin-engine demonstrator jet that could reach any target in an hour could be developed for under $1 billion in five to six years. A hypersonic plane does not have to be an expensive, distant possibility. One key factor in keeping the new project affordable was a decision to limit speed to Mach 6, rather than reaching for higher speeds that would require more expensive materials, such as those used on the space shuttle. New Engine Tech The development of the F135, which was derived from the F119 engine that powers the F-22 stealth fighter. The F135-PW-400 on the carrier-based F-35C differs from the F135-PW-100 in the F-35A primarily in its use of corrosion-resistant materials that are better suited to operations at sea. The short and vertical takeoff and landing-capable F-35B uses the F135-PW-600 to connect to a large lift fan in the fuselage. Issues with the F135 have been further exacerbated by problems in securing adequate supplies of spare parts and a shortage of qualified maintainers. Pratt & Whitney used to tower over the market for such engines, but these days it is third-placed in a business dominated by GE, another American company, and Rolls-Royce, of Britain. Pratt is now hoping to claw its way back to the top with its new generation of jet engine, the “geared turbofan”. This has a gearbox that lets the fan at the front of the engine turn at a different speed to the compressors inside it. By allowing each to run at optimal speeds it makes the engine more efficient. In all, about 70% of the world’s jetliner engines are made either by GE alone or by CFM International, GE’s joint venture with Snecma of France. Rivalry was more intense in the past. But the cost of developing a new engine, at around $1 billion, resulted in today’s odd mix of competition and collaboration. MIT startup LiquidPiston's X2 rotary engine is lighter, quieter and more efficient than the internal combustion engine (ICE). An ICE only converts only 30 percent of its heat into work. The 70-cubic-centimeter (40-bhp) 3.5 horsepower at 10,000 RPM engine boasts a thermodynamic efficiency of 75%! It burns a variety of fuels and only two moving parts, a rotor and shaft; it requires no valves, cooling systems, radiators or mufflers. X Mini could churn out about 5 horsepower at 15,000 revolutions per minute, and weigh 3 pounds. The idea is to compress the air in the LiquidPiston X2 engine to a very high ratio as in the diesel cycle and then isolating it in a constant volume chamber. When fuel is injected, it’s allowed to mix with the air and it auto-ignites as in a diesel engine, but the fuel/air mixture isn’t allowed to expand. Instead, it’s kept compressed in a constant volume so it can burn over an extended period, as in the Otto cycle. When the burning fuel/air mix is allowed to expand, it’s then overexpanded to near-atmospheric pressure. In this way, all the fuel is burned and almost all of the energy released is captured as work. Shkolnik calls this use of constant volume combustion “the holy grail of automotive engineering.” Constant volume combustion and overexpansion provide an HEHC engine like the X2 with a number of benefits. Shkolnik points out that the X2 engine is exceptionally quiet because it burns all of its fuel. In current ICE engines, an alarming amount of fuel goes out the tailpipe. This not only cuts down on fuel efficiency and pollutes the air, it also makes the engine noisy. Since the X2 engine burns its fuel completely, there’s no need for complicated silencing apparatus. The X2 engine is a rotary because piston engines aren’t suitable for the HEHC and a rotary engine provides much more flexibility. Also, the use of a rotary design greatly simplifies the engine with only three moving parts and 13 major components required. That allows the X2 to be one-tenth the size of a comparable diesel engine. X2 engine is almost the inverse of a Wankel. It’s almost like the Wankel engine flipped inside-out. The X Mini is essentially an upgrade in design and efficiency of the compact Wankel rotary engine, invented in the 1950s and used today in sports cars, boats, and some aircraft. The X2 engine has a better surface to volume ratio, it doesn’t have the thermodynamic limitations of the Otto cycle and it doesn't have the emissions problems of the Wankel. The Wankel has apex seals that are carried around with the rotor and need to be lubricated. The X2 engine, on the other hand, moves the seals from the rotor to the housing, so no special lubrication is required. Another way that the X2 engine differs from the Wankel is that Shkolnik has no intention of it sharing the same fate as the Wankel, which turned into an automotive also-ran when put head to head with the ICE or hybrid electrics to power motor cars, (though he admits that the X2 engine would be an excellent range extender for hybrids). One place where the X2 engine may have an advantage is in auxiliary power units (APUs). Shkolnik said that an enormous amount of diesel fuel is wasted by lorry drivers for “hotel” purposes. That is, when they stop overnight they leave their engines idling to provide power for the living amenities of their long-distance rigs. Another area is military applications. The U.S. military has a need for APUs that can run on heavy fuels, which the X2 engine can. Also, the Pentagon is very keen on developing robots. The military has need of APUs for tanks, which suffer from extremely bad fuel efficiency from idling to run electronics. "Swarming" Tech |
| Kinetic Projectile Strike weapon aka “Rods of God”. These 20-40 foot long inert metal pieces are housed in an orbital platform. Once deployed they accelerate down to the earth’s surface at Mach 10 speeds and, upon impact, can cause an explosion akin to an 11.5 ton TNT blast. It can be controlled by satellites to strike anywhere around the globe. |
Although there is very little information the weapon used what was called pulse theory, and used two opposing magnets and electrical energy to accelerate projectiles to extreme velocities. This system pulls the bullet down the barrel, the opposite of gas from an explosion pushing it out.
Rail-guns do not require powders or explosives to fire the round. Addition, electro-magnetic guns provide a highly consistent and uniform explosive charge that gives much greater accuracy. It has higher muzzle velocity at speeds of Mach 5 or higher and so is less susceptible to bullet drop and wind shift. This means they are more accurate to a larger range. The massively increased speed also means there is no reason to use explosive rounds, as the sheer impact force of a solid metal rail-gun round would cause as much or more damage than a conventional explosive one. With no gunpowder and no explosive in the round an electromagnetic weapon is much safer to operate or mount as a vehicle, as there is no risk of an ammunition explosion through misfire or enemy attack.
This presents problems for a traditional battleship because power cannot be diverted from the ship's propulsion system. In the Navy's next-generation battleship, the all-electric DD(X), producing this kind of current will be possible. To launch a rail gun projectile, power would be diverted from the ship's engine to the gun turret. The gun would be fired, up to six rounds per minute, for as long as required. Then power would be shifted back to the engine.
The heat generated from the propulsion of the projectile is enough to erode the rails rapidly. Under high-usage conditions, rail guns would require frequent replacement of the rails until high grade rails capable of producing the same effect without frequent replacement are introduced.
Rail-guns do not require powders or explosives to fire the round. Addition, electro-magnetic guns provide a highly consistent and uniform explosive charge that gives much greater accuracy. It has higher muzzle velocity at speeds of Mach 5 or higher and so is less susceptible to bullet drop and wind shift. This means they are more accurate to a larger range. The massively increased speed also means there is no reason to use explosive rounds, as the sheer impact force of a solid metal rail-gun round would cause as much or more damage than a conventional explosive one. With no gunpowder and no explosive in the round an electromagnetic weapon is much safer to operate or mount as a vehicle, as there is no risk of an ammunition explosion through misfire or enemy attack.
This presents problems for a traditional battleship because power cannot be diverted from the ship's propulsion system. In the Navy's next-generation battleship, the all-electric DD(X), producing this kind of current will be possible. To launch a rail gun projectile, power would be diverted from the ship's engine to the gun turret. The gun would be fired, up to six rounds per minute, for as long as required. Then power would be shifted back to the engine.
The heat generated from the propulsion of the projectile is enough to erode the rails rapidly. Under high-usage conditions, rail guns would require frequent replacement of the rails until high grade rails capable of producing the same effect without frequent replacement are introduced.
Counter-electronics High Power Microwave Advanced Cruise Missile (CALCM or Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missile)
India's KALI (Kilo Ampere Linear Injector) is a linear electron "Single Shot Pulsed Gigawatt Electron Accelerator". It is not a laser weapon as commonly believed. Each pulse of electrons emits hundreds of megawatts of power (Relativistic Electron Beams- REB). Other components in the machine down the line convert the electron energy into EM Radiation, which can be adjusted to x-ray (as Flash X-Rays) or microwave (High Power Microwave) frequencies. This has fuelled hopes that the KALI could, one day be used in a High-Power Microwave gun, which could destroy incoming missiles and aircraft through soft-kill (destroying the electronic circuitry on the missile). There is also speculation of using the KALI as an Anti-satellite weapon and as a space-based weapon system, although it is unlikely that they would be implemented, given India's stance on those issues. The beam can also be used to cripple the enemy UAVs, aircraft avionics, missiles and guided munition electronics.
Kali has also been used by the DRDO scientists for testing the vulnerability of the electronic systems of the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) and for x-ray photography. It has also helped in designing electrostatic shields to "harden" the LCA and missiles from microwave attack by the enemy as well as protecting satellites against deadly Electromagnetic Impulses (EMI) generated by nuclear weapons and other cosmic disturbances, which "fry" and destroy electronic circuits.
Kali has also been used by the DRDO scientists for testing the vulnerability of the electronic systems of the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) and for x-ray photography. It has also helped in designing electrostatic shields to "harden" the LCA and missiles from microwave attack by the enemy as well as protecting satellites against deadly Electromagnetic Impulses (EMI) generated by nuclear weapons and other cosmic disturbances, which "fry" and destroy electronic circuits.
With only the cost of diesel fuel, a HEL-based DEW system can fire repeatedly without expending valuable munitions or additional manpower. Laser beams are eminently scalable. This operational concept is thus for the very first time offering the first ‘reusable’ interception element. As long as the enemy can be detected and is within the laser’s range, they are at risk of being fried regardless of how hard they try to evade via hard turns and other high-g manoeuvres. Existing interceptors use kinetic energy kill vehicles (such as blast-fragmentation warheads), which are not reusable.
Fibre-lasers are typically around 25% efficient at converting DC current to light. Thus a 50kW, two-minute blast would require over 6kW-hours of juice—or roughly 10 car batteries worth of power (car batteries have typically around 1.2kW-hour theoretical capacity and are 50% efficient in the real world). However, fibre-lasers are bulky so may not be mountable on vehicles. Therefore, chemical solid-state lasers, are a more likely possibility, but are expensive on a per-shot basis. The biggest problem will likely be the cooling.
Venting the heat off-board only raises the aircraft’s visibility to heat-sealing sensors. Another option is to develop a thermal accumulator, which is a path the USAF is pursuing. An electrical accumulator stores the energy on-board in the same way as a hydraulic accumulator, releasing the latent energy as necessary to generate a surge of power.
Fibre-lasers are typically around 25% efficient at converting DC current to light. Thus a 50kW, two-minute blast would require over 6kW-hours of juice—or roughly 10 car batteries worth of power (car batteries have typically around 1.2kW-hour theoretical capacity and are 50% efficient in the real world). However, fibre-lasers are bulky so may not be mountable on vehicles. Therefore, chemical solid-state lasers, are a more likely possibility, but are expensive on a per-shot basis. The biggest problem will likely be the cooling.
Venting the heat off-board only raises the aircraft’s visibility to heat-sealing sensors. Another option is to develop a thermal accumulator, which is a path the USAF is pursuing. An electrical accumulator stores the energy on-board in the same way as a hydraulic accumulator, releasing the latent energy as necessary to generate a surge of power.
TUNA seeks to develop and demonstrate novel, optical-fiber-based technology options and designs to temporarily restore radio frequency (RF) tactical data networks in a contested environment via an undersea optical fiber backbone. The concept involves deploying RF network node buoys—dropped from aircraft or ships, for example—that would be connected via thin underwater fiber-optic cables. The very-small-diameter fiber-optic cables being developed are designed to last 30 days in the rough ocean environment—long enough to provide essential connectivity until primary methods of communications are restored. Supplying power to floating buoy nodes on the open sea presents a particular challenge.
0 Comments