F-22, F-35 Outsmart Test Ranges, AWACS

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: grey580

The F-35 is the first to use mostly fiberoptics, and off the shelf software language. It uses an integrated core processor, with PowerPC with C++ instead of Ada or one of the military languages.

Is this change from the normal institutional knowledge base the reason for the reported difficulties they had getting the software working initially?

a reply to: wirehead

Yeah. They are using an off the shelf software at the core, and having to bring it to Milspec to be able to be used on a military aircraft. It's easier to test, being off the shelf, but harder to make it work well with military grade equipment.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Can't believe I didn't recognize it as the YF-23. Very beautiful bird. The front does it justice. I'm guessing they use the F-19 as the F-117s companion. Sinceof course the compsnion is still black. But something flew with it on its missions in Iraq/Afgan.

a reply to: Crumbles

As much as everyone loves the F-19, at the time the F-117 was built, curved shapes like that were barely within our ability to design stealth aircraft. That's the reason that the F-117 was faceted, at the time it was the only way to accurately calculate RCS.

a reply to: Zaphod58

So do you think it was a competition? The F-117 was chosen for its easier design? And the F-19 was left on the backburner until new tech was ready.

I still wonder what the companion is. It has to be an air to air craft for protection.

a reply to: Crumbles

No, the F-117 was built with no competition. Lockheed designed and built it as a black program for the Air Force, after Have Blue turned out to work so well. Tacit Blue was the first to show that curves and radar could work with stealth, but that wasn't until the early to mid 80s.

Congratulations, I just spit my coffee with laughter...I guess the enemy better make EXCELLENT decoy sites.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Don't really see any mass produced curved aircraft though. Unless they're black. Makes since why the bird of prey wasn't picked up aswell. Going with a morecurved design like the 170/180.

a reply to: Crumbles

Even general curves, like the B-2, F-22 and F-35 were impossible to model at the time. It was thought that the only way to get a stealth platform was angles, either beyond or below 90 degrees.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Oh okay I understand. I guess technically radar bouncing off a curve is going to shoot it in a different direction regardless. Even edges are still flat angles even they are flat. Makes complete sense.

a reply to: Crumbles

It's been interesting watching stealth evolve. They've gone from the SR-71 (yes I know, not the first stealth) which used iron ball paint, up to the F-35, which uses composites and shaping in 50 years.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Zaphod58

So, if it's not in this wonder-bird, I wonder what they are using it in?? If the possibilities are as good as it seems, DARPA will be all over it...

So, what's out there that might be using it, I wonder?

Black doritos.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
They're finally starting to admit why this is such an amazing aircraft.

I knew all along you would be vindicated along with the F-35. It is what it was meant to be.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

It's just nice to see some good, and real, news getting out for a change. The last couple months have really started to show what this aircraft can do in the hands of the warfighter.

From the beginning, I always heard that the strength of the F-22/35 was the sensor fusion. Getting all that data to build the SA of the aircrew to manage the battlespace, airborne in real time.

I literally LOL'd reading that the processor was able to discern the radar signatures as fake. The RWR gear in the Tomcat would freak out for a microwave. These guys are getting filtered data to weed out the noise. How awesome is that.

Although, I think admitting that publicly could be a mistake. I mean, imagine if the makers/maintainers of those systems have a means to modify the dish size or tweak the radar signature to make it just off enough that the Raptor/Lightning can't see it, but it could still track/guide a missile.

Great article.

a reply to: cosmania

It would be pretty hard to fool it like that. It's using every on board sensor, including optics, to gather data, and has the ability to use the data from other aircraft as well, to determine if it's a real radar site, or if it's an "emitter on a stick".

a reply to: grey580


That sounds like a major problem if you ask me. I would not say that this is very smart. Who wouldnt want to know what is tracking you even if it is a false AA tracking signal?


There are mordern systems that work integreated With other systems. Today you dont have to be tracked by a Direct AA site or AWACS to be a valid target for a AA system.

a reply to: spy66

There's nothing tracking them. If you read the article, the "radars" on this particular range are nothing but electronic emitters that match the signal output of radar systems that they might go up against. They are simply there to fool warning receivers into thinking the aircraft is being tracked. The F-35 systems determined that's all they were, they weren't actual radars, and ignored them. In a situation where the aircraft was flown against an actual radar site, the system had absolutely no problem determining it was a real radar and reacting to it.

Even an integrated radar is going to be detected, and determined to be a valid radar system and the pilot notified properly. Only electronic simulators are going to be ignored.

a reply to: spy66

I have a feeling that it would be able to distinguish it.

And if it can't then it will in the future.

a reply to: spy66

Except they are not being tracked. Yes, they want to know when they are being tracked .. and it was determined they were not, and the F-35 was right.