Information Fusion to Carrier Suitability Testing. EVERYTHING about the F-35. 17 papers. 477 pages.

Previously much information about the F-35 was scattered around the internet on various websites (even comments on websites), making it hard to find correct or relevant information and follow exactly how the program was progressing unless you had too much spare time on your hands (like me) and spent way too much time reading about the jet (like me). And if you were not careful, often sources could either be out-of-date, or even new articles could be based on out-of-date information. Many sources were also working with an agenda or simply pieced together evidence in the wrong way to create a false narrative.

At the 2018 AIAA Aviation Forum, Lockheed Martin made 18 presentations and have released 17 papers. These papers could be considered a central source for everything about the F-35, albeit they are mostly written from a technical perspective from the contractor, and they also reveal more depth and detail to the program than has ever been shown before - for example, they reveal the real reason the canard configuration was dropped. They are also at the time of the creation of this thread, current.

Shout out to Dragon029 (present on multiple sites) for obtaining these and LM Aero for creating the content.

The titles of the papers are:

F-35 Program History – From JAST to IOC

F-35 Air Vehicle Configuration Development

F-35 Air Vehicle Technology Overview

F-35 Production – Advanced Manufacturing and the Digital Thread

F-35 Weapons Design Integration

F-35 System Development and Demonstration Flight Testing at Edwards Air Force Base and Naval Air Station Patuxent River

F-35 Structural Design, Development, and Verification

F-35 Flight Control Law Design, Development and Verification

F-35 Propulsion System Integration, Development & Verification

F-35 Subsystems Design, Development & Verification

F-35 Mission Systems Design, Development & Verification

F-35 Information Fusion

F-35 Carrier Suitability Flight Testing

F-35 Aerodynamic Performance Verification

F-35 Weapons Separation Test and Verification

F-35 STOVL Performance Requirements Verification

F-35 Climatic Chamber Testing & System Verification

link

The only paper missing is the high alpha verification one.

This is the greatest resource ever.

a reply to: C0bzz

Great stuff C0bzz!

So here's some findings. I'm less than half way through.

- Picture of F-35 LO nozzle testbed is found in 'F-35 Air Vehicle Technology Overview'. This looked like a strange triangular aircraft on google earth as reported here.

- For external weapons carriage, only 500 lb A2G munitions and certain A2A weapons were certified during System Development & Demonstration (SDD). However, the aircraft was still designed for 2000 lb weapons and external fuel tanks. The plumbing for external fuel tanks was previously thought to probably have been deleted, though it may be FFBNW. Personally I am looking forward to the addition of external fuel tanks to the jet. Also the weapons bays have some margin for improvements for future weapons. More information can be found in 'F-35 Weapons Design Integration'.

- F-35 ejection seat accommodates a greater pilot weight range, higher maximum airspeed, and has improved terrain clearance of legacy aircraft ejection seats. More information can be found in 'F-35 Subsystems Design, Development & Verification'. This was previously known, but the full details were not.

- In the link in the first post of this thread, there is some discussion about some information within 'F-35 Aerodynamic Performance Verification ' that indicates the F-35 has similar aerodynamic performance to the F-16. This is as expected by anyone not with an agenda.

- Refrigerated Cooling for certain systems and the cockpit is from a closed-loop air refrigeration cycle, which works by expanding engine bleed air across a power turbine. Waste heat from this and also other systems is transferred to fuel and then to a heat exchanger in the engine bypass duct. The F-35B is actually the most thermally challenged due to the smallest fuel load and because the lift-fan bearing requires cooling. With a small fuel load and in STOVL mode, the aircraft will operate at a thermal deficit, meaning the fuel will heat up. See ''F-35 Subsystems Design, Development & Verification', 'F-35 Propulsion System Integration, Development & Verification ', and 'F-35 Climatic Chamber Testing & System Verification ' for further information.

- Production line has many aspects of the Toyota Production System (my wording not theirs), as expected. As expected, the production line was created in CAD beforehand. They also use projectors to project work instructions directly onto the surface of the aircraft as it is being built, which I thought was very cool. 3d printing is used for tools & work guides where appropriate. More information 'F-35 Production – Advanced Manufacturing and the Digital Thread '.

- Commonality in mission systems was close to 100%, 70% in vehicle systems, and 20% in airframes. Often different parts are cousin parts. Different variants are produced on the same production line which is not changed or stopped for different variants. 'B' and 'C' variants are mixed in with the 'A', which is the most common. More information 'F-35 Production – Advanced Manufacturing and the Digital Thread '.

- Information about the mission systems can be found in 'F-35 Mission Systems Design, Development & Verification'. Note they don't go into a lot of details here since this is what would actually matter to actual performance of the aircraft as a weapons system. I would recommend this as an introduction to F-35 mission systems if you have been previously unaware of them. Also they mention the AN/ASQ-239 can do "HG electronic CM" but this is listed separately to "HG electronic attack (EA) via radar MFA utilization". We all know the F-35 has a towed decoy, they should stop trying so hard to hide it! It might even help them sell more aircraft if they talk about it.

- Information about what sensor fusion actually is, and the different types of sensor fusion can be found in 'F-35 Information Fusion'.

- Canard configuration was dropped for transonic maneuverability, stability, and carrier approaches. More information in 'F-35 Program History – From JAST to IOC '. Not stealth as commonly beleived.

They also cite The Aviationist and I am convinced The Aviationist reads ATS. So maybe this will become a complete circle.

a reply to: C0bzz
Interesting to say the least.

Refrigerated Cooling for certain systems and the cockpit is from a closed-loop air refrigeration cycle, which works by expanding engine bleed air across a power turbine. Waste heat from this and also other systems is transferred to fuel and then to a heat exchanger in the engine bypass duct.

So a bleed air turbo compressor style ACM (Air Cycle Machine), that's been used in commercial aviation across the board for 50+ years. Only difference here is they are dumping the waste heat initially into the fuel, before a fuel heat exchanger pumps it via some means to an engine bypass duct where it is "hidden" in the engine exhaust. I wouldn't be surprised if they are using a Galden loop system at all as its efficient if a little heavy.

*Im surprised they just dont admit to a towed decoy.

*I was under the impression its performance compared to the F-16 was that, one had a better roll rate than the other, while it was the reciprocal with instantaneous turn rates.

*Interesting that they may have left the external tank plumbing in the build. I would have thought that was an early weight saving casualty.

*Also interesting that canards were dropped for reasons other than stealth profile. Does that mean that the often quoted view that canards are detrimental to stealth performance was/is untrue or that regardless of it either performance was more important, or they were always willing to accept some all aspect LO degradation in some quarters anyway, but performance in the transonic was the real issue? Who knows.

originally posted by: C0bzz
They also cite The Aviationist and I am convinced The Aviationist reads ATS. So maybe this will become a complete circle.

Considering one of his articles had the line "...according to the website Abovetopsecret.com...." I think you can safely say he at least occasionally reads here.

a reply to: thebozeian

I wouldn't be surprised if they are using a Galden loop system at all as its efficient if a little heavy.

Galden loop?

*I was under the impression its performance compared to the F-16 was that, one had a better roll rate than the other, while it was the reciprocal with instantaneous turn rates.

I'm not sure about roll rates, but I do know a bit about sustained turn rates, instantaneous turn rates, and acceleration. You might be thinking of sustained turn rate and instantaneous turn rate. I'll start with legacy aircaft.

The F-16 is generally regarded has having mediocre instantaneous turn rate as it's an alpha limited jet (AoA is limited to 15° to 25° depending on conditions) which also means its slow speed maneuverability is mediocre. Sustained turn rate is very good, meaning it can turn tightly without losing speed. Acceleration is also very good. Of course, the F-16 is a vary bare-bones jet and requires external sensors, fuel, and weapons to be added in any realistic scenario. In a heavy A2G loadout the F-16 will actually be relatively unmaneuverable.

The F/A-18 is generally regarded to have very good instantaneous turn rate as it has no alpha limit, I believe it can pull over 40°. Doing so however, bleeds off its speed. Sustained turn performance is mediocre, since turning causes it to lose significant speed. Of interest, corner speed in the F/A-18 is, as far as I can tell, in the region of 300 knots, instead of above 400 knots as in the F-16. Acceleration is also mediocre. The F/A-18 is a bare-bones jet and requires external sensors, fuel, and weapons to be added in any realistic scenario, but since it's larger than the F-16 this should be to a less of an extent.

The F-16 will fight two circle, the F/A-18 will fight single circle. Alternatively, the F-16 is a rate fighter, the F/A-18 is a radius fighter.

The F-35 from my reading seems to be similar to a merger of the two. Very good instantaneous turn rate. Mediocre to good sustained turn rate. Good acceleration. I doubt it has quiet the slow speed maneuverability of the Hornet, since it is not a carrier capable aircraft (the F-35C probably is more Hornet-like due to the bigger wings with worse acceleration). However, the F-35 carries 18,000 lb of fuel, internal weapons bays, integrated EW suite, and integrated TGP. From my reading, a clean F-16 will probably out-turn and out-accelerate an F-35, a light/medium external loadout they would become equal, and with a heavy external loadout the F-35 will win. Generally the F-35 will do better relative to the F-16 in instantaneous turn versus sustained turn as well.

In the link which was a discussion about information in the papers, the F-35 flight envelope (unknown configuration, unknown weight, unknown variant, could be completely BS) appeared comparable to that of a F-16C Block 52 with a drag index of 70 (i.e. "an F-16 with wingtip AMRAAMs, a centreline 300gal fuel tank and both TGP & NAV LANTIRN pods"), which conforms to most discussions about F-35 performance before. There was also some discussion about STR/ITR, but I've had too much wine and am too tired to understand.

*Interesting that they may have left the external tank plumbing in the build. I would have thought that was an early weight saving casualty.

They don't mention if the plumbing is there or not, they just mention that they were required to have compatibility and that the potential for integration exists. I do know that some parts of the F-35 are fitted for but not with (FFBNW), for example there's empty space to add more antennas to allow the AN/ASQ-239 to cover more bands.

*Also interesting that canards were dropped for reasons other than stealth profile. Does that mean that the often quoted view that canards are detrimental to stealth performance was/is untrue or that regardless of it either performance was more important, or they were always willing to accept some all aspect LO degradation in some quarters anyway, but performance in the transonic was the real issue? Who knows.

Agreed.

*Im surprised they just dont admit to a towed decoy.

I think they usually just call it "RFCM", which I would usually think referred to chaff not a towed decoy. Each F-35 seems to be able to hold four of them.

“The Government of Australia has requested the sale of one thousand nine hundred fifty-two (1,952) ALE-70(V)/T-1687A Electronic Towed Decoy Countermeasures, publications and technical documentation, other technical assistance, U.S. Government and contractor engineering, technical and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistical and program support.

This sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a major non-NATO ally and continues to be an important force for political stability, security, and economic development in the Western Pacific. It is vital to the U.S. national interest to assist our ally in developing and maintaining a strong and ready self-defense capability.

The proposed sale will improve Australia’s F-35 survivability and will enhance its capability to deter global threats, strengthen its homeland defense, and cooperate in coalition defense initiatives. Australia will have no difficulty absorbing this equipment into its armed forces.”

www.dsca.mil...

There's basically no information on the capabilities of the ALE-70 and nobody ever talks about it.

F-35 wallpapers, collected by dragon029.

Also the flares for the F-35 are specifically made for the F-35. There is some information on the flares, but there's no information on the chaff. We do know the F-35 carries chaff, in cockpit presentations there's a part that shows flares remaining and chaff remaining.

The free download for each of the articles were pulled at the request of Lockheed Martin since they should only be accessible via the AIAA website. You can buy them there or possibly access them for free from your university or college (for example). I thought this might occur, which is why I linked to the original (re)uploader, as uploading them myself wouldn't be ethical.

Luckily I grabbed a personal copy for all of them before they were pulled.

Got to be quick.