Posted on 09/19/2014 11:21:22 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
One of the most 'popular' features on the controversial F-35 is the jet's Distributed Aperture System (DAS). DAS creates an all-seeing sphere and classifies and relays data and video to the pilot's helmet and to the jet's mission computers. This game-changing system has now been adapted for the high seas, and it won't stop there.
DAS accomplishes its unique task via a constellation of electro-optical cameras installed around the F-35, each staring in a separate direction. Then, a powerful computer processor "stitches" these video images together to create a continuous viewable video "sphere." When the DAS imagery is paired with an advanced helmet mounted display that is slaved to a spacial tracking system, the person wearing that helmet can look around and virtually "see" the environment around them relayed from the camera network, even in total darkness and, in some cases in otherwise blinding environmental conditions.
Because the DAS cameras are mounted around the outside of the vehicle, and the user is seated inside the vehicle while wearing a helmet mounted display with DAS's imagery being projected inside of it, the user can virtually "see through" the vehicle's structure as if it were never there in the first place. So if a F-35 pilot was flying at night, and his wingman disappeared below him, he could look down and see his wingman right through the floor of his jet.
Distributed Aperture technology does not only provide synthetic vision. When paired with high-speed computers loaded with the latest in image recognition and object tracking software, the system can provide missile launch detection and tracking, ground target tracking and recognition, infra-red search and track functions, and even ballistic missile tracking capabilities. When tied to high-end software and advanced computing hardware, the DAS system is very smart and very sensitive
(Excerpt) Read more at foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com ...
When ever I see “F-35” I think Edsel
All these whiz bang technologies won’t fix the F-35.
The idea they want to proliferate the (DAS) Silent Watch system, causes concern for the technology falling into other nation’s hands.
It would seem this technology should be kept highly secret. Why are we willing to put it out there for China or Russia to be able to obtain the tech?
Why are we even talking about it?
Perhaps it’s the potential to make other nations realize we are formidable, but we’ve been that before. I doesn’t last long as other nations advance too.
Granted, this is a cutting edge technology.
I’ll bet China won’t publicize what they’ve developed.
I don’t keep up as well as I should. Would you mind listing some of your major concerns?
I have a gut feeling it isn’t sound either, but that’s not based on hard fact.
They’ve had major engine problems, cracked wings I believe, and the performance is far less than advertised.
Oh and the cost is far higher.
The thing that amazes me about this, and most defense procurement is the huge complexity and astronomical cost. The F-35 is an absolutely HUGE gamble. The USA will produce a few hundred, and the estimated cost of the program will be $1.45 TRILLION, or somewhere between $150-$180 million per copy.
My point - the most successful fighter of WWII was the P-51. It cost about $50,000 per copy and over 15,000 were produced. If you believe Government BLS statistics, that same amount of money today, after inflation, is $657,000.
Will such specialization, complexity and cost of the F-35 survive the reality of war? I doubt it.
Gee I sure am glad we’re telling the world about this.
Okay. I believe the cracked wings were an F-22 problem, but someone could come along and set me straight on that.
The other two thoughts are something I pretty much had come to believe.
So, you can ‘look thru the floor’ and see the SAM coming at you?...............
An F-35 from Eglin caught on fire a few weeks ago. The pilot landed without sustaining any serious injuries but the plane was a total loss.
F-35 is an outstanding aircraft that meets and in many cases significantly exceeds it's design requirements and specs.
I personally would have much preferred to use the existing Northrup YF-23 airframe that lost the ATF competition as the base airframe for the JSF strike fighter mission profile and I think a YF -23 based solution with an F-35 style data buss and sensor suite would have been the lower cost, higher performance solution in the long run despite the second engine.
This option would have made even more sense in light of the much reduced acquisition of F-22s and the subsequent need to force fit the F-35 to cover more of the nations air superiority requirements than it was originally ever intended to do.
The F-35 is an absolutely amazing strike aircraft that can more than hold it's own in the air to air mission, but it was never intended to be able to take on an F-22 class fighter in a visual range combat engagement.
The F-22 opponents in Congress lied and used the excuse that it could be replaced by lower cost F-35s when their true goal was simply to kill the F-22 at any costs based on an ideological agenda. Having succeeded in gutting the F-22 program on the pretext that it could be replaced by the F-35, these same scumbags are trying to kill the F-35 on the pretext that is not capable of replacing the F-22. Of course their goal is simply to kill the F-35 by any means necessary for the same reason they wished to kill the F-22 - they do want the United States to have military superiority.
While the air to air capability of the F-35 has been very much enhanced at significant expense of time and money to allow it to better bridge the gap with next generation pure air superiority fighters, there a basic and inherent limitations of the single engine strike fighter air frame design that were imposed by initial USAF SOW for the JSF program.
A YF-23 based strike fighter with F-35 level sensor and avionics suites would have been an awesome aircraft that could go head to head with an F-22 any time any place and win.
The future is a guy with a mountin dew in the cup holder next to his control, miles or time zones away “flying” the aircraft. This technology will help make that a reality.
So long as control signals can be jammed, the manned fighter will be the superior.
What happens when the signals to the fishbowl on his head get jammed?
The man in the cockpit is in its last generation, the F35 will be obsolete before it can become fully operational.
At some point the pilot is overloaded and this seems like a sure fire way to do it.
If this information is available you can bet that at some point someone will want to have it linked back to the REMFs who want to micro-manage.
They'll be busting pilots for shutting off half this stuff so they can concentrate carrying out their mission.
JMHO
You’re kidding right? That thing has been a tremendous boondoggle, and it won’t be nearly as capable as the many aircraft it’s supposed to replace. Why? Because they’re trying to replace just about everything with it and no single airframe can be designed to do everything well. Say, you don’t work for the f-35 program, do you? You sure sound like it.
The JSF most significantly replaces the F-117 in the USAF inventory and it is safe to say that the F-35 is a much more capable aircraft than the F-117.
If you can explain just how the F-35 is such a dog , and just what it is inferior to and how it is inferior to those other aircraft I would be very happy to listen.
By definition, a strike fighter is an inherent compromise between a dedicated ground strike aircraft such as the retired USAF A-7, the aging USAF A-10 or the also retired Navy A-6 and a dedicated air superiority fighter such as the F-15 or F-22.
The FA-18 is a strike fighter that has been criticized for being a compromise design as well but it is a highly regarded aircraft that has been chosen on merit by a lot of foreign air forces as it's mainstay fighter. It is safe to say that the F-35 is a more capable aircraft than the FA-18
To survive in today's threat environment a strike aircraft needs the low observables of a stealth fighter, the maneuverability of fighter and the strike capability of a dedicated strike aircraft.
The A-7 and A-6 were excellent aircraft that were retired because they simply could not survive in today's threat environment and the A-10 is a special case of an obsolete and vulnerable design that is just too useful and effective to retire.
Technically, yes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.