TVC -vs- JHMCS ?

[Jigs]

Yes, day or night the DAS (distributed aperture system) has a 360 degree view That is just one of the features that sets the F-35 apart in it's electronics capability. The Pilot can look back target an aircraft behind him and fire. The missile (AIM 9X) will turn back towards the enemy aircraft.

Making the need to dogfight irrelevant.

 

[nightcrawler]

I think TVC is a kindoff a thing that can't be introduced in a non-TVC plane
On the other hand JHMCS (or anything similar) can readily be adobted in a TVC plane

Thats why I stand with the Sukhois

 

[Thomas]

I think TVC is a kindoff a thing that can't be introduced in a non-TVC plane
On the other hand JHMCS (or anything similar) can readily be adobted in a TVC plane

Thats why I stand with the Sukhois

JHMCS is only as good as the sensors, computer, and radar that feed into it. And so far the U.S. is the only one with anything like DAS. The future of air warfare I think is not in thrust vector aircraft. Becuase a piloted thrust vector aircraft can not out maneuver a thrust vector missile. Also it is all about who see's who first, who has the best ECM, and can incorporate data fusion.

Did you know the F-35, if it runs out of missiles can get a weapons lock and have another aircraft or ship fire a missile at it's target?

 

[DaRk WaVe]

Did you know the F-35, if it runs out of missiles can get a weapons lock and have another aircraft or ship fire a missile at it's target?

Explain...

F-35 will have to target locked all the time while the missile is guided to the locked target? or in a way should i say that time is near when we will see AWACS etc practically guiding missiles to their target?

 

[SBD-3]

Explain...

F-35 will have to target locked all the time while the missile is guided to the locked target? or in a way should i say that time is near when we will see AWACS etc practically guiding missiles to their target?

No AFAIK there is a video from F Weapons series on YT where it's been demonstrated that F-35s can exchange target mission data and thus one JSF can help the other JSF take out the target. its seems difficult but not impossible for Yanks to do....(I think that one JSF will inform the other JSF that there is a target at XXXXX at XXX distance and at XXXX hight) but I am not pretty sure that JSF can take over the fired missile for its use

 

[DaRk WaVe]

I am really confused about this, one JSF will lock the target & missile will be fired from a different platform? Radar of JSF will guide the missile to its target?? Thomas please explain

 

[SBD-3]

1:30 to 1:50

 

[Kompromat]

^The B1b Lancers are being modified to carry unprecedented numbers of AIM-120D AMRAAM.

Once the JSF or Raptor Radar has locked on the Target the information would be transfered to the B1B via AWACS & Data Link and the Missile will be fired from B1b , which also has Multiple Launch capability.

This is a measure or Last resort , when the Ammo may run out and the AC with Weapons bay cannot be rearmed via Mid air rearming.

 

[Kompromat]

Making the need to dogfight irrelevant.

Smart Avionics and Electronic devices ie JHMCS has out gunned those cool air show maneuvers.

Look down shoot down is kinda boring though

 

[Thomas]

I am really confused about this, one JSF will lock the target & missile will be fired from a different platform? Radar of JSF will guide the missile to its target?? Thomas please explain

F-35, F-22, B-2, AWACS, ect. can network with other aircraft, satellites, ground based radar, and ships. sharing radar and targeting information. It is part of the future war fighting concept of "net-centric warfare".

Though the B-1R program funding has been cut this video gives an example of net-centric warfare.

 

[nightcrawler]

@Thomas

The future of air warfare I think is not in thrust vector aircraft. Becuase a piloted thrust vector aircraft can not out maneuver a thrust vector missile.

You haven't read my post carefully I just stated which plane CAN get both of these function integrated simultaneously & thus will be far better than a plane having only one of these!!
TVC cant be introduced in a airframe that isn't designed for it while sensors radars computers can readily be integrated provided you got a spacious airframe & what better airframe than Sukhois.

Becuase a piloted thrust vector aircraft can not out maneuver a thrust vector missile.

There occurs other parameters to be taken care of e.g radar detection aperture/range of a plane is way beyong than a missile so besides TVC other things have to considered

And so far the U.S. is the only one with anything like DAS.

For present your assumption is fair

Did you know the F-35, if it runs out of missiles can get a weapons lock and have another aircraft or ship fire a missile at it's target?

Again AIRBORNE WARNING AND CONTROL SYSTEM parameter introduces itself & TVC analysis is adulterated

 

[500]

You guys forget one thing that missile turn requires lots of energy, thats why JHMCS does not make planes maneuverability completely irrelevant. This is especially relevant in case of AIM-9 which's diameter is only 130 mm, compare to 160 mm of Python 4/5 and MICA and 170 mm of R-73.

On the other hand TVC gives advantage only at low speeds like 300-400 km/h and less.

 

[Kompromat]

You guys forget one thing that missile turn requires lots of energy,

Energy while making tight turns ?

Thats why JHMCS does not make planes maneuverability completely irrelevant. This is especially relevant in case of AIM-9 which's diameter is only 130 mm, compare to 160 mm of Python 4/5 and MICA and 170 mm of R-73.

Majority of next Generation Missiles will come with TVC & would be able to pull higher g's which should solve this issue.

On the other hand TVC gives advantage only at low speeds like 300-400 km/h and less.

I think its nonsensical - what is the proof to this claim?

 

[500]

Energy while making tight turns ?

Sure

Majority of next Generation Missiles will come with TVC & would be able to pull higher g's which should solve this issue.

What does it matter? If you make a turn using TVC you spend the thrust energy on turn instead of acceleration, thus decreasing the range of missile.

I think its nonsensical - what is the proof to this claim?

Well its obvious that the higher speed the more effective are fins.

 

[Kompromat]

Sure


What does it matter? If you make a turn using TVC you spend the thrust energy on turn instead of acceleration, thus decreasing the range of missile.

Tight turns are vital in order to score a Kill , fortunately today's BVR's and WVR's Ie AIM-9x and AIM-120D / R77/PL-12 etc give enough range which means that There is enough energy to meet acceleration as well as Range requirements.

Lets say the Range of AMRAAM is 120Kms , a bandit is detected 122 kms away - you would not fire the missile after Locking on the target on that range even 5-10kms within the effective range as the Target will maneuver too - a wise pilot will launch his Missile within 100kms range which provides enough energy for Turns and Effective Range.

Well its obvious that the higher speed the more effective are fins.

I can sort of agree with you on this , but if this is the case then BVR's and HOBS can also be less efficient on higher altitudes where the air is thin and speeds are usually high.

Its simple - if the air has less density , there would be nothing to cut into.