頁:
[1]
2
F-35的導彈艙為武器帶來挑戰
10度至12度的餘量？沙漠環境的白天晚上的溫度差異也很容易超過這個範圍！對於一部普通的計算機，CPU過熱警告的餘量也可能只是10度至20度的範圍！長時間暴露在溫度邊際的狀況上，對武器上的處理器、集成電路有沒有任何影響？對於一些人來說，導彈通過目標不爆炸的狀況也許並不是陌生的 ;P ，但「能買到F-35」的富裕和先進的國家絕對不希望這種故障發生在他們高價買進的戰鬥機上 :@
By Amy Butler
Source: Aviation Week & Space Technology
September 17, 2012
Amy Butler Washington
Developers of the multinational F-35 are finally embarking on a multi-year campaign to demonstrate the single-engine stealthy fighter's ability to dispatch weapons. But uncertainties loom about the impact of internal-carriage requirements on those weapons' effectiveness.
The Lockheed Martin F-35, and the F-22 before it, have introduced a new level of complexity into the air-launched-weapons world by demanding that munitions long anchored on external wing and belly pylons of legacy fighters be carried in small, stealthy internal bays. The Air Force decided decades ago to forgo large payloads—epitomized by the F-15 Strike Eagle—in pursuit of a significantly reduced radar cross section, allowing for fighters to evade air defenses and penetrate into enemy air space.
While the F-22 was a step in this direction, the F-35 is expected to carry far more weapon types in its bay, which has a challenging thermal and acoustic environment. Although the bay has not presented developers with conditions beyond the specifications of weapons slated for use in the F-35, engineers acknowledge there is little margin. “We are within about 10-12 degrees in most cases. But it is close” to the design specifications of some weapons, says Charlie Wagner, weapons integrated project team lead for the F-35 Joint Program Office. “It is not that simple, though. Maybe I can get that hot. But can I get it hot for an hour? Or can it be that hot for two days?”
Wagner says experts in the military are studying the potential prolonged and cumulative effects of operating so close to margin for weapons such as the 1,000-lb. GBU-32 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) and GBU-31 2,000-lb. version. Both ground-attack weapons are slated for early use on the aircraft. A thornier issue, perhaps, will be the environmental impact of the bay on weapons employing more sophisticated electronics, sensors and motors, such as the Raytheon AIM-120C7/D Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (Amraam) or British AIM-132 Advanced Short-Range Air-to-Air Missile (Asraam). “I don't know if the weapons people know that for sure,” says Wagner. “We are pushing what they designed to. . . . If I'm going to the extreme of what they tested to, they may not have a real good understanding of how that is going to affect the weapon over the next 20 years.”
Operating near or at the margins is not new for the F-35 program, which has suffered problems keeping the F-35B to the required weight. Though the weight issues have been resolved—with roughly 300 lb. of margin now on the aircraft, according to Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos—developers are loath to run into similar problems with the operating margins of weapons in the F-35 bay. This is especially true as the Pentagon faces major funding cuts in the coming years; shortcomings in programs could make them vulnerable for reductions or terminations by Congress.
As scientists and engineers continue to study these issues, the flight-testing program is moving forward. The first jettison test took place Aug. 8, when a GBU-32 was dropped from BF-03, a short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing F-35B at NAS Patuxent River, Md. The trial was designed only to ensure safe separation, and the weapon was inert. This is the first in a short series of such jettison tests. At least two are slated for next month, including the first drop of a GBU-31 from a conventional-takeoff-and-landing F-35A.
The F-35 maintained a speed of roughly Mach 0.65 at level flight for the first drop; higher speeds are slated for future demonstrations. However, Wagner notes that it is not urgent to test high bank angles for JDAM drops because, in the field, the F-35 will likely be employed primarily in level flying conditions to maintain the lowest radar cross section possible for ground-attack missions.
Varied angle-of-attack maneuvers will come into play when engineers begin testing the use of Amraam on the F-35. As pilots will want to “fire and forget” their air-attack weapons, they will need to employ them in a much larger flight envelope than the ground-attack munitions.
Unlike the JDAM series, Amraam is powered by a solid-rocket-fuel motor and is dispatched from its position on the door of the F-35 weapon bay. JDAMs are carried on a bomb rack mounted inside the belly.
Initially, developers plan only to demonstrate safe separation of the Amraam, using test bodies lacking a rocket motor. They hope to actually fire an Amraam from the F-35 by the end of January, Wagner says.
Although the three F-35 types share some elements, each weapon model must be tested separately on each fighter version. Those trials will be conducted in parallel, he says. The program prioritizes tests of internal-carriage weapons, as those are required for the Block II and Block III F-35 releases; Block IIB software is what the U.S. Marine Corps will use for declaring initial operational capability (IOC) with its F-35Bs.
The first external weapons will be used in Block III, which is the software version required for IOC for Air Force and Navy models; Block III will be released no earlier than 2017. Introduction of the Boeing GBU-39 Small-Diameter Bomb, a 250-lb. glide weapon, is slated for the Block IV software release at the end of the decade. This weapon was developed by the Air Force specifically to maximize the number of ground targets that the F-35, with its limited internal-bay space, can attack on a single mission; four SDBs can be mounted in place of each JDAM position, allowing for the F-35 and F-22 to each carry eight of the weapons internally. The SDB II, a version incorporating a tri-mode seeker for all-weather, day/night engagements, is now being developed by Raytheon. The first units will be delivered for operational use in 2016 (see p. 61).
The F-35 also is being developed to carry nuclear weapons. Testing of nuclear munitions on the fighter is not slated to begin until after the aircraft development phase is complete.
In the meantime, F-35 developers are sharing the thermal and acoustic data being collected from the bay with the weapon manufacturers. While the bay environment is close to the design specifications of weapons already in the arsenal, the developers hope that sharing this information will help engineers crafting next-generation munitions to design them with those environmental factors in mind, Wagner says....<div class='locked'><em>瀏覽完整內容，請先 <a href='member.php?mod=register'>註冊</a> 或 <a href='javascript:;' onclick="lsSubmit()">登入會員</a></em></div><div></div> F35的機腹真的好醜喔
這真的擁有隱形功能嗎
還只是塗上隱形材料而已 F35能力果然強悍 武器種類繁多 不過 近2億美元身價裸機 加上昂貴武器 不是一般國家所能承受 F-35的新聞看的都直搖頭~~
不知該說甚麼好~
具續研發吧~~
F-35~~{:51:} 可以用的武器種類多有啥用阿,那少的可憐的在載彈量.機腹只能塞2枚炸彈或2枚飛彈,在加上一架要價1億美金起跳的價格,f35的戰力令人懷疑{:36:}<br><br><br><br><br><div></div> 其實我認為這個F-35與F-22都一樣，都太過於跨世代了導致整個情況問題很多!不過這也就是美國人之所以這麼厲害的地方，她們跟台灣不一樣她們允許這些事情，因為在開發武器的過程中問題是肯定會發生的，台灣的武器開發就顯得相對性保守許多，這也是我們的武器一般來說都只是普通而已，而無法像美國有一種跨世代的武器。 看完樓上五位大大的回文，總覺得純粹是看圖片作答：不要說內文，連標題的意思也不清楚 ;P
內文大部份講解F-35測試武器時遇上的問題，是甚麼我亦不在此明說 {:25:} 可能有這樣大的彈倉嗎 別忘了這是單引擎的戰機 光引擎就占掉中間的位置還有進氣道 美製武器的缺點就是要全部用美製裝備......
買F-35, 16....一訂得掛載美製彈藥~~~~
美不續賣或是不在提供後勤維護......就可能跟廢物一樣
未必能用，用了不一定有效~~~~
F-35的載彈量果然是很驚人阿!但是單價真的太貴了<br><br><br><br><br><div></div> 本帖最後由 formosacoffe 於 2012-9-28 11:17 PM 編輯
看到樓主的評論 "沙漠環境的白天晚上的溫度差異也很容易超過這個範圍！" 感覺樓主自己也沒有抓到重點. 確一副自以為高深漠測, 看不起別人的評論. 實在是相當的丟人. ;P 可見樓主自己也是一知半解. 看文章說故事的人. 樓主應該想想看. 這個熱是指哪造成的. 是太陽? 還是別的地方?
我想 "是甚麼我亦不在此明說:shutup: " 請樓主用腦袋想想看.
...<div class='locked'><em>瀏覽完整內容，請先 <a href='member.php?mod=register'>註冊</a> 或 <a href='javascript:;' onclick="lsSubmit()">登入會員</a></em></div> formosacoffe 發表於 2012-9-28 11:15 PM static/image/common/back.gif
看到樓主的評論 "沙漠環境的白天晚上的溫度差異也很容易超過這個範圍！" 感覺樓主自己也沒有抓到重點. 確一 ...
自稱很了解的人我也不多說廢話，引述一段文自己看 ;P
The F-35 is having enough of a problem getting rid of excess heat that it will require a redesign. While the leader of the program in 2009 (Gen. Heinz) stated I that the aircraft is meeting its thermal requirements, reading between the lines of an Aviation Week article says that there will have to be more work done to solve this problem or the jet won’t be able to handle hot weather environments.
-
Bradley Perrett/Amy Butler, Aviation Week, Hot Spots, March 30, 2009, pg 54 ...<div class='locked'><em>瀏覽完整內容，請先 <a href='member.php?mod=register'>註冊</a> 或 <a href='javascript:;' onclick="lsSubmit()">登入會員</a></em></div> F-35光是價格就讓人卻步了
美國只想從這個開發案中獲利
而別國想利用F-35獲得美方匿蹤的技術
我認為老美不會輕易的把技術讓給別國
都寫英文看不太懂但我還是覺得F22比較強{:31:} F-35的載彈量還蠻驚人的
可是價格方面有點貴<br><br><br><br><br><div></div>
頁:
[1]
2