New F-35 engine: Burger wizardry?

>>34994668
>and F-35B could outrange Superhornets.
it already does

>>34994668
Numbers are the result of someone saying "if we could build the entire hot stage in [list of putative super-ceramics from material science journals] it would do - this!. Wow!"

Does anyone know if they could use the extra thrust to increase stovl performance of the B?
Would that require serious changes to the lift fan system?

Aren't they planning on giving the F-135 a thrust vectoring nozzle?

>>34994871
No, not worth it.

>>34994705
>tfw I'm in a field and at a school that does all this shit for the aerospace and defense industries and have job opportunities at all the coolest R&D facilities with $$$
Holy fuck I love my career choice.

>>34995594
what field is that senpai?

>>34994668
Whatever, China will make a better and cheaper version.

>the largest, most well funded collection of engineers, manufacuring facilities and production base on earth by orders of magnatude beyond all competition can produce the highest quality equipment.

Shocker.

>>34995729
>China
>building engines
lol

>>34994668
Is it close to being finished yet? I've thought it's interesting how much they've worked on this

>>34994668
Now imagine this on a superior J-20. As always, China is impressive.

>>34994668
I thought they were working on a drop-in upgrade

>>34995729
>>34995780
Lee Zhang pls

>>34995780
Ching chong ling long small ding dong me chinnneeee!

>>34995594
Are you doing Materials Science or something engineering?

>>34995729
>better
>China

no

>>34995780
J-20 would probably fall apart with superior American engine.

>>34995729
>>34995780
.50 cents working overtime this month

>>34994668
lol the F-35 is going to have it's 2nd engine before the PAK-FA has it's first production engine.

That's 'Murica son!

>>34994871
There's literally no point and it would just add more complexity, points of failure and weight.

File: GE_ADVENT_Core[1].jpg (455KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

455KB, 1500x1000px

>>34994705
>>34995765
Tech demo versions of these engines (akin to what the YF-22 was to the F-22) have been in testing for a while; pic is of the core of such an engine from 2012. First they had the ADVENT engine program, than the AETD program, now they're up to the AETP program which will run until 2021. After that comes the final product.

>>34994769
They can only boost vertical lift thrust by about 5% without upgrading the lift fan / gearbox assembly.

>>34994871
Adds weight and the F-35 already has a decent instantaneous turn rate.

>>34995729
Let us know when they match the F135 in service today.

>>34995786
P&W are - they want to deliver a "F135 Growth Option 1.0" which takes the upgrades in materials and aerodynamics in the core of the new engines, and drops that into the F135 for more thrust and less fuel burn (just not as much). They also want to put out a Growth Option 2.0, but I suspect the timelines would conflict with the introduction of new adaptive cycle engine.
Either way, GO 1.0 is meant to be roughly cost-neutral, so chances are we'll see it happen.

>>34998934

Don't suppose you've heard anything about a renewed F-22 production run? Possibly coinciding with a COTS architecture upgrade for the current fleet? I've heard rumors of it being kicked around the usual defense blogs but they're usually full of shit.

>>34999126
Why would we re-open the F-22 production? Upgrade what we have, and as the F-35 development runs down, start up the F-22 replacement program.

>>34994668
How can burger make such a good engine? They are ahead by a wide margin

>>34999146

ChairFarce is starting to feel the pinch now that conflict with Russia and China's becoming more and more likely and 180~ F-22s doesn't feel like enough. The F-22 acquiring a secondary air-to-ground strike role with the SDB helped a lot, too. The SDB is now a 60nm capable glide bomb with a bunker busting warhead, deliverable from a supersonic capable stealth platform (the F-22,) and while the F-22 isn't as stealthy as the F-35, it still has the best kinematic performance as a dogfighter of pretty much any aircraft airborne today.

They've had some massive problems trying to manufacture replacement parts recently because the machine tooling wasn't in the conex containers they were supposed to be in - typical government bureaucratic fuckups - but they could be tracked down (with expense and time) if we commit to a full second production run.

Of course we'd need to find more money for that, but given how the recent fuckups in 7th fleet have drawn attention to the ills of a decade of overworking and underspending on our military forces, I think a big budget increase is pretty likely. Doesn't mean the Air Force will want to spend it on F-22s, however.

>>34999126

There is no point, they've already started work on the penetrating counter air program. If there is a shortfall in heavy air superiority fighter numbers, they can just order some of those F-15E advanced configurations that the Qataris & Saudis are getting. Sure they're strike eagles, but they'll fill any long range interceptor gap, will work pretty well alongside the F-35s (especially with options like that fruity 16 AMRAAM configuration as a data-linked missile truck) and most importantly the line is still open thanks to exports.

>>34999182
>There is no point, they've already started work on the penetrating counter air program

There's a problem with that philosophy, however - namely, the Bradley Problem. We've tried to replace the Bradley like five times now with various "future vehicle" programs, all of which then died out for various reasons. And even if they carry it to fruition, it's going to take a decade at *least* and that's not counting inevitable time extensions and cost over-runs from unforseen developmental problems, just like the F-35, F-22, and most conventional fighters before it (like the F-14.)

The possibility of a war happening, well... *now* is looming pretty large these days.

>>34999210
>(especially with options like that fruity 16 AMRAAM configuration as a data-linked missile truck)

Also holy hell what

File: RAF-USMC F35 2.jpg (75KB, 2048x1199px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 2048x1199px

>>34994668
>F-35B could outrange Superhornets

Fully laden B's launched from a ramp already carry more weapons further than a superbug

>>34999177
I still don't see the point of more F-22s when the F-35 production lines are in full bore. Money is better spent starting the F-22s replacement program.

>>34999226
>fully laden

I'm not sure that's true. I haven't seen numbers on how far a B can fly with a bunch of Paveways hanging from the wings.

>>34999177
Yeah I'm sure those 12 Su-57s and more Su-27+++++ bodykits flying about are a real danger

>>34999334
Yeah, no one gives a shit about Russia's Air Force nowadays, China is a problem though

>TFW I probably made some parts for this
>TFW i'm totally dogshit at my job
It's gonna blow up.

File: 1427441622857100359.jpg (27KB, 800x480px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 800x480px

>>34999218

https://www.google.com/amp/foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/boeings-touts-new-16-air-to-air-missile-carrying-f-15-e-1730258333/amp

File: F-15E_16AMRAAM.jpg (32KB, 800x480px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 800x480px

>>34999210

Unlike the Bradley replacement, where upgrades are marginal compared to the costs, the PCA is going to be replacing the F-15C/D fleet. Which means that simply by being a scaled up version of the F-35's matured technologies, it will be a clear upgrade. If there is delays, it won't really matter, as no other power is going to be close to the combined air power of the USAF, USN, and USMC for the foreseeable future.

>Also holy hell what

See pic, remember that the F-35 can pass targeting information to that through a datalink.

>>34994668
HMM, NO MATTER WHAT ENGINE F-35 HAVE, GLORIOUS AND STRONG CHINESE J-20 WILL BE ABLE TO STRIKE DOWN THE LEMON-35. I AM NOT CHINESE OBVIOUSLY BUT EVEN I CAN SEE THE SHEER MIGHT OF THE PLAAF

>>34995729
Amazing what you can do when you don't have to worry about the R&D costs

>>34999388
So the F-15 will be the AA missile truck that we heard about?

>same company that makes my dishwasher helps design jet engines
its a comfy sort of american feeling

>>34999916
A lot of companies that make defense products have civilian departments and subsidiaries. All over the world really. Arms purchases are at the whims of the political climate and such so alot of these companies have quite substantial non-defense related business in order to stay competitive.

>>34999916
>tfw you learn that honeywell also works in Aerospace

It was weird as I always imagined them to be nothing more than a thermostat & home appliances manufacturer.

File: bilde.jpg (5KB, 640x345px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 640x345px

>>34995729
Maybe in 50 years.

>>35000041
honeywell does fucking everything you can think of

>>35000041

Honeywell also makes nuclear reactor components.

>>35000086
shit like this always fucks with me because you have GE and you like "yeah they make lightbulbs and shitty mid-tier appliances" and then you look closer and they're also a massive bank and make the fucking minigun.

File: hmmm.jpg (66KB, 850x567px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 850x567px

>>34999388
>Unlike the Bradley replacement, where upgrades are marginal compared to the costs, the PCA is going to be replacing the F-15C/D fleet. Which means that simply by being a scaled up version of the F-35's matured technologies, it will be a clear upgrade. If there is delays, it won't really matter, as no other power is going to be close to the combined air power of the USAF, USN, and USMC for the foreseeable future.

There's also a further consideration - the F-22s stealth characteristics are "dated," but most of the design work on the airframe and internal systems... well, *isn't.* If you're looking at restarting F-22 production *anyway* to make up numbers shortfalls in the active force, and you need a next-gen air superiority fighter with a secondary strike role as well, it makes a hell of a lot more sense to iterate on the F-22's basic design (to save time and development costs) than to just build more of a fairly old airframe.

At some point trying to rework old designs is far more trouble than it's worth - the F-22 may be at that point - but if it isn't, a new aircraft based on it's probably more likely than just restarting F-22 production. Any run of those would be low in number, and thus fairly expensive - and you'd want to wait till the Block II upgrades of the current airframe are in place, anyhow, and produce them to that spec, and I don't think they're planning on those upgrades until what, 2020?

>>35000161
Same for GM and Sony (the bank part)

>>34999177
Here is something I don't think any of you appreciate. the 180 F-22s out number the total Su-30 (80), 35 (54), and 57 (10, all prototypes) in the Russia airforce. With the F-35 (305) we have 485 5th gens, which is more than three times the number of Su30+ aircraft Russia has. Further, whereas they are producing ~10 a year, and we are currently pumping out 148 F-35s a year, this only gets worse for russia.

>>34994769
even if they could, it would require new deck plating, which makes it a 10+billion upgrade to the navy in order to make use of that extra thrust.

>>34999177
>ChairFarce is starting to feel the pinch now that conflict with Russia and China's becoming more and more likely and 180~ F-22s doesn't feel like enough.

You live in a fantasy world where the F-35 doesn't exist.

>>34994668
>seems almost too good to be true
>marketing

In other news, USAF is recieving the first F-35As with 3F software next month.

>>35001657
I am sure that to people who have hung their hat on the F-35 being a terrible plane that it sounds too good to be true.

>>34994668
GE knows their shit. All Pratt knows is how to bribe people.

>>34999168
GE is Rolls-tier. Maybe better.