F-35
Lightning II
- Combat aircraft for the future
Written by Erlend Larsen
Translated by Sigrid Hesjevoll and Erlend Larsen
Thanks to everyone who has helped me with the book.
No one mentioned, no one forgotten.
Publisher: E-forlag, 2010
Cover photo: Lockheed Martin
ISBN: 978-82-93057-09-3 (Smashwords Edition)
ISBN: 978-82-93057-08-6 (printed UK version)
ISBN: 978-82-997486-6-7 (printed Norwegian version)
The printed versions are available from erlenden@online.no
Copyright 2010 Erlend Larsen
Smashwords Edition, License Notes
This ebook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each recipient. If you’re reading this book and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your use only, then please return to Smashwords.com and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respecting the hard work of this author.
E-book is published in paper version in Norway (2009: www.e-forlag.no) and Denmark (2010: http://veterania.dk/). Contact erlenden@online.no for releases in other countries.
Discover other titles by Erlend Larsen at http://e-forlag.no/
Content
Introduction
Introduction by former Inspector General of the NoRAF, Major General Olav Aamoth
Combat aircraft for the future
Joint Strike Fighter program
F-35 Lightning II
The history behind stealth
The secret stealth technology
Short take-off and vertical landing
The jet engine
The advanced electronics
The weapons platform
The aircrafts to be replaced by F-35 Lightning II
The rivals
Unmanned aircraft
About the author
Sources
The past and the future. Photo: Lockheed Martin
Norway is facing the largest purchases ever. We have been offered to buy 48 new fighter jets for three billion dollar. It seems like Norway will buy 56 aircrafts, and that the total investment, including weapons and logistics, will become seven billion dollars. During the aircraft's expected lifetime of 30 years, the authorities assume that the total cost comes to 24 billion. The latter amount includes operating and maintenance costs.
We, as a small country, are going to use an unbelievable amount of money – but do we know what we are about to buy?
The intention of this book is to introduce the fighter F-35 Lightning II, show the historical developments that led to this plane, and show what the aircraft stands for. The book presents the past secrets and the unclassified technology available in the aircraft.
Combat aircrafts is an attractive contribution in conflicts, partly because it can deliver accurate weapons virtually anywhere at any time. Fighter aircrafts can be used in both offensive and defensive operations, and is well suited to information collection. In recent years, fighter aircrafts from NATO has participated in several operations with high intensity, something one must take into account when we are going to buy new aircrafts. At the same time, new fighter aircrafts shall first and foremost safeguard the interest of each country.
Fighter aircrafts is just as important for a national defence as frigates and tanks. We cannot content ourselves with one of the parts. An independent country must have a defence where there is a balance between land, sea and air power. There must be symmetry in the level of ambition among the three military branches.
I have chosen to limit the book to a presentation of the western fighter jets with an emphasis on American planes. That’s partly because the stealth technology has been there longer than in the rest of the world, and partly because my main task is to introduce the F-35 Lightning II. The book describes a number of aircrafts that have influenced the development of the new aircraft. Aircrafts from countries like Russia and China are not mentioned unless needed due to inadequate sources.
Please contact us if you have any questions or comments about the book; erlenden@online.no
June 2010
Erlend Larsen
Author
Major General Olav Aamoth. Photo: RNoAF.
Introduction
By the former Inspector General of the RNoAF, Major General Olav Aamoth
The fighter aircrafts JSF F-35 Lightning II, JAS-39 Gripen and the Eurofighter have been devoted much attention in recent years, far beyond the academic environment. This is natural in view of the major political and industrial interests involved, interests that at times overshadow the professional needs of the selected aircraft to cover. We went through a similar process 35 years ago when several NATO nations cooperated in efforts to replace its F-104 and Mirage fighters, in the so-called "Century arms trade".
Norway was a part of this process both in the analytical work in advance of the election and with the Norwegian chairman of the established Eurogroup which sought to standardize equipment procurement within NATO. France, Sweden and United States competed with good candidates. The U.S. aircraft that became F-16 had superior characteristics in all relevant areas through the use of new and sometimes untried technology, and when the U.S. made it clear that they would acquire a significant number, the choice were made for us. The election was by many poorly received and designated as hazardous investment in unproven technology, and little reliable economic forecasts. The ensuing 35 years have shown that it was a good choice, operational, industrially and economically. F-16 is currently delivered to 25 nations, more than 4500 are now produced and the aircraft is still in production.
It is tempting to compare today's choice of F-16s successor with the process that led to the selection of the F-16 in 1975, both because of the project's scope and the widespread use of new technology. The choice of expensive military equipment, like fighter aircraft, has traditionally invoked great political interest, both because of the large investments, opportunities for industrial participation and the technical and security aspects of the acquisition. Politicians have in varying degrees involved themselves in these elections with the desire to overrule the professional choice to customize the acquisition to political frame factors. In modern times we have examples of how to override has both good and bad results. The most dramatic was presented in the white paper from Defence Minister Duncan Sandys in 1957 in which all further development of fighter aircraft in British industry was stopped. The perception was that the future of air defence should be performed with guided missiles. This led to the British aviation industry ended up in a backwater they still haven’t come out of, and the competitors in U.S. and France got the market for themselves for many years. The military development has shown that Duncan Sandys was at least 60 years before his time, if not more. Fighter aircrafts are still needed and priority first-line equipment in all nations that have need for military power means, to safeguard their own safety or for participation in alliance operations.
A less dramatic move was the dictations to the U.S. defence in the 60’s from Defence Secretary Robert Mc Namara to develop a fighter that would meet the Air Force and the Navy's need for fighter-bombers and pure fighter with one type of aircraft. The result was the F-111, a plane that could not make any task satisfactory, and that ended its life as a strike fighter with good range. Australia has continued to use F-111 in this role. U.S. industry with the Defence branches then developed their own F-14 and F-15 which was very good, but expensive, fighter aircraft. Mc Namara`s initiative has since been left as a monument over how it might go when the politicians overrun the user's needs.
At the beginning of 70’s, and with the Vietnam war as experience background, a new government in the United States wanted to develop a less expensive fighter that using new technology could complement and eventually replace the F-15 and F-14. In addition, they would thus be able to offer its allies an aircraft at a cost that was affordable. U.S. Air Force had strongly opposed this idea; they would rather have several F-15s. The politicians had taken their stand, and the result was the F-16 and F-18. This time the political overrule gave an indisputable success.
With this backdrop, we might consider the ongoing development of the F-35. The objective from the political side was to develop a fighter to be used by all the three U.S. Forces, and which also could be offered to the allies. This objective would be achieved by full use of the progress made in all fields of relevant technologies and by a high degree of standardization.
Within the United States, however, strong forces on both the political and military side would prioritize continued procurement of F-22 and F/A-18E/F, both for the sake of employments in several states, and with uncertainty about the F-35 will be able to meet the challenges the U.S. military will face in the coming decades. Outside the United States, many people claim that it is not possible to produce an aircraft that can solve all tasks in a credible manner and at an affordable price like the goal for the F-35. An important factor for all is, of course, uncertainty regarding the development of fighter jets in the nations that produce and sell aircraft that can meet the F-35 and F-22 in combat.
Here we are today. F-35 is already in production before the test program is completed, F-22 production is proposed stopped several times by the U.S. government. It is once again become an election where very strong forces; political and military, shall decide questions of great political importance of security, both for the United States and other nations that face a renewal of their Air Force. For Norway, it is essential that we obtain military means to meet defence challenges in the next 30 years in a credible manner. The Government has made a selection of aircraft type as in all the ways has come best out of our assessment of the options. Norway shall place an order of the aircrafts after parliament has approved the contracts that shall be negotiated in the coming years with the aim of delivering aircrafts between 2016-2020, an order that will be affected by developments in the U.S. and where the competitors will continue to use every opportunity to influence our and others' choices.
In order to keep up with the ongoing debate, it is necessary to have an understanding of the new technologies that are behind the evaluation and choices. These are technologies that in many areas will change traditional thinking about the fighter application. Erlend Larsen has in a good way collected most of what is released by the information on these areas, and with emphasis on the F-35, presented it in a way that is understandable and interesting for readers both in and outside the academic environment. This book is a necessary and significant contribution to this important debate.
Olav Aamoth
Major General, Former Inspector General of the Royal Norwegian Air Force (RNoAF).
F-35. Photo: Lockheed Martin
Combat aircraft for the future
F-35 Lightning II is the combat aircraft for the future. It`s among the most advanced and complex combat aircraft the world has seen. It`s perhaps only big brother F-22 Raptor that exceeds the plane's advanced features. The two fighters have close family ties; they come from the same factory (Lockheed Martin), they are the first fighter aircrafts in the world with stealth characteristics, and they share many technological qualities.
It is no coincidence that the two planes are so similar. Lockheed Martin has done what is possible to keep development costs down. Then it has been natural to develop the younger brother in the image of F-22 Raptor. The U.S. government has placed great demands on low costs. F-35 should be "affordable." Military products have had inflation unparalleled by anything. Now the U.S. government has put its foot down, inflation must come down. F-35 shall have an affordable price.
It was the little brother who won the coveted Collier Trophy award first. Collier Trophy is the most prestigious award to be handed out in American aviation. The honourable trophy is awarded to those who contribute to a marked development of aviation, and has been awarded virtually every year since 1911.
Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) received the trophy in 2001 for the development of the motor system that makes F-35 to take off, breaking the sound barrier, stand still in the air and then land vertically. The development of this engine technology was seen as a revolutionary breakthrough for aviation. Not least for the U.S. aviation industry, for they have never quite got to build airplanes that can take off and land vertically. They have made many attempts, but ended up buying the British fighters.
F-22 got Collier Trophy five years later for their superior performance, which was demonstrated during exercise Northern Edge in 2006. 5000 people were involved in a large exercise together with more than 110 aircraft of various types. F-22 Raptor flew 97 percent of their scheduled missions and killed opponents in the ratio 80 to 1. All of the bombs hit their targets, and the advanced aircraft conveyed a good overview of the enemy to the blue force based on information from the aircraft's modern radar. The exercise showed that the F-22 will give the U.S. total air superiority for years to come.
Raptor is the most superior fighter Americans have developed. It is built to establish air dominance anywhere in the world, and is meant to replace the F-15 Eagle. The technology is so advanced - and secret - that no country in the world is allowed to buy the plane, not even close allies such as Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom. The Senate has opened for the development of a downgraded version for export.
Another question is whether other countries can afford to buy the Raptor. The cost breaks even U.S. limits and the production of Raptor are therefore at risk to stop. Originally, U.S. Air Force planned to buy 750 planes. Now they are likely to buy fewer than 200.
Joint Strike Fighter program has had a goal of achieving a nearly equally good product at an affordable price. Lockheed Martin claims that the F-35 will cost about the same as its competitors, even though the F-35 will have technology superior to them all. Lockheed Martin saves a lot of money to bring technology from the F-22.
JSF or F-35?
What is the correct name of this fighter; JSF or F-35? Joint Strike Fighter is the name of all the elements in the development program, which ended up with the production of the fighter aircraft F-35. It is therefore not correct to call the aircraft for JSF. The name of the plane is F-35 Lightning II.
F-35 would actually have a different number than 35. At a press conference a reporter asked what designation JSF would get. A good question, said the man from the authority, who did not know the answer, for there was no answer at that time. JSF was not yet given any F-number. The Americans call all the fighters something with "F" for Fighter. Thereafter follows a number that shows the number in the series.
The person representing the authority asked his manager which number JSF would get. Some confused the other replied "X 35". The answer was misunderstood, and the journalist was told that JSF should be named F-35.
Pentagon got a dilemma: Should they admit the mistake or should the JSF assign a number outside the order? It was number 24 which was to be used; JSF should be named F-24. After a few rounds in the bureaucracy, the designation F-35 was confirmed in June 2002. At that time the term was already well established in the media and the airline industry.
Some aircrafts are in the A-series, which means that the aircraft is built for ground-attack (Attack). F/A means that the aircraft is designed for both air-to-air and air-to-ground. As for F/A-18 Hornet, the fighter aircraft that U.S. Navy and U.S. Marines use.
Maybe the correct designation should have been F/A-35 since it is designed for both air-to-air and air-to-ground. According to Lockheed Martin, the F/A-term is a term used by the Navy, but not by the U.S. Air Force. F-22 was called F/A-22 for a period, but this was changed back to F-22 again.
Most military aircraft also have a letter behind their number. The letter may say something about the plane is a single-seat (A) or whether there is room for two in the cockpit (B) - but not always. AV-8B, for example, is built for only one pilot.
Some years ago, the Americans used other designations. For example, P-51 Mustang, which for sure was a fighter.
P-38 Lightning and F-35 Lightning II. Photo: U.S. Air Force.
Lightning II
Lockheed Martin has chosen to name the F-35 in honour of the P-38 Lightning from World War II and British English Electric Lightning from the 50's. The P-38 was developed by Lockheed for the U.S. Army Air Corps, but was also used by the British RAF and the Free French Air Force.
In the period from 1941 to 1945, Lockheed produced more than ten thousand aircraft of this type. P-38 was used for various missions, including air raids, ground attacks, photo reconnaissance and escort of other aircrafts. P-38 Lightning was a very fast aircraft, significantly faster than the Spitfire, and had a top speed of over 700 kilometres per hour.
Lightning was also well armed. A 20 millimetre cannon and four 12.7 mm machine guns made the plane effective against both ground targets and enemy aircrafts. The P-38 could also carry four rocket launchers or different types of bombs.
P-38 Lightning has two engines, and is very unlike F-35 Lightning II, but the P-38 was a success for the U.S. Army Air Corps and Lockheed. Similarly, Lockheed Martin hopes that F-35 Lightning II will be a success for themselves and their customers.
English Electric Lightning was a supersonic jet, which was known for its high speed. Lightning was the first jet that could “super cruise", meaning that it could fly faster than the speed of sound without having to use the afterburners. Usually, fighters must use afterburners to come up in such a high speed. The disadvantage is that fuel consumption is very high when the afterburners are in use.
English Electric Lightning was built as an interceptor which should shoot down Soviet fighter- and bomber aircraft. It had an extremely good climbing ability, which is a good feature when you're up to intercept hostile intruders. Lightning managed to climb 50,000 feet per minute (at sea level), 15-20,000 feet more than Mirage and MiG managed on the time.
Five generations
F-35 is a breakthrough in fighter technology. Not so much for its speed and manoeuvrability, but more as a result of a combination of stealth, smart sensors, overview presentations on the pilots screens, as well as the weapons bay. By carrying their weapons inside the belly, the plane will be more difficult to detect on radar. This will also give the aircraft less drag. This has great significance for the range of the aircraft - which is significantly longer than the F-16.
Stealth alone does not make the F-35 Lightning II to a fifth generation fighter. The highly developed electronics are just as important. All the sensors, computers and advanced systems make a difference between F-22 and F-35 from other previously produced fighters.
Today there are only these two planes that are considered to be fifth generation fighters. But there are more on its way. The Indians are developing a plane they call the Medium Combat Aircraft, a fighter with two engines, stealth capacity and weapons bay in the belly. The aircraft is still far away from the maiden flight. Also China and South Korea have started with their own projects.
The Russians are working to get their first fifth generation fighter in the air. PAK-FA, also called T-50, shall replace the MiG-29 Fulcrum and Su-27 Flanker. The first test flight was delayed a few times, but was performed the 29.th of January 2010.
Fighter aircrafts have had an extreme development since the first jet was in the air 70 years ago. The development has been divided into marked steps; therefore it was decided to split it into five generations - so far. What will be the sixth generation, one can only guess. It is not even certain the next generation of fighter aircrafts carry any pilots. Unmanned fighters are not sixth generation by itself; it must through a greater development than to take away the pilot. On the other hand, one should not disregard the fact that so-called "black projects" are underway to develop the next generation of fighter aircraft in the utmost secrecy.
Messerschmitt 262. Photo: Wikipedia.
First generation
In the '30s, Sir Frank Whittle from UK developed the first jet engine that was suitable for flight. The German Dr. Pabst von Ohain developed at the same time - and completely independent of Whittle, his own jet engine. Whittle was the first to get a patent on his construction in 1930. Ohain received his patent in 1936, but was on the other hand the first to get the engine up in the air. On the 27.th of August 1939, the German jet engine was tested on board a Heinkel He 178. Whittle got his jet engine up in the air for the first time on the 15.th of May 1941. The plane was a Gloster E.28/39.
The jet engine provided many advantages over piston engine; fewer moving parts, high speed and the ability to fly significantly higher than what had previously been possible. Engine power is huge relative to the engine's weight. A jet engine does also use a simpler type of fuel which is less flammable than the piston engine.
First generation fighter jets are the ones that were built in the period from World War II too the Korean War. The aircrafts failed to break the sound barrier even though they were equipped with jet engines, and they were usually equipped with guns to shoot down other planes. These fighters came only to a limited extent in combat during World War II.
It was built a large number of fighter jets during World War II, not least the Messerschmitt Me 262. Many people are surprised when they learn how many jets that were actually in service. Nazi Germany built 1400 jet aircrafts of this type, but the Me 262 was not exploited fully. Hitler was very reluctant to let the jets into battle. Germany had four different jet-and rocket-propelled aircrafts in service during the war. All together, the Germans built around 2500 copies of these aircrafts.
The British had two jets in service before the war ended. Gloster Meteor came into service in the summer of 1944, while the de Havilland DH 100 Vampire came into service in April 1945. Meteor was on missions in Germany, but didn’t ever get into air combat. The Vampire did not join the war against Nazism, but was the first jet to be used on aircraft carriers.
The Americans were a bit later with their first jet aircraft. Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star (which changed its name to F-80) was completed in 1944, but was not used during World War II. This aircraft made itself famous during the Korean War a few years later, where it was in combat for the first time.
On the 8.th of November 1950, Lt. Russell J. Brown and his F-80 came in to air combat with two MiG-15s over Korea. MiG-15 was considered to be superior to the American fighter planes during the first years of the Korean War. Brown won the first ever air combat between jets.
Sweden was pioneering in the West with the use of arrow-shaped wings on their jet. Saab J 29 Tunnan was on the height with the MiG 15 and F-86.
Second generation
From the mid 50’s to early 60’s there was a period when the jetfighters were under a huge development. At that period, the afterburners were introduced, and the first fighter planes broke the sound barrier. The aircrafts underwent a major development in aerodynamics, engine technology and electronics. Aircraft manufacturers began to experiment with new aircraft design, such as different angles of the wings (delta wings and arrow formed wings).
Around 1960, the radar technology had come so far that they could equip the aircraft with effective, small radars. It was radar aboard aircrafts prior to this also, but of poorer quality. Radars made it possible to detect aircrafts that were outside visual range, and the pilot was able to fire missiles on longer distances than before.
The fear of a possible World War III contributed to the development of specialized aircrafts that should solve different types of missions, one of which was to rule the skies. Specialized fighter aircrafts should shoot down other planes. Air-to-air missiles were part of the arsenal on board. Heat seeking missiles were common, and the missiles began to take over as the primary weapons in air combat. Close air combat aircraft against aircraft was devalued because it was believed that the guided missiles would replace the guns, and it was assumed that air combat would take place against aircrafts outside the visual range. Several of this generation's jet fighters was equipped with powerful radar and armed with missiles.
Designers assumed that the manoeuvrability was no longer so important. Therefore, they sacrificed it to achieve high speed, the ability to fly at high altitude, and the ability to climb quickly. The main task was to shoot down other planes, not least strategic bombers that operated at the high altitude.
Fighter aircrafts should also fill the role of fighter bombers. These planes could switch between ground attack and air combat, and was designed to fly fast. The first air-to-ground missiles that were controlled by the TV-and IR-seekers were eventually on the market, and supplemented conventional bombs. Some fighter bombers were developed in order to participate in a nuclear war, and were equipped to drop nuclear weapons.
The two Swedish fighter aircrafts Saab 32 Lansen and Saab 35 Draken was among the second generation of fighter aircrafts, together with fighters like the British Hawker Hunter and North American F-100 Super Sabre. Lockheed F-104 Starfighter was a modern aircraft, but there were many who meant it was difficult to fly. West Germany had 916 Starfighters in service, 292 of them crashed.
F-104 was the epoch-making as the first fighter with inertial navigation and mono-pulse radar. The radar made it possible to follow terrain, map reading and the opportunity to deliver air-to-ground weapons without the need to see the target. The Starfighter could also be used to drop nuclear weapons.
Third generation
Most of the fighters that were produced in the 60's are a part of the third generation fighters. This period was a refinement of the second generation. What was good on the older planes were done even better on the new. Manoeuvrability was given great importance, and aircraft manufacturer developed new methods to make the aircraft more suitable for close air combat.
Missiles, radar systems and other electronics were developed further. Radars became more sophisticated and missiles got greater range. In the 60s, the computer-controlled interceptions got possible. The radar on board intercepted enemy aircraft at long distances, and could follow the enemy automatically using the autopilot. The equipment brought the fighter into a position where it could attack the enemy. At the same time, the electronic countermeasures were developed to be so good that it was difficult to hit the enemy with missiles. Electronic jamming devices were made to confuse the seekers on the missiles.
The fighters were also made even better suited in air-to-ground role. Guided missiles and improved electronics helped to make the aircraft more suitable against ground targets. General Dynamics developed the F-111 with its terrain following radar. The F-111 could fly at high speed at low altitude using radar and autopilot.
Precision strike against ground targets was possible with laser-guided bombs in the 60's. The bombs were guided from targeting systems which were mounted below the aircraft. The technology is from the 60’s, and was first used during the Vietnam War in 1968. It was during the 1991 Gulf War that media got the eyes on these "smart" bombs.
Saab 37 Viggen, MiG-25 Foxbat, McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom and Northrop F-5 Freedom Fighter are among the third generation fighter aircraft.
Fourth Generation
This generation goes from 1970 to mid-90. The different generation classifications are fluent in the same manner as aircraft manufacturers developed the fighters independently. The development had certain features in common. One of the common features for fourth-generation fighters was doing most aircraft more suited to solve several different tasks, so-called multirole. Multirole means that the fighter should be able to perform two or more tasks like air combat, ground attacks, bombing raids and surveillance.
In the 80’s, an infrared search and track system (IRST) was more common. IRST is a system which can detect and track objects that emit infrared radiation, such as airplanes and helicopters, but also cars and people. Infrared (IR) radiation is electromagnetic radiation that is outside the spectrum the human eye perceives. Heat sources emit infrared radiation.
Aircraft designers emphasized high manoeuvrability more than ever. They designed the fighter aircrafts to be aerodynamically unstable. F-16 is the first fighter that was designed in this way, and is unstable around the axis which is controlled by the elevator. F-16 is completely dependent on computers to keep the plane stable. If the computers stop working, the pilot will lose control of the aircraft.
F-16 was completely dependent on electronics and electrical wires to transmit control signals from the pilot to the control surfaces. Previously, they used steel wire and rods to control aircrafts. Electronic transmission of control signals were common in several fighter aircraft, and were eventually put to use in civil aviation.
Aircraft designers also collected several of the most important switches to the stick and throttle. Weapons systems, radio equipment and engine adjustments could now be controlled from one of the two handles. The pilot did not have to move his hands and eyes around the cockpit, and had more energy to monitor what ever happened outside of the aircraft, which gave a better tactical view.
Fighters from the fourth generation had a greater focus on simpler maintenance. The aircrafts were technically complex, but they were easier to maintain. Former jets could require up to 50 hours of maintenance for every hour the plane was in the air. The fourth generation was able to cut down on maintenance hours. Some aircrafts could make it with less than ten hours of maintenance per flying hours, which reduced the total cost and increased the efficiency.
Typical fourth generation fighters is the French Dassault Mirage 2000, Soviet Mikoyan MiG-29 Fulcrum, British Panavia Tornado and U.S. F-15 Eagle.
The Russian Sukhoi 35 is a fighter of the mid-generation. Photo: Sukhoi.
4.5 generation
The end of the Cold War decelerated the military development. Most countries conducted heavy cuts in defence budgets, and the military industry entered a period of crisis. Customers stalled, and purchases that were made were small in relation to the former. Research on new technology was either slowed sharply up or cancelled.
Developments in computer technology accelerated greatly during the 90's. Research that should end up as fifth-generation fighters went into something in between fourth-and fifth-generation aircraft. In several cases, like the F-16 and MiG-29, the hull was very much the same, but much of the electronics were renewed. In other cases, it was built new aircrafts that were so similar fourth-generation aircrafts that they came in this category, such as the Swedish JAS 39 Gripen, the French Dassault Rafale and the Eurofighter Typhoon.
This generation got advanced digital electronics, integrated weapons systems, and ability to transfer information between aircraft and other units via data link. They also got GPS-guided weapons and more advanced support systems for the pilot, such as helmet-mounted aiming. The fighters were also more modern through the use of composite materials, which make planes lighter. It gave the opportunity to bring more fuel or weapons. Several of the fighters were also made difficult to detect on radar or with infrared seekers. But they were not stealthy.
Fifth Generation
It was Lockheed Martin and Boeing who were the first to introduce the fifth generation fighter with the F-22 Raptor. This is the only fifth generation fighter in service, but the F-35 Lightning II and the Russian PAK-FA are on their way. Several countries, like India, China and South Korea, are about to develop aircrafts that will come into this category. Their projects are somewhat longer into the future.
Fifth generation fighters are designed from the beginning to take part in a computer network where information exchange between aircraft, ground- and sea forces is in the centre. The aircrafts has an advanced "sensor fusion" where the information from all sensors are processed and presented together for the pilot. This generation is characterized also by the fact that the aircraft is extremely difficult to see on radar, they have a low infrared signature from the engines - they are what are called stealth aircraft. The fifth generation fighters use a new type of radar with a revolutionary technology in relation to the traditional radar.
The modern electronics in combination with the low radar signature makes these aircrafts to be the first to see the enemy, the first to shoot and the first to kill. This generation has all the modern electronics that customers can afford to buy. All possibilities are open, but the price tag is related to what you want. Development costs of the fifth generation fighter aircrafts are so high that fewer and fewer aircraft builders are able to hang with. They are totally dependent on getting the production up in a high number to spread the costs out on as many aircrafts as possible.
The Boeing X-32 (left) and the Lockheed Martin X-35. Photo: Lockheed Martin.
The Joint Strike Fighter program
The Cold War was barely over and the F-16 Fighting Falcon was still a young aircraft when the U.S. government began to see how its successor should look like. A number of project teams considered different types of aircrafts that would solve various tasks for the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy and U.S. Marines, three branches with different requirements for fighter aircraft.
In 1983, the Americans began to look at an advanced successor to the Harrier, a plane that is used by U.S. Marines, British RAF, Royal Navy and several other forces. Four years later, it became clear that technological developments had not come far enough to make a satisfactory replacement for this plane. The Lockheed Skunk Works department had in deepest secrecy investigated the possibility to build a fighter plane that could take off and land vertically, and which could fly over the speed of sound. Skunk Works concluded that it is possible to build such a plane, and the concept was renamed Advanced Short Take-Off / Vertical Landing (ASTOVL).
In 1983, the Navy began to look for a plane that could replace A-6 Intruder. They wanted a long-range aircraft, which was difficult to detect on radar and could carry large weapons load. In 1988, McDonnell Douglas and General Dynamics were selected to develop the A-12 Avenger II, a flying wing that could take off with twice as high take-off weight as F-16. Technical problems and budget crack got the authorities to cancel the project in 1991.
U.S. Navy established another project to look at possible new fighters in the early 80's. This group evaluated a larger and heavier twin-engine jet aircraft to replace F-14 Tomcat. This project joined with a group from U.S. Air Force, and ended up building F-22 Raptor. U.S. Navy considered to replace the F-14 with F-22 on their aircraft carriers, but this was abandoned.
The A-12 Avenger was one of several fighter projects considered during the 80`s and 90`s. Illustration: U.S. Navy.
U.S. Navy launched a new project after the A-12, and the replacement for F-14 was cancelled. Advanced Attack / Fighter program wanted a plane that could solve several tasks, have a long range, be difficult to detect on radar, and that would be equipped with advanced electronic systems. Also, U.S. Air Force attended this project, because they wanted to find a replacement to the F-111. In 1993, this project was cancelled.
In the early 90's, another group was considering how the successor to the F-16 would look like. Multi-Role Fighter program should develop a plane that was affordable in price. At the same time, the plane should be manufactured in the same size as the F-16. The new aircraft should cost somewhere between 35 and 50 million dollars, and was intended as a replacement for A-10 and F/A-18, as well as F-16.
The end of the Cold War got new weapons projects to a halt. Defence budgets were cut sharply down, and the military had to use the existing weapon systems for many years to come. The aircrafts were used less and got fewer hours in the air, which increased their life and reduced the need for replacements. In 1992, the Multi-Role Fighter program was put on ice.
In 1993, the "Joint Advanced Strike Technology” (JAST) program was established to develop a new aircraft for both U.S. Navy and U.S. Air Force. This program was merged with the project who worked on the successor to the Harrier (ASTOVL) in 1995, and Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) was thus created. The experience from the previous projects helped in their own way to the development of what today's F-35 Lightning II.
Four years of development and testing
In March 1996, the aircraft manufacturer McDonnell Douglas, Boeing and Lockheed Martin were invited to submit their own proposals for the design solution for a new fighter. Already in November the same year, McDonnell Douglas fell out of the competition, while Boeing and Lockheed Martin received a contract to build two aircrafts each. One of the planes was to use ordinary runways, while the other plane should land vertically like a Harrier (STOVL).
The aircrafts was not intended as prototypes, they should demonstrate that the concept was possible; therefore, they had the X-terms. Boeing aircraft was awarded the designation X-32, while Lockheed Martin was given the designation X-35.
Boeing's STOVL-version has a jet engine that is very similar to the engine on board the Harrier. During vertical landing, most of the thrust came from two jet nozzles in the centre of the engine. The Jet nozzle behind the engine was shut down, while a nozzle under each wing kept the plane in balance. Two nozzles in front and two nozzles behind balanced the plane in the longitudinal direction.
Lockheed Martin mounted a large fan behind the cockpit. The fan is driven by the jet engine, and provides lift together with the jet stream from the jet engine. A ”Three Bearing Swivel Module" (3BSM) was mounted at the rear of the jet engine, and allowed the main engine exhaust to be deflected downward at the tail of the aircraft. The X-35 is lifted on two main jet streams. Also X-35 has nozzles out on the wing to balance the plane around the longitudinal axis.
In September 2000, the X-32 flew its first test flight; one month before the X-35 made its maiden flight. All four aircrafts went through a series of tests during the test period of almost a year, including simulated landings on aircraft carrier. The planes never landed on aircraft carriers, but conducted simulations on ordinary runways. In March 2001, the Boeing STOVL version lifted for the first time, also this time Boeing won by a head upon Lockheed Martin.
All the test flights were performed in July 1991, and the required data was forwarded to the U.S. authorities for evaluation. Four years of intensive development work had come to an end. Now it was up to authorities to decide who should continue to develop the fighter of the future.
The 26.th of October 2001, it became known that the industrial group led by Lockheed Martin won the contract for System Development and Demonstration, awarding them to produce the Joint Strike Fighter. Over the next ten years they would develop the X-35 to end up as the F-35. This phase is called the "System Development and Demonstration Phase” (SDD).
The X-32B did not manage to take off from a short runway, accelerate to supersonic speed and then land vertically. The aircraft was simply too heavy. X-32B managed to take off from a short runway and accelerate over the sound barrier, but they did not land vertically on the same flight. When Boeing conducted their vertical landing, they took off the air intake and the wheel well doors to reduce the weight.
X-32 and X-35 was not built exactly like the expected final result, the test aircrafts should demonstrate that the project was possible. Therefore, you will find many differences between the X-35 and F-35. Here`s a few differences:
There is only one large door on the nose wheel well on the first aircrafts – this is changed to two small doors, because one large door makes the aircraft more vulnerable to strong cross wind on takeoff and landing.
X-35B has two doors on each side of the lift fan behind the cockpit – on the F-35B, the two doors are replaced with a single door that is hinged rear and opened in front of the speed direction.
F-35B was extended by a few inches in height and length as well as the plane got 60 inches wider wingspan than the X-35B. That gave more space for electronics, sensors and fuel.
Air intake on the F-35 was redesigned and pulled back slightly relative to the X-35 to save weight and costs. This change did also improve the performance during manoeuvres at high angle of attack.
During the SDD-period, F-35's technical and electronic systems are tested and further developed into a finished product. Lockheed Martin received a contract to build 22 test planes, but the number is later reduced to 19. 13 of these planes will conduct flight tests; six shall be used for various tests on the ground. In addition, several converted aircrafts, like a Boeing 737, are used for various tests. It is planned to fly 5000 test flights for a total of 10,000 flight hours.
Development and production of military aircrafts is a very extensive process that involves research on new radars, communications equipment, cockpit, engines and so on. At the same time, the aircraft manufacturers are planning and developing the production lines with specialized machines and tools. F-35 gets a lot of benefits from the Raptor. Some of the technology that was developed to produce F-22 can also be used during the production of Lightning II, which helps to reduce costs. Development of the F-35 is scheduled for the period 2001 to 2014. At that time, Lockheed Martin expects that they have saved five years by developing in parallel with the production.
F-35 is the first fighter that is produced by the same principles as assembly line production of cars. Usually fighters are produced by handicraft traditions. The production is done with digital equipment so that the accuracy is greater, and allows the parts fit better together. Assembly line production contributes to bring down production costs.
Development and production of civil aircraft are also time-consuming: it took 16 years from Airbus decided to produce the A380 to the first plane was delivered to the customer. Development time is even longer if one counts the time Airbus spent on market studies and other reviews.
Also, simulators and training programs for pilots and mechanics must be developed while the aircraft is developed. Today, test pilots fly the plane in a fairly realistic simulator long before the first plane is completed. They can test out a number of systems in the simulator, and the engineers can correct obvious errors. Some years ago, they had to fly the aircraft to find the same errors. Test Pilots do also use converted aircrafts to test planned systems. For instance, Lockheed Martin has used a two-seater F-16 where the cockpit in front was built like the cockpit of an F-35.
Development of fighter aircrafts involve specialists as engineers, scientists and mathematicians who must have expertise in areas such as aerodynamics, engines, structures, materials, control systems, electronics, weapons systems, performance, human factors, weight and balance, production and finance. They do not have to invent all the functions while developing a new aircraft, but the engineers must develop a plane that solves the tasks the new fighter is intended to do.
Lockheed Martin is leading the aerospace industry team that is to develop and produce the F-35. Illustration: Lockheed Martin.
International cooperation
Lockheed Martin does not develop the JSF all by themselves. They lead a major industry group which develop and build the aircraft to a potential value of 300 billion dollars. The American Northrop Grumman and the British BAE Systems are Lockheed Martin's two largest partners. These three manufacturers have a number of subcontractors, including the Norwegian Kongsberg Gruppen.
Pratt & Whitney has developed and manufactures the jet engine F135. General Electric and Rolls-Royce are developing a competing engine called F136. It shall be possible to use both engines on the same F-35, which is not possible on the F-16. Here the customers have to decide in advance which engine they want for the whole lifetime. Volvo Aero Norway supplies parts to both engines.
British BAE Systems give the JSF-program a lot of expertise in STOVL operations, and shall contribute during the test flights of the aircraft. BAE shall also produce the rear part of the fuselage and tail section in addition to computers and electronic systems.
The Northrop Grumman Group comes to the table with great experience from aircraft carrier operations and stealth technology. They are to support the JSF- program with building the mid section of the fuselage, landing wheels, software and the radar.
Lockheed Martin owns the main responsibility for the project, making sure that the integration of all the sub deliveries are functioning in best manner possible. In addition, Lockheed Martin also produces the front part of the fuselage and wings, also responsible for the production of the main parts making it possible to conclude and finish the building and production of the aircraft JSF.
The Joint Strike Fighter Program is made reality by an international cooperation containing of eight different countries, the United States of America not amongst them. These countries are divided into three levels, considered and decided from the extent of the cooperation and contribution regarding the technical development.
As of right now, Great Britain is alone in being the only country owning a level 1 partnership. The British contributes with a significant amount of funding in the category of research and development, while the BAE-system is a highly important industrial partner to the JSF- program. Being Level 2 partners, Italy and Netherland contributes with high amounts of funding, Netherland also having ordered one aircraft for testing.
The Dutch hope to establish a base for general and heavy maintenance regarding the newest models of fighters, while Italy is establishing a manufacturing industry with the ability to assemble their own fighter jets. In addition, Italy is planning to offer maintenance and upgrading of fighters to other countries.
Canada, Turkey, Australia, Denmark and Norway are all level 3 partners, while Israel and Singapore are members of the so called Security Cooperative Participants. Well worth mentioning, Finland has expressed interest in buying an F-35 sometime after the year of 2020.
The American Government has been in contact with several countries with membership in NATO, in hopes of adding numerous new countries in the international cooperation. In the group of countries also having been invited into the cooperation, we find countries such as Germany, Greece, Spain and Poland. Other possible buyer countries are Emirates, India and South Korea.
All countries with membership in the project are welcome to take part in the process of developing and delivering products to JSF, however, this is dependent upon the prices being reliable in competition. Norway usually demands repurchase agreements before we undertake significant purchasing agreements. Those who want to sell equipment of defence to Norway have obliged themselves to buying products from Norwegian Industries as a favour of return.
In the JSF-program, the American Government has decided that there shall be no repurchase agreements in order to maintain low prices. The industrial cooperation is to be functioning by the principal of “best value”. This translates to the fact that the industry in membership countries, own the right and opportunity to bid on participation in part production of the aircraft. The cost of the product must find itself within the limitation of maximum cost, in addition to all the demands in quality have been met and found satisfying.
Repurchase agreements contribute in adding to the cost of the fighter, a fact that comes to cross with a fundamental philosophy; the F-35 shall be affordable. Instead of repurchase agreements, Lockheed Martin contributes in the development of technology and industrial competence. This cooperation has led to the fact that Norwegian Industry delivers parts to the production of the F-35.
Three different demands
F-35 is not built for air battle alone, today the F-15 and F-22 manages these roles. These two fighters are primarily developed to be superior when it comes to air combat; they are to challenge the leading air fighters around the world in the battle for domination in air combat. F-35`s assignment is to solve the duties the Raptor is not built to handle. This includes everything from air combat with smaller fighter jets, bomber aircrafts and helicopters to ground attack and attacks against naval targets. F-35 is meant to fill the role as a multirole aircraft, on a similar line as the F-16 owns today. The main duty for the F-35 is air-to-ground operations, all the while being superior in air combat.
The U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy and U.S. Marines did agree in taking part in the same air fighter project, however, they required three different demands regarding the aircraft. The three different branches of defence came to the table with extremely different point of departures, requirements and demands. For instance, the U.S. Air Force uses three kilometres long runways, not having to consider marginal flight operations. The U.S. Navy uses 330 meters long runways for their aircraft carriers, while the U.S. Marines are to primarily use the F-35B supporting their ground forces. The aircraft must be in the capacity of taking off at a short, improvised runway, all the while landing vertically. This example alone offers three very different conditions.
The missions they are to undertake and the aircrafts to be replaced, offers also a high level of variation. The U.S. Air Force is to primarily replace the Multi-Role Combat Aircraft, F-16, and the aircraft for ground attack, A-10, while the U.S. Navy is to replace earlier models of the Multi-Role Combat Aircraft F/A-18. However, they require quite special demands when the AV-8B Harrier is to be replaced. The U.S. Marines are demanding that this aircraft will be able to land vertically, in the same manner as a helicopter.
The Joint Strike Fighter Program therefore developed three different aircrafts with each of their exclusive abilities, the planes however owning mainly similar fuselages and electronics. In order to pin out the differences between these three airplanes, one have to own a sharp eye for details, and for the pilots, the practical differences are none. A condition for the JSF-program has been that the cost of the F-35 is to be affordable. JSF stands out from earlier air fighter programs as their focus on economy and budget has been rather extreme, very unlike the earlier projects in the field of aircrafts. For that reason, the three different versions of the F-35 are to be developed and equipped as similar as possible, as far as the process is manageable.
The U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy and The U.S. Marines found agreement in a line of elements that should experience joint similarities within the three versions; for example that every version should own the capacity of stealth, also worth mentioning owning the same engine and the capacity to exchange data with one another and outside military units.
70 to 90 percent of all composites to the three versions are either to be similar or in family with each other. This meaning that the parts will be produced on the same machines with no need of changing much of the adjustments. When an A-model is to be produced, one is to adjust the machine to “A”, place the raw material into it and the machine will then adjust the A-model in the areas where it is distinct from the other models.
The three branches of defence own a handful of different operative demands to the new aircraft, for instance regarding its range. The U.S. Marines operate close to the ground forces, and manage without the amount of fuel needed by the U.S. Navy, them placing their aircraft carriers together with their support vessels further away from mainland. They agree on how many weapon stations the aircraft own under its wings, but share not the similar need for fixed armament. In almost alike manner, the different parties agree on wanting the air fighter reaching a capacity in flight up to 1, 6 times the speed of sound. On the other side, they all uttered different demands concerning the manoeuvring abilities regarding the aircraft. The U.S. Air Force wants a fighter jet capable of pulling 9G, G being an expression for the strains experienced when exposed for sudden manoeuvres. All the while, the U.S. Navy is content with 7,5G, the U.S. Marines limiting themselves to 7G. The aircraft`s tolerance for G is of significant matter when it comes to the ability to manoeuvre the aircraft in air combat, while an aircraft built to manage the 9G, naturally experience an higher level of cost in producing and maintenance, compared to an airplane only managing 7G.
Dismal calculations
Today there are 25 countries around the world operating the F-16, new members being added temporarily. Still in production, the Fighting Falcon still undergoes ongoing development for new customers. The F-16 Block 60 is a version that clearly has undertaken changes compared to earlier versions of self. The Block 60 was developed for use in the Arabic Emirates, and owns among other things new fuel tanks assembled on the over side of the fuselage. With the tanks assembled the figure of the plane looks square in its appearance. The F- 16 Block 60 owns a more advanced technology than the earlier version was equipped with.
Some might say that most budget friendly solution would be to replace the elder versions of F-16 with newer versions of the same type of aircraft. However, the United States no longer purchase the F-16 for use in their departments, and the new aircrafts are only being purchased by buyers on the international market. USA plans of facing the challenges of the future with brand new technology. New versions of the F-16, is a ongoing development of the technology created in the 70`s, and will for instance prove just as easy to discover on radar as the earlier models made possible.
One of the goals undertaken by the JSF-program is being able to offer old and regular customers a new model of the air fighter, within a price that is affordable. The market of countries wanting to renew their aircrafts, are comparatively in growth. As this market holds great importance for American politics, industry, employment and economy, the United States aims to keep their control and superiority on the market.
This time around, the Americans have been more aware of the economical costs than on earlier occasions, in knowledge of the fact that the military costs experiences a growth that hugely exceed the economy of the society in general. Some have calculated that the drastic rise in cost experienced in the 70`s, will lead to the entire American gross natural product in the year of 2150, will be necessary in order to afford buying one single fighter.
Calculations were so dismal that the military industry for aircrafts was forced to renew their thinking. The markets around the world cannot afford buying as many fighters as occurred after the Second World War. There existed seven times as many fighters in the year of 1950 in comparison to 1980. All the while, we witness that the number of years the aircrafts function in active duty, are increasing. During the Vietnam War, the average age of military aircrafts found itself being nine years, while today this age has climbed to being twenty four. The Norwegian air fighters will pass the age of thirty in 2010, none the less expected to function in duty for another ten years.
The development of the technical advanced electronics stands for the highest costs in developing an air fighter, the fuselage alone standing for a continuous lesser share of the cost in total. At the same time, only a few years down the line, today`s electronic will be found old fashioned and wanting, then to be replaced by new and more advanced technology. The development in costs makes necessary the production having to increase in volume in order to decrease the total cost of one unit being produced. This fact serves in favour of the largest and most central aerospace producers, such as the American Lockheed Martin, ahead of smaller manufacturers of aircrafts, such as the Swedish Saab, probable to experience a fewer number of advantages. The battle of harvesting customers is sure to harden during the coming years, until the western world finds itself with only two manufacturers of aircrafts left competing.
The JSF are therefore developed in usage for three unique versions of the F-35 that is to solve comparatively similar missions, most of the composites also being similar. The composites experiencing similarity are first and foremost those being very high in cost to produce, in this way making it possible to share the cost of development on as many individual aircrafts as manageable. Former Secretary of Defence, William Cohen, claimed that the cooperation between the three branches of armour would mean a decreasing in cost of about 15 billion dollars, compared to the cost of developing three different models of new air fighters.