No, sir. The missile is so big the F-35 will have to be integrated to Brahmos. Then Brahmos will carry two F-35s.
Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
No, sir. The missile is so big the F-35 will have to be integrated to Brahmos. Then Brahmos will carry two F-35s.
Please ignore anything randomradio says. He's clueless and makes things up.
The F-35 has indigenous UK and Isralie missiles. You pay the cost of fitting and testing . Like everyone else, you won't get the F-35 source codes.
Depending on what you want it to do. It may be like the Israeli EW pod and plug and play. So you can change the missile data.
The F-35 has 2x 5,000lb hard points. The BrahMos-NG weighs 3,300lb
Last edited:
This is exactly what I wanted to know. Without this, F35 can't be used to it's maximum potential, the same issue Indians are having with Rafale. A very potent aircraft but restricted to go full potential, some how Indians managed. I am not sure, if the French Airforce has access to Rafale source code or it is patent property of Dassault Aviation. Plagiarism is a very serious matter in the west.
Brahmos NG could be perhaps fitted also the Brahmos 2. Point is every time you need to ask them to fit the weapons
How does not having the source codes stop you? Do you or app developers have Microsoft source codes to windows? Does this really affect the use of your computer? It's plug and play.
Dassult, like everyone else has control of their source codes. The French air force would work with Dassault for what they need.
As long as it doesn't corrupt the use of the F-35, you can have what you want fitted or if needed plug and play.
You have mission system reprogramming labs. Where you do your own threat library, etc.
The F-35 PSC provides the capability to program, test and field F-35 Mission Data for Partner Nation and FMS customers. The PSC develops, operates, and maintains state-of-the-art F-35 hardware-in-the-loop MD Verification and Validation labs. The PSC aids in developing Modeling and simulation capability for F-35 MD testing. The PSC also provides help developing a systems engineering approach to MD and tools for the F-35 reprogramming enterprise.
Last edited:
Any app will not have access to the Kernel. Any new hardware installation with a different data link or a unique digital signal processing requires access to Kernel so that a new device type can be added to the I/O. Let's say a new electronic pod which is based on some new OS and a new data link needs to be integrated with the mission computer, first it has to be defined in as new device in I/O management of Kernel.
Just by installing device drivers will not optimize the functionality of any new device, it is prone to bugs, because there is radar, and other sensors on board which are managed by the Kernel.
If a Brahmos NG, or any Russian or French electronic Pod needs to be integrated into F35, the programmers need to create an interface by studying the device, why would French or Russians allow Americans to do that. Then there is a deadlock.
So you/developers don't get the windows source codes, just plug and play kernels.
As I said, like Dassault, You would work with the JPO for changes. No one gets the source codes. UK and Israel worked to have their missiles included. i would think they wouldn't have given over the weapons source codes. just what is needed to have the aircraft and weapon talk to each other. There are also the new universal weapon connection stuff, I haven't followed that closely
Universal Armament Interface (UAI) ...[aka plug and play.]
Last edited:
Brahmos-A cannot be integrated on medium and light jets, only heavies. The 8.5 m length is too high for carriage on 15-17 m long jets.
Brahmos-NG can be integrated on the F-35, but it's a political hot potato 'cause the motor will be Russian, and the Americans are unlikely to allow it.
Considering the timeline of induction of the F-35, we will have an indigenous hypersonic ALCM by then. So no loss there.
You can only plug and play which is defined in kernel. Which is not defined can be plugged but can't be played. More over just like apple I phone adapter is not USB -C in US and but for EU it is USB-C. And only apple can do it, as they have access to the Kernel.
Seamless integration with imports is not possible without full access to source codes. But a significant amount can be achieved with some level of access.
The F-35I type access can allow us to integrate our own weapons and EW pods quite easily, and the modification already exists. They are unlikely to allow Astra though, basically any weapon that requires integration with the radar and other primary sensors. And in turn, we will not be allowed to integrate their BVRAAMs with our offboard sensors. We will have to use American, Israeli, or European BVRAAMs.
So the F-35 is not a workable solution for the IAF without Astra's integration.
Why would integrate Brahmos when F35 cannot carry that inside its weapon bay?
Mere 36 numbers,we have the audacity to ask for source code,buy rafale or f35 in numbers similar to MKI,you will get it.
As you know these things are the keys to the safe. France isn't going to give you the source codes to the Rafale, end of story. Even the partners in the FCAS, doesn't get Dassault's source codes either. They do get to pay Dassault to develop it. So they pay for it but don't get it.
I don't know where you want to go with this..Developers don't get the source code to windows. They get enough connection to work their apps.
You just make it up as you go.
Israel and UK have radar guided missiles fitted.
Your ignorance is well established. It's obvious direct US military allies will be treated differently.
Integration of BVRAAMs requires quite a bit of ToT. UK received some radar ToT for the F-35 as a Level 1 partner. The US helped Israel develop Derby and integrated the Derby for them.
If Astra is to be integrated, either we will need UK-level ToT so we can make the changes we want, or we will need to hand over the Astra's specs to the US.
Here's an example of MBDA with a stick up their *censored*.
Israeli radar means Tejas won’t have Meteor missile
Ruling out any possibility of the Israeli firm carrying out the integration, MBDA categorically stated: “No other mode of integration is possible and any other suggestion from third parties is misinformed.”
Then, in response to an IAF query whether the Meteor could be integrated onto the Uttam AESA radar the Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO) was developing, MBDA gave conditional acceptance on July 13, 2018. Writing to the deputy chief, MBDA wrote: “integration would be perfectly feasible [provided] this DRDO ‘UTTAM’ radar would need to be shown to be completely indigenous.”
Making its security concerns clear, MBDA wrote: “Security concerns (for all parties) over the implementation, architecture and day to day operation would need to be addressed [and] the 6 partner nations would need to obtain access to full working prototypes (of the Uttam radar) before progressing to the next stage.”
Yeah, so I bet the US won't allow the integration of Astra on the F-35.
You just live in a fantasy world. You aren't getting TOT. The US fits it for you. Or gives a plug and play option.Your ignorance is well established. It's obvious direct US military allies will be treated differently.
Integration of BVRAAMs requires quite a bit of ToT. UK received some radar ToT for the F-35 as a Level 1 partner. The US helped Israel develop Derby and integrated the Derby for them.
If Astra is to be integrated, either we will need UK-level ToT so we can make the changes we want, or we will need to hand over the Astra's specs to the US.
Here's an example of MBDA with a stick up their *censored*.
On May 29, 2018, MBDA wrote yet again to the IAF chief, stating: “As design authority and OEM (original equipment manufacturer) of the Meteor missile, we wish to confirm to you that integration of this missile can only be possible with a European radar and our proprietary data link.”Israeli radar means Tejas won’t have Meteor missile
www.ajaishukla.com
Ruling out any possibility of the Israeli firm carrying out the integration, MBDA categorically stated: “No other mode of integration is possible and any other suggestion from third parties is misinformed.”
Then, in response to an IAF query whether the Meteor could be integrated onto the Uttam AESA radar the Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO) was developing, MBDA gave conditional acceptance on July 13, 2018. Writing to the deputy chief, MBDA wrote: “integration would be perfectly feasible [provided] this DRDO ‘UTTAM’ radar would need to be shown to be completely indigenous.”
Making its security concerns clear, MBDA wrote: “Security concerns (for all parties) over the implementation, architecture and day to day operation would need to be addressed [and] the 6 partner nations would need to obtain access to full working prototypes (of the Uttam radar) before progressing to the next stage.”
Yeah, so I bet the US won't allow the integration of Astra on the F-35.
Now you want to throw in MBDA not being able to fit a meteor to just any platform, it has to have the ability to communicate.
It's understandable that you do not understand the article I posted. Nothing surprising there. Really.
Astra's datalink module is independent from Link 16 and MADL, so the F-35 needs to incorporate it into the aircraft. The mission computer needs to be uploaded with the missile's parameters and mid-course guidance algorithms and then integrate with the radar.
In order to protect Astra, the Indian team can create a black box. But to create the black box the US has to provide schematics for an interface which requires some ToT.
For the datalink, we need a translator, but the US doesn't work with others in this area as per CISMOA/COMCASA. Which means Astra will have to carry 2 datalinks, one that uses the Indian network and the other that can integrate with the F-35, fat chance of that happening.
What makes integration of Derby and Meteor easy is they use AMRAAM electricals and ejectors. And the UK, Italy, and Israel, apart from using American datalinks, all three already have high security clearance due to their deep access to AMRAAM tech. Astra is a unique missile with its own electricals and ejection system.
Finally, people forget that the F-35 is a closed architecture system compared to Rafale's open architecture. So it's a lot easier to integrate non-NATO weapons on Rafale than the F-35. The datalink incompatibility is where things end even before they start.
If the F-35 is bought, while we can use a few other weapons that do not need radar integration but will still require modifications, we are nevertheless going to get stuck with mostly American weapons.
Otoh, NGAD uses an open architecture, so it's a lot easier to integrate Indian weapons on it. So, NGAD or bust. The F-35 has no chance of being inducted in the IAF.
PS: This is too complex for you to understand, I wrote this post for the benefit of other readers so they don't get taken in by your jingoistic takes.
I don't think the US will sell it to you without jumping through a lot of hoops. Take the UAE and others that have been rejected.