General Category > Unofficial F/A-18 Acceleration Pack board
Dino Cattaneo F-14/T-45/F-35 News Update
SpazSinbad:
The problem with the old USN electronic landing equipment is that it is not designed to work with the F-35. For example the F-35 Low Observable design does not allow good radar contacts, especially for precision approaches. Until JPALS comes along the F-35s will require radar reflectors to operate in civilian airspace. JPALS will work everywhere eventually, with land, sea and civilian including portable installations for USMC / USAF forward base uses. JPALS will provide a secure system especially with stand alone features for CVN / LHA use at sea when in a hostile electronic environment; and when any satellite support may not be available (the ship will provide the reference data). JPALS suitable equipment will be fitted to any aircraft likely to be operating in a few years time, including the F-35 of course. I'll post a small PDF about JPALS on SkyDrive soon.
JamesChams:
--- Quote from: SpazSinbad on March 20, 2013, 11:52:18 pm ---The problem with the old USN electronic landing equipment is that it is not designed to work with the F-35. For example the F-35 Low Observable design does not allow good radar contacts, especially for precision approaches.
Until JPALS comes along the F-35s will require radar reflectors to operate in civilian airspace.
--- End quote ---
No, I don't know if you fully understand how this works in the real world (due in-part to professional online PDF's by agencies requiring technical knowledge by the reader, which isn't clear to the general public, who are NOT in the business of aviation). So, please allow me to briefly explain in general terms if you want to know... (As I'm fairly certain that LM is certainly NOT going to put radar reflectors on the JSF for ACLS or JPALS to work).
1. For shipboard operations the radar returns from the ships ACLS would be absorbed by the F-35's RAM (radar absorbent materials - it's stealth stuff) which would render the systems effectiveness near useless. The onboard ships radar system requires an accurate return to judge slant distance for accurate guidance calculations from the guidance computer to land the vehicle accurately and safely on board. That is the ONLY way that it operates today, and since the F-35's physical structure cannot grant it that, the two are NOT compatible.
2. In controlled civilian air spaces (Class A, B, C, D, (F (Europe & else where but NOT in the U.S.)) - but NOT E or G which are uncontrolled), RADAR is NOT strictly needed for safe ATC aircraft separation guidance & clearance requirements (specifically for military aircraft), but a MODE-C Transponder IS (Class A, B, & C is required) & 2-way radio com's when operating in Class A, B, C, & D airspaces. ATC TRACON or other ground radar systems use this unit which transmit a unique identifier code along with Alt./ Spd. / other info., while in the air, which are both sent & received by ground ARTCC's radar and provided for TCAS I / II, TIS, and others such systems that pick up these needed info. for traffic separation. But are NOT needed for GPS guided approaches or TACAN/VOR/DME & ILS/MLS systems to work which are radio transmitters and NOT RADAR based systems. These systems already work in the F-35 in-order for it to obtain the FAA's Air Worthiness Certification, etc. so JPALS wouldn't need to work with these systems in any way, except if coupled with them for shipboard operations & at military bases/training areas.
3. Also, specifically here in the U.S. there are strict altitude restrictions for Military aircraft in the cruise at altitudes that differ than civilian traffic and even within "Hot" MOA's & prohibited areas. So the need for JPALS in the civilian world is necessitated by the debate of cost & function but I personally don't see a need for it with current GPS guided AUTOPILOT Landing system that are extremely accurate in many of today's aircraft and DON'T require a new & costly JPALS to operate.
--- Quote ---JPALS will work everywhere eventually, with land, sea and civilian including portable installations for USMC / USAF forward base uses. JPALS will provide a secure system especially with stand alone features for CVN / LHA use at sea when in a hostile electronic environment; and when any satellite support may not be available (the ship will provide the reference data). JPALS suitable equipment will be fitted to any aircraft likely to be operating in a few years time, including the F-35 of course. I'll post a small PDF about JPALS on SkyDrive soon.
--- End quote ---
That might be true in certain location but unverified whether it is necessitated for global use as a whole specifically within joint civilian/military facilities.
But while this may be interesting, this is still an FS forum and I'm pretty sure that Dino's JSF won't necessarily need JPALS written gauges integrated into his models as it is not implemented at all in FS; at least not yet. LM's P3D may or may-not include it in their professional releases to Military clients but I CANNOT say for sure, I make NO claims to know what they do with P3D and will NOT speculate.
Happy Sim'ing, Later!
SpazSinbad:
'JamesChams' thanks for the explanation but if you reread the sentence of mine - that you highlighted - you will note there is no requirement for your subsequent statement: "As I'm fairly certain that LM is certainly NOT going to put radar reflectors on the JSF for ACLS or JPALS to work." Why? Because I did not say that at all and was generalising in a very broad way, thinking that at some point a PDF with further explanation would become available for any interested readers here.
Subsequently your detailed explanations about controlled airspace and the like seem reasonable. So thanks - I'll take some time to get the PDF together which will be about the USN and Allies use of JPALS in a military environment. And my initial response was to the earlier statement by 'SUBS17': "... I can't believe it did not already have ACLS like the Hornet."
You will note my first post was about the 'new ways' that the F-35 B/Cs will bring to NavAv (without mentioning JPALS) for the potential interest of the readers here. How it becomes relevant to FSX users of the F-35 family I don't really know. Some smart people may figure out something - but not me. :D
SpazSinbad:
SpazSinbad SkyDrive Page: https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=cbcd63d6340707e6&sa=822839791
FOLDER: "JPALS & F-35B+C Deck Land Info"
OOPs I notice that this looonnggg URL is broken at the ! so the entire string must be copy/pasted into your browser:
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=CBCD63D6340707E6&id=CBCD63D6340707E6!1380#cid=CBCD63D6340707E6&id=CBCD63D6340707E6!1416
PDF: "JPALSinfo21mar2013.pdf" 43Mb
________________
A lot of this information is on the F-35 forum at F-16.net specifically a lot of JPALS stuff on this thread:
EMALS & JPALS for the JSF
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-14115.html
There are other threads specifically about CVF and SRVL and what not but a lot of info is consolidated in the PDF mentioned above. The info is provided as is and you will have to make an effort to make sense of it as required. Come on over to F-16.net to the F-35 forum. However I consider this info relevant to the FSX Accelerator F-35B/C experience as is.
________________
Addition: On previous page post about SRVV Ship Referenced Velocity Vector approach possibilities there is now a graphic from a USN LSO Newsletter.
SUBS17:
There should be no need for radar reflectors anyway as the aircraft is visible on radar the moment the gear is down.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version