Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Aerospace / Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Last post by SpudmanWP on Today at 01:46:37 pm »
Respectfully disagree.

That's ok.. I will try and comb through the last 15+ years of memories and dig up the specific references that say "why" there are multiple layers and their importance.

In the meantime, the basics are this:

On the F-22, all stealth layers were sprayed on.  They specifically had an issue with the 1st layer that was in direct contact with the skin (metal or composite).  IIRC That first layer had a problem with adhesion to the skin.  If that layer had an issue, then ALL the layers in the area had to be removed and reapplied, in order, with time in between to dry.  This process was obviously was not only time consuming, but also very expensive.

In the F-35 there are basically only two layers, the "baked in" ones that are part of the structure (and cannot thereby "peel off") and the sprayed on "final finish" that also contains the paint and TopCoat®.  This "Final Finish" may scratch but does not peel.  Even if scratched, the effect is negligible.

Here is a quote from the coatings test center where they basically made a doormat of the stuff, walked on it every day, and it was just fine.

Quote
SLD: In entering the facility, I noticed you have a “door mat” of stealth that’s been there for some time.  Can you comment on this “door mat?”

Bill Grant: Oh, the slab of stealth?  That’s our welcome mat.  Yes, we actually have one of the test panels that we use for assessing the stealth of the various materials.  It represents a stack-up that’s consistent with the upper surface or the outer surface of the jet.  It has the exact same structure and the primer and the topcoat system that you’ll find on the operational jets.  And that gets walked upon every time somebody comes in or out of our lab area out there, the repair development center.
Occasionally, we take it up to test to see if there’s any electrical or mechanical degradation to the system and with around 25,000 steps across that system we have not seen any degradation whatsoever.  So we have a great deal of confidence, however anecdotal that may be, that we have a very robust system.

The article as a whole is a good read on the F-35's stealth robustness.

https://web.archive.org/web/20150715003916/http://www.sldinfo.com/the-f-35-low-observable-repair-facility-a-unique-asset-for-21st-century-combat-aviation/


One final thing to keep in mind is that there are basically three kinds of "stealth" on the F-35: The baked in and sprayed on coatings, the "rubber" seals around doors that open during normal ops (gear, canopy, weapon bays, etc), and replaceable items like "putty" and "tape" that are used on panels that are opened infrequently (engine swaps, other access panels, etc).  The issue that the original claim came from may very well come from one of these other items and have nothing to do with the skin/coatings part of the F-35.
2
Aerospace / Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Last post by kcran567 on Today at 01:26:55 pm »
...
3
Aerospace / Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Last post by kcran567 on Today at 01:18:04 pm »
Yes i get the point...

As a previous post suggested, even with multiple scratches the F-35 will not become an B-52 sized radar reflector.

Size and shaping very important as well as coating effectiveness.

 Re: size, isn't the F-5/T-38 relatively stealthy based on their small size? So how much "detectable" on radar would an F-35 be with degraded stealth coatings (from wear or weather etc.)-if it would even be an issue? or is that classified?

The Su-57 might not be as "stealthy" as an F-35, but it does improve on earlier designs and is overall much more effort of "Low Observable" in consideration.
The Russians being wary of stealth as the primary driver in design while taking an approach that does not compromise other aspects. The Su-57 being designed as "counter stealth" to aircraft like the F-22/35. Side mounted and beaming techniques etc.

Sorry if straying off F-35 news, am asking in relation to F-35 surface scratches and coatings issues.
4
Aerospace / Re: Space Ship II, White Knight II - projects, flights, info
« Last post by sferrin on Today at 12:49:04 pm »
What a stupid answer, nice from you. I was just reminding that Branson grossly overpromised over the years, 12 years or more. "We will fly in 2007". Yeah, sure dude.

You sounds upset that he didn't quit like everybody else.
5
+1
6
What a stupid answer, nice from you. I was just reminding that Branson grossly overpromised over the years, 12 years or more. "We will fly in 2007". Yeah, sure dude.

Something new; something hard; something no one else has done before. An objective who's attainment demanded dedication, money, talent, and a vision; an objective that simply could not be secured within an arbitrary time limit or given amount of money.

Commercial suborbital space flight is a stunning example of achievement by those of vision, ability, and profit-motive. People who would not give up when faced with adversity and impatience of a side-line audience.

I hope Branson -- and those like him -- make a zillion bucks off this kind of investement.

To the Inovators, and those who foster their work!

David
7
Military / Re: Russian Strategic Weapon Modernization Plans
« Last post by stealthflanker on Today at 11:46:08 am »
Regarding dead hand tho, i wonder what Russia use to replace the special Radio-electronic "lead missile" That will launch and radioing the launch authority.  AFAIK the missile is currently out of service.
8
What a stupid answer, nice from you. I was just reminding that Branson grossly overpromised over the years, 12 years or more. "We will fly in 2007". Yeah, sure dude.
9
Military / Re: Russian Strategic Weapon Modernization Plans
« Last post by bobbymike on Today at 09:17:14 am »
https://special-ops.org/47515/russias-dead-hand-nuclear-doomsday-weapon-is-back/?fbclid=IwAR2JQAImBHmYThNSLuuIeAekhinpBXOQtTlqWW1TP6GndXWjS2YfP_nBaYg

Quote
Russia has a knack for developing weapons that—at least on paper—are terrifying: nuclear-powered cruise missiles, robot subs with 100-megaton warheads .

Perhaps the most terrifying was a Cold War doomsday system that would automatically launch missiles—without the need for a human to push the button—during a nuclear attack.

But the system, known as “Perimeter” or “Dead Hand,” may be back and deadlier than ever.
10
Aerospace / Re: Space Ship II, White Knight II - projects, flights, info
« Last post by sferrin on Today at 05:31:58 am »
In the immortal words of Iam Malcolm

"He did it... crazy S.O.B, he did it..."

Only 10 years late, after two lethal accidents, and 15 years after SS1. Nice to see all this was not silly hype. Glad to see it fly high and fast. Now the next step is to fly safely... and a lot.

That's what happens when you don't give up after the first failure.  Who knew?
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10