- 22 January 2006
- Reaction score
F-22 from Flug Revue 8/1993 page 33
F-35 from AWST July 10, 2000 page 33
F-35 from AWST July 10, 2000 page 33
The company (LMA Co.) also is studying a two-seat JSF version. Mission radius would be reduced by 75 mi. Although modifying the Air Force CTOL and Navy CV versions to accept a second cockpit would not be difficult, stretching the STOVL airplane would present more problems because of the lift fan bay. Although analysis by Lockheed Martin JSF team member BAE Systems indicates a two-seat STOVL aircraft is feasible, "there are considerations, including aerodynamics and weight and balance issues," Beaufait said.
The TAV-8B Harrier II doesn't look too bad.Matej said:Lets say that still far better than 2 seat Harrier.
If a future F-35 version needs a WSO, he won't be sitting in the cockpit anymore, he will be rather sitting in a comfortable armchair in front of flat screens.Matej said:.....
But with the much universal F-35, well, this is the real question for the future. In the electronic jamming variant or attack/strike variant the second crew member should be very handy.
fightingirish said:If a future F-35 version needs a WSO, he won't be sitting in the cockpit anymore, he will be rather sitting in a comfortable armchair in front of flat screens.
Matej said:I agree that it can be the general direction of the future development, but to say "he wont be sitting... ...anymore", it reminds me one of the "why do we need fighters anymore, when we have rockets" or "why do we need cannon on board anymore, when we have rockets" statements a few decades ago. We all know, how it ended. I simply don't believe at all that we will not see two seat fighters in the future. For me it is too absolute, too ultimate and too imprudent.
Matej said:Probably this is the theme for some another thread but I ask: was there ever at least one conflict in modern history, where the remotely piloted advanced planes (such as RQ-1 and higher) were used in a strongly jammed environment against healthy enemy with the good technological base? Because the painful thing is, that someone is able and can simply cut you from the network. And then what?
Iranian F-14A said:I think as hard as it would be to produce, I think a USMC/RN two seater is almost a given. If nothing else,for training. VSTOL aircraft require special training, and yes, helicopters help and are part of the course,but nothing compares to a two seat model. Also notice that both the RN and USMC, not to mention the RAF, always keep up on updating their two seat Harriers to the newest mark. An example was the TAV-8s of the USMC. Granted, they did use the TAV-8As after the AV-8B was introduced,however, a TAV-8B was eventually made as the entire fleet of "A" and "C" models could be retired as well as being more on par with the "B" model. For now, the TAV-8Bs will do, but in the future, something will have to step up to take their place just as they did before.
Abraham Gubler said:There is NO requirement for a two seat F-35B for training....
McColm said:Hi Guys,
Flying a simulator and the real aircraft aren't the same. Some sort of training aircraft for the F-35B will be required. Wether it is a Talon or a Hawk this is to be decided.
As for the F-22, I reckon a few of the F-15 two seaters will be upgraded.
chuck4 said:...How long will it be before software would make complex tactical decision with speed and overall quality no human can possibly match in real time? What then?
Yeah, that was me Evan, I'm still working on it but it's a long-term project at the moment.Given the structural breakdown of the F-35, any version, a two-seater would have to extend from the back bulkhead of the present cockpit and that's going to do interesting things to weight and balance, which would especially affect the F-35B. It would be tight, but I'd be prepared to argue for side-by-side seating instead of tandem seating if they did produce a two-seat F-35. ISTR that someone did a comparison and the cockpit of the TF-102 looked to fit fairly well.