The F-35 Thread

[Emu]

So I think I figured out the ICP specifications.

 

http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/military/JSF-Integrated-Avionics-Par-Excellence_1067.html#.ViztOrfhCUk

 

Core Processor

Hosting the mission systems software is the JSF's electronic brain, the ICP. Packaged in two racks, with 23 and eight slots, respectively, this computer consolidates functions previously managed by separate mission and weapons computers, and dedicated signal processors. At initial operational capability, the ICP data processors will crunch data at 40.8 billion operations/ sec (giga operations, or GOPS); the signal processors, at 75.6 billion floating point operations (gigaflops, or GFLOPS); and the image processors at 225.6 billion multiply/accumulate operations, or GMACS, a specialized signal processing measure, reports Chuck Wilcox, Lockheed's ICP team lead. The design includes 22 modules of seven types:

 

Four general-purpose (GP) processing modules,

Two GPIO (input/output) modules,

Two signal processing (SP) modules,

Five SPIO modules,

Two image processor modules,

Two switch modules, and

Five power supply modules.

 

The ICP also will have� "pluggable growth" for eight more digital processing modules and an additional power supply, Wilcox adds. It uses commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) components, standardizing at this stage on Motorola G4 PowerPC microprocessors, which incorporate 128-bit AltiVec technology. The image processor uses commercial field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) and the VHDL hardware description language to form a very specialized processing engine.The ICP employs the Green Hills Software Integrity commercial real-time operating system (RTOS) for data processing and Mercury Computer Systems' commercial Multi-computing OS (MCOS) for signal processing. Depending on processing trades still to be made in the program, the JSF also could use commercial RTOSs in sensor front ends to perform digital preprocessing, according to Baker. The display management computer and the CNI system also use the Integrity RTOS. COTS reduces development risk and� ensures an upgrade path, according to Ralph Lachenmaier, the program office's ICP and common components lead.

 

Tying the ICP modules together like a backplane bus and connecting the sensors, CNI and the displays to the ICP is the optical Fibre Channel network. Key to this interconnect are the two 32-port ICP switch modules. The 400-megabit/sec IEEE 1394B (Firewire) interconnect is used externally to link the ICP, display management computer and the CNI system to the vehicle management system.

Low-level processing will occur in the sensor systems, but most digital processing will occur in the ICP. The radar, for example, will have the smarts to generate waveforms and do analog-to-digital conversion. But the radar will send target range and bearing data to the ICP signal processor, which will generate a report for the data processor, responsible for data fusion. Radar data, fused with data from other onboard and offboard systems, then will be sent from the ICP to the display processor for presentation on the head-down and helmet-mounted displays.

 

http://embeddedstar.com/press/content/2004/2/embedded12722.html

 

Raytheon Selects RACE++ Multicomputers for F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

 

https://www.mrcy.com/products/boards/race_powerpc7448/

 

Fully compatible with RACE++ Series 66.66-MHz RACEway interconnect

Includes RACE++ Series MULTI® Integrated Development Environment (IDE) for application development and testing

6U Form Factor

MCJ6 motherboard and two daughtercards.

Each daughtercard with either two 1.06-GHz MPC7448 processors or two 1.267-GHz processors with AltiVec™ technology.

MCJ6 configurations with one PowerPC 7448 daughtercard and one RINOJ-F-2.5 are also available

9U Form Factor

Up to seven PowerPC 7448 daughtercards and one RINOJ-F-2.5 available

 

https://www.mrcy.com/products/boards/race_powerpc7448/

 

PowerPC 7448 Daughtercard

For 1.06-GHzRACEway ports: 2

Processor frequency: 1.06-GHz

Compute nodes: 2

Memory frequency: 133 MHz

DDR DRAM per CN: 512 MB or 1024

DDR DRAM per daughtercard: 1024 MB or 2048 MB

L2 cache frequency: 1.06-GHz (32 bytes wide)

L2 on-chip cache: 1024 KB per CN

For 1.267-GHz

RACEway ports: 2

Processor frequency: 1.267-GHz

Compute nodes: 2

Memory frequency: 133 MHz

DDR DRAM per CN: 512 MB or 1024 MB

DDR DRAM per daughtecard: 1024 MB or 2048 MB

L2 cache frequency: 1.267-GHz (32 bytes wide)

L2 on-chip cache: 1024 KB per CN

PowerPC 7448 Multicomputer

6U VME/RACE++ MCJ6 and 2 daughtercards*

For 1.06-GHzMaximum power consumption

512 MB per CN: 68W**

1024 MB per CN: 72W

For 1.267-GHz

Maximum power consumption

512 MB per CN: 72W

1024 MB per CN: 76W

 

http://www.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/fact_sheet/MPC7448FACT.pdf

 

The MPC7448 processor features a

high-frequency superscalar e600 PowerPC

core*, capable of issuing four instructions per

clock cycle (three instructions plus one

branch) into

11 independent execution units:

> Four integer units (three simple plus one

complex)

> Double-precision floating point unit

> Four AltiVec technology units (simple,

complex, floating and permute)

> Load/store unit

> Branch processing unit

AltiVec Acceleration

The MPC7448 includes the same powerful

128-bit AltiVec vector execution unit as found

in previous MPC7xxx devices. AltiVec

technology may dramatically enhance the

performance of applications such as voiceover-Internet

Protocol (VoIP), speech

recognition, multi-channel modems, virtual

private network servers, high-resolution 3-D

graphics, motion video (MPEG-2, MPEG-4),

high fidelity audio (3-D audio, AC-3), and so

on. AltiVec computational instructions are

executed in the four independent, pipelined

AltiVec execution units. A maximum of two

AltiVec instructions can be issued in order to

any combination of AltiVec execution units per

clock cycle. In the MPC7448, a maximum of

two AltiVec instructions can be issued out-oforder

to any combination of AltiVec execution

units per clock cycle from the bottom two

AltiVec instruction queue entries. For example,

an instruction in queue one destined for

AltiVec integer unit one does not have to wait

for an instruction in queue zero that is stalled

behind an instruction waiting for operand

availability.

Edited October 25, 2015 by Emu

[badaboom]

[badaboom]

[Emu]

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/features/2015/WashPostF352.html?utm_content=sf15133773&utm_medium=spredfast&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=Lockheed+Martin&sf15133773=1

 

“With improvements, tanks or planes can be cloaked from human observation, car trunks can be made see-through, blind spots can be cloaked to be seen easily or cloaking can even be used as art or included for architectural effects,” said Joseph Choi, a researcher with the University of Rochester’s Institute of Optics.

 

Cloaking, which makes objects partly or wholly invisible, manipulates the direction of visible and near-infrared light or electromagnetic waves around an object as if it weren’t there. For an invisibility cloak or shield to work, the material needs to curve waves completely around all dimensions of an object, and work with all backgrounds and angles of view.

 

The Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory at the University of California recently created an ultrathin invisibility cloak – a thin film of magnesium fluoride topped by small gold antennae – that can flexibly wrap light waves around any shape and create illusions to match different backgrounds. It does that by controlling how reflected light is scattered, and therefore what the viewer sees. The cloak’s creators say it can be draped over any object to obscure it or make it look like something else.

 

Cloaking with specifically engineered, artificial materials to bend light waves – or metamaterials – also holds great promise for electromagnetic field cloaking. “For more practical cloaking that can make large objects disappear for the human eye and work for all visible colors (frequencies), we think using standard optics (lenses and mirrors) has a lot of potential,” Choi said.

[Cibit]

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=182

 

UK government announce seped up of F35's

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34893614

[Emu]

Results of UK Strategic Defence Review

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defence_and_Security_Review_2015#Royal_Air_Force

 

Royal Air Force[edit]

 

Nine P-8 Poseidons will be ordered.

See also: Future of the Royal Air Force

Personnel will be increased by 300.

Typhoon will be retained for an additional ten years (until 2040) and will receive upgrades. Two additional squadrons will be stood up, bringing the total number of frontline Typhoon squadrons to seven by 2025.[2]

There was a reaffirmed commitment to 138 Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning IIs (with a total of 24 available to be deployed on board the Queen Elizabeth-class carriers by 2023).[6][7]

Nine Boeing P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft will be ordered to plug the gap left by the retirement of the Nimrod in 2011 and the scrapping of its successor, the Nimrod MRA4.[2] The aircraft will be based at RAF Lossiemouth.[8]

The RPAS fleet will be doubled with the current 10 General Atomics MQ-9 Reapers to be replaced by more than 20 new armed "Protector" RPAS.[9]

Fourteen C-130J Hercules aircraft will remain in service alongside 22 Airbus A400M Atlas and 8 Boeing C-17 Globemaster III.

Sentinel R1 will be extended in service "into the next decade", but will leave service by 2025.

Shadow R1 will remain in service until "at least" 2030 and two more aircraft will be procured.

Sentry AEW1 and Rivet Joint R1 will remain in service until 2035.

[Emu]

JSOW in testing.

 

[Sweep]

Cool pics!

[Ktulu2]

How old is this picture? It shows Canada in the program...

[Sweep]

How old is this picture? It shows Canada in the program...

 

And you think Canada will walk away from the F-35?

 

Or they'll end up with a CF-39...... :megalol:

[Ktulu2]

I hope not, but it sure sounds like it

[HiJack]

Being in the program does not require Canada to buy the F-35 but they have to provide the cash for the program agreement. They can of course select the Swedish Gripen if they like :P

[GGTharos]

We're not interested in Grippies.

[RAZBAM_ELMO]

Essentially the F35 does not meet Canada's needs as far as an all weather interceptor goes. What Canada needs is a twin engine mach 3 capable multi role fighter to reach our vast expanse of airspace which the F35 simply cannot do. Im very glad that we are launching an open competition for our new fighter. Yes the F35 will be included but it will be subjected to all of the same challenges and or mission requirements as the other competitors with no special exceptions.

[wilky510]

Essentially the F35 does not meet Canada's needs as far as an all weather interceptor goes. What Canada needs is a twin engine mach 3 capable multi role fighter to reach our vast expanse of airspace which the F35 simply cannot do. Im very glad that we are launching an open competition for our new fighter. Yes the F35 will be included but it will be subjected to all of the same challenges and or mission requirements as the other competitors with no special exceptions.

Which is fine. But Canada won't be finding a Mach 3 aircraft out there, unless you made a typo and meant mach 2.

 

Also, with this change, Canada won't be able to engage in any foreign relations, (IE bombing ISIS). But If that's what they're aiming for, good for them!

 

 

This change also doesn't make the F-35 any less capable, though, it will make the overall price of each aircraft go up.

Edited December 2, 2015 by wilky510

[GGTharos]

It's a waste of money. The F-18 has similar flight performance, but is going to be obsolete decades sooner.

 

What else then? Tiffy? Rafale? They won't be any cheaper than F-35's, and they have their own problems. I doubt the Grippen NG is even appropriate for Canada.

 

What's left?

[Emu]

Essentially the F35 does not meet Canada's needs as far as an all weather interceptor goes. What Canada needs is a twin engine mach 3 capable multi role fighter to reach our vast expanse of airspace which the F35 simply cannot do. Im very glad that we are launching an open competition for our new fighter. Yes the F35 will be included but it will be subjected to all of the same challenges and or mission requirements as the other competitors with no special exceptions.

Well I guess you could ask Russia to make MiG-31s A2G capable, because that's the closest you'll get to a Mach 3, multi-role fighter.

[Emu]

It's a waste of money. The F-18 has similar flight performance, but is going to be obsolete decades sooner.

 

What else then? Tiffy? Rafale? They won't be any cheaper than F-35's, and they have their own problems. I doubt the Grippen NG is even appropriate for Canada.

 

What's left?

Assuming he meant Mach 2 and not Mach 3, the EF is the only aircraft that fits that bill unless they're going to buy Russian. Gripen only has one engine and Rafale can't do Mach 2.

[wilky510]

It's a waste of money. The F-18 has similar flight performance, but is going to be obsolete decades sooner.

 

What else then? Tiffy? Rafale? They won't be any cheaper than F-35's, and they have their own problems. I doubt the Grippen NG is even appropriate for Canada.

 

What's left?

I personally agree with you. I think the Typhoon and Rafale will just be as much as an F-35. I honestly think the aircraft Canada's looking for is out of their reach.

[PiedDroit]

Also, with this change, Canada won't be able to engage in any foreign relations, (IE bombing ISIS). But If that's what they're aiming for, good for them! .

Not sure to understand this, do you think Canada won't be able to do any external operations if they don't choose the F-35? That's a bit extreme.

 

I just hope they will choose an aircraft that doesn't suck the budget dry and ensures reasonable technology transfers.

[NineLine]

Well, its a little off topic, but first you have to decide what Canada's needs truly are. I think the F-35 might be overkill for what they need, honestly, a Super Hornet might make more sense, it wont have the legs of newer generation aircraft like the F-35, but what do we really need? If the poop ever hits the fan and we need a full blown fighter, then they would have to deal with it then, but right now we escort tankers and drop a couple bombs...

[PiedDroit]

Well, its a little off topic, but first you have to decide what Canada's needs truly are. I think the F-35 might be overkill for what they need, honestly, a Super Hornet might make more sense, it wont have the legs of newer generation aircraft like the F-35, but what do we really need? If the poop ever hits the fan and we need a full blown fighter, then they would have to deal with it then, but right now we escort tankers and drop a couple bombs...

Good points, I agree, especially the "overkill" part. I think they need something modular. I.e. a basic workhorse that can have capabilities extended through the use of better payload when necessary (jamming pods, smart / standoff weapons).

Edit: Sorry for off topic btw. I won't add more here, promise. :music_whistling:

Edited December 2, 2015 by PiedDroit

[Sweep]

Edit, should have read PiedDroit's post, he mentioned the jamming stuff. :)

 

I think the F-35 is "modular" enough for Canada, you'll get more payload than the Rhino, have an option to be stealthy, and kick everyone's rear end in air to air.

 

Also, I want to see what Canada will name it...CF-3335555? :D

Edited December 2, 2015 by Sweep
I should read more.

[RAZBAM_ELMO]

Why not fund the development of a fifth Gen Avro Arrow which is designed in and for Canada?

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[RAZBAM_ELMO]

Which is fine. But Canada won't be finding a Mach 3 aircraft out there, unless you made a typo and meant mach 2.

 

Also, with this change, Canada won't be able to engage in any foreign relations, (IE bombing ISIS). But If that's what they're aiming for, good for them!

 

 

This change also doesn't make the F-35 any less capable, though, it will make the overall price of each aircraft go up.

Supercruise with ability to go Mach 3 if needed. Look up Canadas CFB bases. They don't go that far north. So we need something with legs and the ability to intercept fast

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk