PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - The F-35 thread, Mk II
View Single Post
Old 8th Apr 2020, 13:12
  #101 (permalink)  
Asturias56
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,519
Received 369 Likes on 216 Posts
"2. They needed to deliver a decent sortie count, which meant a decent number of aircraft, which meant they had to be of a certain size, which meant that CTOL configuration became an option"

Interesting - the RAND study "Future Aircraft Carrier Options" back in 2017 has some interesting illustrations of how the perceived threat drives the response which drives the sortie rate which drives Carrier size. This was a major factor in the design of the "Fords"

"Of particular note is the fact that a major impetus for development of a carrier capable of supporting a high SGR (Sortie Generation Rate) was the Navy’s experience in Desert Storm, in which distances were short and the target environment rich. In such a context, high SGR would enable the faster delivery of ordnance and possibly a shortening of the campaign.

Even in the current environment, there are operational scenarios in which high SGR would be highly desirable, with defense against a swarm of small boats being one notable example. There is a large number of targets; the major detection sensor is radar and visual; the ability to use standoff munitions is limited. DCA in an environment in which rapid expenditure of air–air munitions is expected might be another.

In recent experience, however, there has been little need for large numbers of short sorties and a larger emphasis on longer-range sorties in which such features as ability to tank, ability to provide organic EA, and ability to provide long-range battle-space awareness are particularly important. Having the ability to rapidly generate sorties is not a detractor, but it has been less important than other features, and, in either case, the ability of current platforms to provide this support has been more than sufficient."
Asturias56 is online now