F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chopper2004
Slightly digressing here but Green Knight, I do recall the filming credits of Top Gun been allocated to USS Ranger as well as the other 2 carriers (can' remember) and prior to the films release, in 86, must have taken a year or two of preparation and filming so were you on board when Hollywoods finest came to film out of interest?
These were NAS Miramar, Ca. for the F-14A & E-2C squadrons (VF-1, VF-2, VAW-116), NAS Whidbey Island, Wa. for the Navy A-6E and EA-6B squadrons (VA-145 & VAQ-131), the airfield side of NAS North Island for the S-3A & SH-3H squadrons (VS-38 & HS-14), and MCAS El Toro, Ca. for VMA(AW)-121 (80 miles or so north of NAS N.I.).
Therefore, only the Ship's Company were present during the filming of the on-board scenes (which took no more than a couple of days in reality for each movie). Few of the ship's crew even knew about the filming in advance, only finding out when the studio crews showed up... we in the squadrons only learned about it later, weeks or months after the fact!
Last edited by GreenKnight121; 20th Nov 2012 at 21:55.
MCAS Yuma - F-35Bs Deliveries
Local news item on delivery of first 2 x F-35B to VFMA-121. A total of 16 are due to be delivered by end-2013.
F-35 squadron makes debut in Yuma | azfamily.com Phoenix
F-35 squadron makes debut in Yuma | azfamily.com Phoenix
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
What the Marines’ Stealth Fighter Can’t Do
Last week the U.S. Marine Corps accepted the first combat-designated F-35B stealth fighter at its air station in Yuma, Arizona. The Corps is racing to prep its first frontline F-35B squadron for Initial Operating Capability sometime in the 2015 timeframe. A reputable source provides some context:
Last week the U.S. Marine Corps accepted the first combat-designated F-35B stealth fighter at its air station in Yuma, Arizona. The Corps is racing to prep its first frontline F-35B squadron for Initial Operating Capability sometime in the 2015 timeframe. A reputable source provides some context:
The Marines’ early-IOC force is a maximum of 33 jets — the F-35Bs in LRIP-4 through 7, the last of which should be delivered in 2015 if they ever get back on schedule. These are the only Bs that have Block 2B software. Given training and test needs, plus concurrency mods, I don’t see more than one squadron.
These aircraft are limited to 550 knots airspeed, Mach 1.2 and 5.5 G and carry internal weapons only. Of the internal weapons, the only useful weapon for CAS is the GBU-12 LGB. They don’t have AIM-9X, so they are at a disadvantage against almost any air threat unless the ROEs allow BVR engagement with radar only.
These aircraft are limited to 550 knots airspeed, Mach 1.2 and 5.5 G and carry internal weapons only. Of the internal weapons, the only useful weapon for CAS is the GBU-12 LGB. They don’t have AIM-9X, so they are at a disadvantage against almost any air threat unless the ROEs allow BVR engagement with radar only.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the guy is clueless, the f-35 has over 600 data points for ID's, radar is only a part of it. I don't know what the limits are on 2B software because I'm not following it that close, but I speculate even in 2B software it will be a beast
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or provide an easy target for complete cancellation of both carriers and associated naval fighter, so saving a whole bunch of capital and operating costs to be spent wisely on other deserving causes instead. I don't think it automatically follows that there would be an immediate substitute. Much easier to 'kick the can down the road' as our American friends are fond of saying, maybe until SDSR 2020, or whenever.
I therefore hope F35B happens. Not because I am bowled over by it but because the alternative could easily be much, much worse.
I would have gone cat&trap with Super Hornets (on lease if feasible) pending greater certainty of both cost and performance of F35. But we are past that now. If it was £2bn to fit EMALS 3 months ago, it will be an even bigger number and more delay now.
LF
I therefore hope F35B happens. Not because I am bowled over by it but because the alternative could easily be much, much worse.
I would have gone cat&trap with Super Hornets (on lease if feasible) pending greater certainty of both cost and performance of F35. But we are past that now. If it was £2bn to fit EMALS 3 months ago, it will be an even bigger number and more delay now.
LF
Anyway EMALS is a non starter for us. Just based on when we started building our carriers. It's still testing and won't be certified aboard G Ford until 2015 (assuming nothing goes wrong
) well past when the QE will be complete and nearing the final stages of stitching POW together. When Converteam had the rug pulled on the UK version of EMALS which had been in protype form and test for quite a while and no funding you knew Cats and traps was off the menu.SDSR was always a daft decision purely because it effectively deleted one carrier. You have to have at least two preferably three to do 365 day 24/7 carrier ops. SDSR would have had one carrier and one brand new one in mothballs/sold making it almost pointless. The time to go CATOBAR would have been before the steel was cut. The design allows space for cats and traps to be fitted (steam based with boilers, which was rejected anyway as being too hard on the airframes and being inefficient what with the ships being all electric) doesn't mean it'd be cheap with two complete ships so getting it into the design before build was the time to do it. Add in the extra delay to the RN getting the ships and potential risk associated and you just know the capability would be deleted.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Neverland
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hhmm so in response to an article that states what capabilities are available today your counter argument is "that's a load of rubbish, it will be able to take out tie fighters in the future."
Where have i heard that (non) "argument" before...
?
Where have i heard that (non) "argument" before...
?
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, I called BS and his lack of any knowledge on "These aircraft are limited to 550 knots airspeed, Mach 1.2 and 5.5 G and carry internal weapons only. Of the internal weapons, the only useful weapon for CAS is the GBU-12 LGB. They don’t have AIM-9X, so they are at a disadvantage against almost any air threat unless the ROEs allow BVR engagement with radar only."
For the USMC to call IOC at 2B it means that it reaches the initial CONOPS requirement for the USMC. It doesn't reach the CONOPS of USAF or USN and the partners initial IOC requirements, that is block 3-3+
For the USMC to call IOC at 2B it means that it reaches the initial CONOPS requirement for the USMC. It doesn't reach the CONOPS of USAF or USN and the partners initial IOC requirements, that is block 3-3+
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A lot closer to the sea
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IOC is still a way off - fact.
The USMC is not claiming the stand up at Yuma as IOC, just the start of the process. Even the General in his speech said that they would be taking things slowly.
The aircraft still has a lot to do in testing, with 2013 being planned to be the busiest year, but these aircraft at Yuma are not 'test aircraft', they are not instrumented and have all the mission systems fitted.
Your perception of F-35 development can be coloured by what you compare it against. Compare the timescales for development and the air to air and air to ground capability at IOC against Typhoon and F-35 comes out very well. Its then a question whether the capability is worth the cost...
The USMC is not claiming the stand up at Yuma as IOC, just the start of the process. Even the General in his speech said that they would be taking things slowly.
The aircraft still has a lot to do in testing, with 2013 being planned to be the busiest year, but these aircraft at Yuma are not 'test aircraft', they are not instrumented and have all the mission systems fitted.
Your perception of F-35 development can be coloured by what you compare it against. Compare the timescales for development and the air to air and air to ground capability at IOC against Typhoon and F-35 comes out very well. Its then a question whether the capability is worth the cost...
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A lot closer to the sea
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UK F-35 Pilots
First U.K. pilots begin training to fly F-35 - Community - Crestview News Bulletin
The UK has started to build its cadre of F-35 pilots to add to Sqn Ldr Schofield (current UK F-35 TP) with 1 RN and 1 RAF pilot.
Good news what with the recent videos from the Chinese!
Edited to add:as well as the 3 BAES UK F-35 Test Pilots of course!
The UK has started to build its cadre of F-35 pilots to add to Sqn Ldr Schofield (current UK F-35 TP) with 1 RN and 1 RAF pilot.
Good news what with the recent videos from the Chinese!
Edited to add:as well as the 3 BAES UK F-35 Test Pilots of course!
Last edited by WhiteOvies; 26th Nov 2012 at 17:12.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally I think we should GIVE Great Britain a couple or three F-35 wings and a couple F-22 wings as well just for being the friends they’ve been. We could probably sell Guam to the Chinese to offset the cost. Never liked Guam anyway.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 57
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TS
Personally I think we should GIVE Great Britain a couple or three F-35 wings and a couple F-22 wings as well just for being the friends they’ve been. We could probably sell Guam to the Chinese to offset the cost. Never liked Guam anyway.
)
Gentleman Aviator
Treat them like shaving equipment - give away the base unit and then charge wildly for the consumables over the life of the thing!
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[Treat them like shaving equipment - give away the base unit and then charge wildly for the consumables over the life of the thing!]
Well no uh…we could leave the Guamians. Wouldn’t want to cheat China.
Well no uh…we could leave the Guamians. Wouldn’t want to cheat China.
Last edited by Temp Spike; 27th Nov 2012 at 12:32.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
DEW Line: Canada might be issuing RFIs for F-35 alternative soon
Canada's National Post is reporting that the country's Conservative--or Tory if you prefer--government will soon issue requests for information (RFI) to Boeing, Eurofighter and possibly Dassault for a potential alternative to the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The move is designed to signal that the Harper government is serious about considering alternatives to the stealthy single-engine fighter, the purchase of which is mired in controversy in Canada.
Read the story here
The Post reports that the RFI is not a formal tender but more of a market analysis. Canada's minister of public works, Rona Ambrose, is apparently setting aside the Royal Canadian Air Force's stated requirements for its next generation fighter while a new analysis is conducted. "We are looking at all options on the table at this point," Ambrose says.
The Post's sources say that officials inside the public works ministry are "not comfortable" with the Canadian Department of National Defense's stated requirements for a new fighter. They're doing their own "due diligence."
The alternatives that Canada will likely consider are Boeing's F/A-18E/F Super Hornet (and possibly versions of the F-15, but that's probably not likely), the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Dassault Rafale and probably the Saab Gripen. The Super Hornet, Typhoon and Rafale have twin engines, which at least for some Royal Canadian Air Force pilots, is a major benefit when patrolling the vast reaches of the Canadian Arctic.
But US Air force pilots who have flown in similar Arctic conditions don't necessarily buy that argument. "F-16s have been flying out of Eielson AFB for 20 years and haven't had many problems with their single engine," one senior USAF pilot says. Another USAF pilot with similar experience in Alaska says: "I don't buy the 'can't use a single engine aircraft for alert ops' argument that some Canadians are using. We always wore gear suitable to survive long enough to get rescued. If you make the assumption up front that there's a chance you'll have to bail out, then the probability of bailing out shouldn't really matter...especially if it's extremely negligible."
Canada's National Post is reporting that the country's Conservative--or Tory if you prefer--government will soon issue requests for information (RFI) to Boeing, Eurofighter and possibly Dassault for a potential alternative to the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The move is designed to signal that the Harper government is serious about considering alternatives to the stealthy single-engine fighter, the purchase of which is mired in controversy in Canada.
Read the story here
The Post reports that the RFI is not a formal tender but more of a market analysis. Canada's minister of public works, Rona Ambrose, is apparently setting aside the Royal Canadian Air Force's stated requirements for its next generation fighter while a new analysis is conducted. "We are looking at all options on the table at this point," Ambrose says.
The Post's sources say that officials inside the public works ministry are "not comfortable" with the Canadian Department of National Defense's stated requirements for a new fighter. They're doing their own "due diligence."
The alternatives that Canada will likely consider are Boeing's F/A-18E/F Super Hornet (and possibly versions of the F-15, but that's probably not likely), the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Dassault Rafale and probably the Saab Gripen. The Super Hornet, Typhoon and Rafale have twin engines, which at least for some Royal Canadian Air Force pilots, is a major benefit when patrolling the vast reaches of the Canadian Arctic.
But US Air force pilots who have flown in similar Arctic conditions don't necessarily buy that argument. "F-16s have been flying out of Eielson AFB for 20 years and haven't had many problems with their single engine," one senior USAF pilot says. Another USAF pilot with similar experience in Alaska says: "I don't buy the 'can't use a single engine aircraft for alert ops' argument that some Canadians are using. We always wore gear suitable to survive long enough to get rescued. If you make the assumption up front that there's a chance you'll have to bail out, then the probability of bailing out shouldn't really matter...especially if it's extremely negligible."
The combat performance of the Rafale impressed the RCAF during the Libyan campaign. Its multi-role reliability and the ability to refuel quickly from the CC150T were of considerable interest.....
I never understood why Canada was intending to require the F-35A though - the F-35C appeared to me to be rather more suitable and is also fully compatible with the CC-150T, whereas the 'standard' version of the F-35A is not.
Surely it's a two horse race between the Super Hornet and Rafale?
I never understood why Canada was intending to require the F-35A though - the F-35C appeared to me to be rather more suitable and is also fully compatible with the CC-150T, whereas the 'standard' version of the F-35A is not.
Surely it's a two horse race between the Super Hornet and Rafale?
Last edited by BEagle; 29th Nov 2012 at 07:33.