F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
An interesting DN story. I suspect that Boeing could make a Gripen that costs less than a LockMart-made KAI T-50, and it would be a much better lead-in trainer for F-22/F-35/F-XX, and thereby offload hours from those expensive aircraft.
Of course it's not a long jump from the training squadrons to the Guard/Reserve, who already do air sovereignty and CAS.
On numbers - it depends what you want to do with your fighter force in a national strategic sense. One argument for the F-35 is that it will be the USAF, so that if you want to contribute to a US-led coalition it is what you want to bring to the party.
How many total aircraft do I need, in order to:
1 - Deploy a dozen or so jets to a coalition operation outside my own region,
2 - while maintaining security in my homeland airspace, and
3 - do both the above without generating a bow wave of deferred training and aircraft upgrades?
I don't know the answer, which also depends on a lot of factors and may be different for different cases (eg how much airspace you have), but I would guess that it is not less than 25 and not much more than 50.
Of course it's not a long jump from the training squadrons to the Guard/Reserve, who already do air sovereignty and CAS.
On numbers - it depends what you want to do with your fighter force in a national strategic sense. One argument for the F-35 is that it will be the USAF, so that if you want to contribute to a US-led coalition it is what you want to bring to the party.
How many total aircraft do I need, in order to:
1 - Deploy a dozen or so jets to a coalition operation outside my own region,
2 - while maintaining security in my homeland airspace, and
3 - do both the above without generating a bow wave of deferred training and aircraft upgrades?
I don't know the answer, which also depends on a lot of factors and may be different for different cases (eg how much airspace you have), but I would guess that it is not less than 25 and not much more than 50.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 66
Posts: 6,995
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Nice vid from S/L Jim Schofield covering the UK's first "at sea" takeoff ...
RAF Pilot performs first UK takeoff of F-35B Lightning at sea - YouTube
RAF Pilot performs first UK takeoff of F-35B Lightning at sea - YouTube
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Courtney
the trouble with going with "calculated needs" you ALWAYS finish up with large numbers - it's just human nature
I calculate I need an annual after tax income of £850,000 but......................
the trouble with going with "calculated needs" you ALWAYS finish up with large numbers - it's just human nature
I calculate I need an annual after tax income of £850,000 but......................
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
No F-35s Scrapped - NotSo KC-10s & A-10 (is it something about '10'?)
USAF Weighs Scrapping KC-10, A-10 Fleets 15 Sep 2013 MARCUS WEISGERBER & AARON MEHTA
USAF Weighs Scrapping KC-10, A-10 Fleets | Defense News | defensenews.com
"WASHINGTON — Faced with steep budget cuts and the desire to keep existing procurement initiatives on track, the US Air Force is considering scrapping its entire fleet of KC-10 tankers and A-10 attack jets, according to multiple military and defense sources.
Also on the chopping block are F-15C fighter jets and a planned $6.8 billion purchase of new combat search-and-rescue helicopters, these sources say.
While these proposals are far from final, the options show the magnitude of the decisions facing Air Force leadership as the service wrestles with the prospect of cutting billions of dollars in planned spending over the next decade.
“You only gain major savings if you cut an entire fleet,” Gen. Mark Welsh, Air Force chief of staff, told sister publication Air Force Times last week. “You can cut aircraft from a fleet, but you save a lot more money if you cut all the infrastructure that supports the fleet.”...
...Retiring the F-15C would save maintenance and upgrade costs, Rebecca Grant, president of IRIS Research and a former USAF official, said. The service could then use those funds to speed procurement of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.''...'"
Also on the chopping block are F-15C fighter jets and a planned $6.8 billion purchase of new combat search-and-rescue helicopters, these sources say.
While these proposals are far from final, the options show the magnitude of the decisions facing Air Force leadership as the service wrestles with the prospect of cutting billions of dollars in planned spending over the next decade.
“You only gain major savings if you cut an entire fleet,” Gen. Mark Welsh, Air Force chief of staff, told sister publication Air Force Times last week. “You can cut aircraft from a fleet, but you save a lot more money if you cut all the infrastructure that supports the fleet.”...
...Retiring the F-15C would save maintenance and upgrade costs, Rebecca Grant, president of IRIS Research and a former USAF official, said. The service could then use those funds to speed procurement of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.''...'"
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 15th Sep 2013 at 22:00. Reason: titillating title etc
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a state the USAF is getting into, considering scrapping one of the most capable tanker/transports available and a tried, trusted and proven CAS platform... All so they can continue to pour money into the never ending financial black hole (money goes in, nothing comes out!) that is the F-35...
-RP
-RP
Boeing has been showing off a highly modified F-18 with conformal fuel tanks and an integral bomb bay.....which they can mass produce with ease at far cheaper costs than the F-35.
They are hedging their Bets....in case the F-35 finally is cancelled as it should be.
The program is failing.....just the FJ Mafia refuses to admit it.
Anyone care to bring up the McNamara TFX disaster for reference?
They are hedging their Bets....in case the F-35 finally is cancelled as it should be.
The program is failing.....just the FJ Mafia refuses to admit it.
Anyone care to bring up the McNamara TFX disaster for reference?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had always thought of COIN as involving psyops, int, surveillance, air-ground against soft targets etc. - not really an A-10s cup of tea. CAS on the other hand...
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
USAF Vows to Shield F-35 from Budget Cuts
U.S. Air Force vows to shield three weapons programs from budget cuts 16 Sep 2013 Andrea Shalal-Esa
U.S. Air Force vows to shield three weapons programs from budget cuts | 4-Traders
"The top U.S. Air Force official on Monday vowed to protect three weapons programs from sweeping federal budget cuts: Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 fighter jet, a new refuelling plane built by Boeing Co and early work on a new bomber.
The top U.S. Air Force official on Monday vowed to protect three weapons programs from sweeping federal budget cuts: Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 fighter jet, a new refuelling plane built by Boeing Co and early work on a new bomber.
Acting Air Force Secretary Eric Fanning said the Air Force was convinced of the need to invest in those three programs to ensure continued U.S. military superiority the future. But he said other single-mission aircraft programs would likely face cuts if lawmakers did not reverse a second round of across-the-board cuts due to hit the Pentagon in fiscal 2014.
"You can't get savings of the magnitude necessary by reducing all of your fleets. You have to take out some fleets entirely in order to get the whole tail that comes with it in terms of savings," Fanning told reporters at the annual Air Force Association conference.
Fanning declined to comment directly on reports that the Air Force's plan for coping with continued budget cuts called for retirement of its fleet of A-10 attack planes and KC-10 refuelling planes, saying only that some single-mission aircraft would clearly be affected....
..."It's a series of very painful decisions and painful cuts that are really damaging, in my view, to readiness and national security, and will be very expensive to fix later in the future if we try to," Fanning told reporters. He said the Air Force's sequestration budget envisioned a smaller force but gave no details."
The top U.S. Air Force official on Monday vowed to protect three weapons programs from sweeping federal budget cuts: Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 fighter jet, a new refuelling plane built by Boeing Co and early work on a new bomber.
Acting Air Force Secretary Eric Fanning said the Air Force was convinced of the need to invest in those three programs to ensure continued U.S. military superiority the future. But he said other single-mission aircraft programs would likely face cuts if lawmakers did not reverse a second round of across-the-board cuts due to hit the Pentagon in fiscal 2014.
"You can't get savings of the magnitude necessary by reducing all of your fleets. You have to take out some fleets entirely in order to get the whole tail that comes with it in terms of savings," Fanning told reporters at the annual Air Force Association conference.
Fanning declined to comment directly on reports that the Air Force's plan for coping with continued budget cuts called for retirement of its fleet of A-10 attack planes and KC-10 refuelling planes, saying only that some single-mission aircraft would clearly be affected....
..."It's a series of very painful decisions and painful cuts that are really damaging, in my view, to readiness and national security, and will be very expensive to fix later in the future if we try to," Fanning told reporters. He said the Air Force's sequestration budget envisioned a smaller force but gave no details."
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 17th Sep 2013 at 00:49.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A lot closer to the sea
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the USAF getting to grips with financial realities in the same way the RAF has in the past:
Jaguar scrapped to be able to afford Typhoon.
Sea Harrier (as part of 3 Grp) scrapped to afford GR9 upgrade.
Harrier scrapped to be able to afford F-35 (or Typhoon upgrades).
Some Tornadoes removed to afford F-35.
C-130K scrapped to afford A400M.
If you want future capability you have to be able to afford it somehow.
Possibly thread drift but does anyone think that if the UK had gone it alone we would have anything close to what we have now with F-35? Even at the cost of F-35, and negating the benefits to UK economy of F-35, would an 'all British' Harrier replacement ever have got off the ground?
Jaguar scrapped to be able to afford Typhoon.
Sea Harrier (as part of 3 Grp) scrapped to afford GR9 upgrade.
Harrier scrapped to be able to afford F-35 (or Typhoon upgrades).
Some Tornadoes removed to afford F-35.
C-130K scrapped to afford A400M.
If you want future capability you have to be able to afford it somehow.
Possibly thread drift but does anyone think that if the UK had gone it alone we would have anything close to what we have now with F-35? Even at the cost of F-35, and negating the benefits to UK economy of F-35, would an 'all British' Harrier replacement ever have got off the ground?
would an 'all British' Harrier replacement ever have got off the ground?
Read up on the Tail Hook problems alone....for a perfect engineering study on how not to design a carrier aircraft arresting hook system.
Folks....this thing is a Turkey in the truest sense of the concept.
What a state the USAF is getting into, considering scrapping one of the most capable tanker/transports available and a tried, trusted and proven CAS platform... All so they can continue to pour money into the never ending financial black hole (money goes in, nothing comes out!) that is the F-35...
-RP
-RP
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
37 F-35s for DutchLanders
Dutch to purchase 37 F-35 fighter planes - sources 17 Sep 2013
Dutch to purchase 37 F-35 fighter planes - sources | Reuters
"(Reuters) - The Netherlands will purchase 37 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter planes, two sources with knowledge of the matter told Reuters on Tuesday, a decision that should end years of political wrangling over ballooning costs and delays.
Defence Minister Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert was due to announce the decision later on Tuesday in a policy paper setting out her long-term vision for the Dutch armed forces, the sources said...."
Defence Minister Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert was due to announce the decision later on Tuesday in a policy paper setting out her long-term vision for the Dutch armed forces, the sources said...."
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 53
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SpazSinbad
Dutch to purchase 37 F-35 fighter planes
Also further cuts are not out of the question , the budget was released today and another 2400 on top of he previous 12000 lay-offs are in the pipeline.
IIRC 6 or 8 of these are permanently stationed in the US, supporting the local US economy iso the Dutch, this program is nothing more than a clever way to hijack our defence resources and make them completely dependant on US support.
Last edited by kbrockman; 17th Sep 2013 at 10:21.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Great Midwest
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Twelve Su-35s will each have approximately six R-77 (AA-12) missiles on board and four R-73 (AA-11) missiles on board attack two F-35s and each have approximately 2 AIM-120 missiles and 2 AIM-9X missiles on board. Now if the AIM-120s have a Pk of 1.0 (not in the realm of the possible) and the SU-35 score no kills on an initial exchange then you have eight Su-35s, pursuing two F-35s.
This is a chase with the F-35’s signature at its worst, capable of Mach 1.5 at best, being pursued by Su-35s capable of Mach 2.0.
I’m not sure that 6:1 thing will work in real combat.
This is a chase with the F-35’s signature at its worst, capable of Mach 1.5 at best, being pursued by Su-35s capable of Mach 2.0.
I’m not sure that 6:1 thing will work in real combat.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Bevo - Try not to engage 'JSFfan' in an intelligent conversation about the relative advantages/disadvantages of the F-35, he really isn't interested.
His usual trick is to put his fingers in his ears and scream "la, la, la, I can't hear you" if challenged over his frequent use of far from nonpartisan bumpf by folk who actually seem to know about stuff like this, rather than, as I fear he is, someone with a copy of Microsoft Flight Simulator and Ladybird's Big Book of Aircraft.
I say this as an observer of the thread rather than active participant. Unlike some I am happy to acknowledge and respect the limits of my airpower knowledge.
His usual trick is to put his fingers in his ears and scream "la, la, la, I can't hear you" if challenged over his frequent use of far from nonpartisan bumpf by folk who actually seem to know about stuff like this, rather than, as I fear he is, someone with a copy of Microsoft Flight Simulator and Ladybird's Big Book of Aircraft.
I say this as an observer of the thread rather than active participant. Unlike some I am happy to acknowledge and respect the limits of my airpower knowledge.
Last edited by The Helpful Stacker; 17th Sep 2013 at 16:10.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it's not me saying it, it's a dozen top air forces with LM
ParlInfo - Parliamentary Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade : 20/03/2012 : Department of Defence annual report 2010-11
ParlInfo - Parliamentary Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade : 20/03/2012 : Department of Defence annual report 2010-11
Last edited by JSFfan; 17th Sep 2013 at 16:26.
So it has a 6:1 advantage; as long as the enemy does not actually arrive with 6 aircraft to your 1.
Yep, all makes sense now.
Nothing to do with defending the money spent then.
Good.
Got it.
All makes sense now.
Yep, all makes sense now.
Nothing to do with defending the money spent then.
Good.
Got it.
All makes sense now.