F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
Japan to Develop Full Amphibious Capability etc....
[Japan] NATIONAL DEFENSE PROGRAM GUIDELINES for FY 2014 and beyond (SUMMARY)
page 8: Document: Japan's 2014 National Defense Program Guidelines | USNI News
"...e. Response to an attack on remote islands
- In order to ensure maritime and air superiority, the SDF will strengthen its ability to deal with attacks by aircraft, naval vessels, and missiles, etc.
- The SDF will develop full amphibious capability, in order to land, recapture and secure without delay in case of any invasion to any remote islands...."
- In order to ensure maritime and air superiority, the SDF will strengthen its ability to deal with attacks by aircraft, naval vessels, and missiles, etc.
- The SDF will develop full amphibious capability, in order to land, recapture and secure without delay in case of any invasion to any remote islands...."
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 18th Dec 2013 at 16:02. Reason: frmt
Indeed, Coff. It was a Gen 5 platform. And note the internal weapons bay, LO shape and RCS reducing coating. Of course, it had its own data link. Despite having 120 TTFs, they were still unable to gain space supremacy against one Gen 4 Stingray commanded by Troy Tempest.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Customer base for NG Gripen strongly improved today;
President Dilma Rousseff Announces Brazil Is Buying Sweden's Saab Gripen Jet Fighters
President Dilma Rousseff Announces Brazil Is Buying Sweden's Saab Gripen Jet Fighters
President Dilma Rousseff Announces Brazil Is Buying Sweden's Saab Gripen Jet Fighters
By Patricia Rey Mallén and Alberto Riva
on December 18 2013 1:29 PM
By Patricia Rey Mallén and Alberto Riva
on December 18 2013 1:29 PM
Just looked at Orac's video... Holy 
ing .
The pilot was apparently not named Darwin. Either his girlfriend had just run off with his best buddy, his truck and his dog, or the VP Engineering was holding a Luger to his mom's head.
ing . The pilot was apparently not named Darwin. Either his girlfriend had just run off with his best buddy, his truck and his dog, or the VP Engineering was holding a Luger to his mom's head.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
Inside Japan’s New Defense Plan 20 Dec 2013 Kyle Mizokami
Inside Japan?s New Defense Plan | USNI News
"...Japan is also sending fighters southward. Naha Airport will receive a second squadron of F-15J air superiority fighters, doubling the number of fighters based there from 20 to 40. Fighter squadrons will increase from 12 to 13, with the number of fighters set to grow from 260 to 280 units. Japan will acquire 28 F-35A Joint Strike Fighters during the five-year period covered by the Mid Term Defense Plan, with another 14 to follow later. Japan is considering a second F-35 purchase, possibly including the F-35B vertical takeoff and landing version for deployment on Japan’s Izumo and Hyuga-class helicopter destroyers....
...Like the U.S. Marines, the amphibious unit will also be airmobile, thanks to the purchase of 17 V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft. The first Osprey will be procured in April 2014 and the procurement process is expected to last five years....
...The Mid Term Defense Plan and National Defense Program Guidelines represent a significant change in Japanese defense policy. New capabilities, such as ISR assets, joint operations, and amphibious units will go a long way toward addressing gaps in Japan’s existing defenses. The reorganization of the Self Defense Forces, as well as procurement initiatives for equipment such as the Osprey and Global Hawk will create a foundational basis for the defense of Japan’s southern islands."
...Like the U.S. Marines, the amphibious unit will also be airmobile, thanks to the purchase of 17 V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft. The first Osprey will be procured in April 2014 and the procurement process is expected to last five years....
...The Mid Term Defense Plan and National Defense Program Guidelines represent a significant change in Japanese defense policy. New capabilities, such as ISR assets, joint operations, and amphibious units will go a long way toward addressing gaps in Japan’s existing defenses. The reorganization of the Self Defense Forces, as well as procurement initiatives for equipment such as the Osprey and Global Hawk will create a foundational basis for the defense of Japan’s southern islands."
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not sure the Hyuga's deck can take F-35's
they would have to be F-35B's and the deck was only designed for helicopter operations
the new 22DDH's may have upgraded decks but as they were designed and ordered a coupleof years back they also might need a major upgrade
they would have to be F-35B's and the deck was only designed for helicopter operations
the new 22DDH's may have upgraded decks but as they were designed and ordered a coupleof years back they also might need a major upgrade
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When it comes to big steel decks .........
The Chinooks max AUW must be 50,000lb or perhaps even more.
As for the heat underneath an F35B landing do you notice that it has rubber tyres? Funny they don't mind.
Seriously the myths and deliberate items of misinformation (plus sheer ignorance) surrounding jet VSTOL since 1960 is quite remarkable.
One of my favourite myths was the "fuel consumtion penalty of doing a VTO"
At Dunsfold we asked people to define a conventional takeoff so that the fuel used could be measured. We setttled for from startup to being on heading towards the first way point in level flight at 250ft. With a Harrier this was always less from a VTO compared to a conventional or short take-off in the same aircraft. But what would you expect given no taxiing needed let alone the runway or strip not pointing in the direction to the first way point. A VTO into wind then yawing round to the desired heading before accelerating away was always going to win.
Of course there was a penaly associated with a VTO. A big one. But it was about payoad available not fuel consumption.
Hey ho.
The Chinooks max AUW must be 50,000lb or perhaps even more.
As for the heat underneath an F35B landing do you notice that it has rubber tyres? Funny they don't mind.
Seriously the myths and deliberate items of misinformation (plus sheer ignorance) surrounding jet VSTOL since 1960 is quite remarkable.
One of my favourite myths was the "fuel consumtion penalty of doing a VTO"
At Dunsfold we asked people to define a conventional takeoff so that the fuel used could be measured. We setttled for from startup to being on heading towards the first way point in level flight at 250ft. With a Harrier this was always less from a VTO compared to a conventional or short take-off in the same aircraft. But what would you expect given no taxiing needed let alone the runway or strip not pointing in the direction to the first way point. A VTO into wind then yawing round to the desired heading before accelerating away was always going to win.
Of course there was a penaly associated with a VTO. A big one. But it was about payoad available not fuel consumption.
Hey ho.
But what about vertical landings, John? How much fuel did the Harrier use from breaking into the circuit abeam the pad to landing on it vertically?
Compared to, say, a Hunter F(GA) 9 completing a normal break and landing?
Compared to, say, a Hunter F(GA) 9 completing a normal break and landing?
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beags
How very dare you ! But in doing so, you make a very valid point.
VTOL/STOVL is, IMHO, and always has been, a wasted asset. Very unique, payload and range limited, and useful only in limited scenarios ( which is great, when needed; but how often since its inception?) All of which makes it an expensive option. No matter how much revered.
I knew John light years ago, and we'll still differ, and we had differences over what was then Eurofighter. But given its short take off and landing capability (not rough field, I accept), and its payload/range/and inbuilt air-to-air capability, Typhoon is an enormously preferable acquisition.
May F35 prove me wrong!
How very dare you ! But in doing so, you make a very valid point.
VTOL/STOVL is, IMHO, and always has been, a wasted asset. Very unique, payload and range limited, and useful only in limited scenarios ( which is great, when needed; but how often since its inception?) All of which makes it an expensive option. No matter how much revered.
I knew John light years ago, and we'll still differ, and we had differences over what was then Eurofighter. But given its short take off and landing capability (not rough field, I accept), and its payload/range/and inbuilt air-to-air capability, Typhoon is an enormously preferable acquisition.
May F35 prove me wrong!
Last edited by cuefaye; 21st Dec 2013 at 19:47. Reason: layout
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEags
Of course the Hunter (or any other well flown fighter) would use less fuel when landing. I would never say otherwise.
However there is a huge but at the end of the sortie.
And that but is that you can join the ship or a circuit to land vertically with 2 mins hover fuel remaining, use half of it and think how boring it was to sit in the hover for 30 secs doing nothing. The twitch when you must trap or do a reasonable conventional approach (especially when the vis is poor) is just not there if you can VL (anywhere).
Quite a lot of the fuel tankage difference between the F-35B and the other versions will be needed to give sensible landing reserves - although I don't expect that to be understood by many.
Of course the Hunter (or any other well flown fighter) would use less fuel when landing. I would never say otherwise.
However there is a huge but at the end of the sortie.
And that but is that you can join the ship or a circuit to land vertically with 2 mins hover fuel remaining, use half of it and think how boring it was to sit in the hover for 30 secs doing nothing. The twitch when you must trap or do a reasonable conventional approach (especially when the vis is poor) is just not there if you can VL (anywhere).
Quite a lot of the fuel tankage difference between the F-35B and the other versions will be needed to give sensible landing reserves - although I don't expect that to be understood by many.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 57
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by john farley
As for the heat underneath an F35B landing do you notice that it has rubber tyres? Funny they don't mind.
Or at least that was something that had to be incorporated into the design of holding areas for land based aircraft. The RAAF use tarmac for cost reasons, the holding areas had to be concrete for the APU reason given above.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The twitch when you must trap or do a reasonable conventional approach (especially when the vis is poor) is just not there if you can VL (anywhere)."
And just how many times has that capability been employed in reality?
"although I don't expect that to be understood by many."
Oh, please!
(edit facility still not working correctly Roj ?)
And just how many times has that capability been employed in reality?
"although I don't expect that to be understood by many."
Oh, please!
(edit facility still not working correctly Roj ?)