F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
History would support that Melmothtw, we never seem to learn our lessons. Just as we get a performance advantage/parity all the reasons for it are ignored and we get compromised/inferior equipment and then hope our tactics will bridge the gap 
How can the F-35 possibly be the UK's principal air defence platform when we are only getting 40 of them, enough for 2 Sqns, and 22 of those will be spending half their life on a carrier somewhere in the middle, or far, east, attending cocktail parties.....
UK air defence, only available when the fleet's in?
UK air defence, only available when the fleet's in?
We're not only getting 40 of them Biggus. 48 have so far been committed to (though none yet signed), with the first 14 expected to be financially approved in the coming days (Maine Gate 4). The main buy for upwards of 120 aircraft (assuming the programme of record of 138 jets still is even remotely accurate) will be financially approved in 2017 (as per the Jane's article linked a few posts ago) - Main Gate 5.
Final UK F-35 numbers to be disclosed in SDSR 2015.
As to how can the F-35 be the UK's principal air defence platform? Well, that's a good question (but not for the reason of aircraft numbers).
Final UK F-35 numbers to be disclosed in SDSR 2015.
As to how can the F-35 be the UK's principal air defence platform? Well, that's a good question (but not for the reason of aircraft numbers).
Last edited by melmothtw; 9th Feb 2014 at 13:16.
melmothtw,
Apologies, the figure of 40 was incorrect (I thought I'd read that somewhere). Depending on your point of view, I should either have used 17 or 48. If anyone seriously expects us to ever get anywhere near to 138 they are living in cloud cuckoo land.....
As to the F-35s air defence capabilities (weapon load, range, manoeurvability, etc), I appreciate what you're saying, but you can put whatever asset you like on air defence (F-2 with blue circle radar?), its effectiveness in that role will only be tested in the event of an actual conflict, in peacetime it will probably be capable of doing the job....
Apologies, the figure of 40 was incorrect (I thought I'd read that somewhere). Depending on your point of view, I should either have used 17 or 48. If anyone seriously expects us to ever get anywhere near to 138 they are living in cloud cuckoo land.....
As to the F-35s air defence capabilities (weapon load, range, manoeurvability, etc), I appreciate what you're saying, but you can put whatever asset you like on air defence (F-2 with blue circle radar?), its effectiveness in that role will only be tested in the event of an actual conflict, in peacetime it will probably be capable of doing the job....
I agree that most people now regard the 138 number as being at the top-end of what the UK's likely to get, but the final fleet size will be significantly larger than the 48 currently committed to.
Don't forget, at the time of the last SDSR the Harriers were divested because the 78 (ish) fleet size was deemed to small to support contingency operations.
With respect, a 747 is capable of doing air defence in peacetime (I'm being facetious, of course, but you take my point).
Don't forget, at the time of the last SDSR the Harriers were divested because the 78 (ish) fleet size was deemed to small to support contingency operations.
With respect, a 747 is capable of doing air defence in peacetime (I'm being facetious, of course, but you take my point).
57 Sea Harriers which could be augmented by significantly more land-based Harriers if needs be (not to mention the many and varied land-based types that served concurrently to the Sea Harrier).
It's a different kettle of fish when you're down to fielding just two fast-jet types...total.
You obviously didn't take my point, but that's ok.
Edited to add: On reflection, my 'point' in that specific regard was to do with aircraft capabilties rather than numbers, but that's ok too.
It's a different kettle of fish when you're down to fielding just two fast-jet types...total.
You obviously didn't take my point, but that's ok.
Edited to add: On reflection, my 'point' in that specific regard was to do with aircraft capabilties rather than numbers, but that's ok too.
Suspicion breeds confidence
You need to take sqn size into account. Sea Jet was originally set a 5 jets, then 7 or 8 and technically JFH at 9. I don't the RAF ever got nine to sea at the same time though post Sea Jet. The USMC could though. We should move to larger sqns as per USMC. 14-16 should do the job.
We should move to larger sqns as per USMC. 14-16 should do the job.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys,
Just to get some facts out there.
Sea Harrier FRS1 squadrons were originally 7 strong, augmented to 9 or 10 during the Falklands. In my time as an AEO (88 to 90) they were increased to 9. Numbers fell during the FRS1 to FA2 conversion programme to 6, occasionally 5, then recovered back to 8.
Of course, prior to JFH, those 57 could not actually be 'augmented' in their primary role at sea by RAF aircraft. There were regular exercises to bring RAF Harriers on board, but they only served to underline the fact that RAF units were, unsurprisingly, not ready to operate from the deck. Please note that this was not down to any lack of professionalism or ability, just the simple fact that their pilots and maintainers didn't have the required experience, qualification or currency in deck operations to do so at an operational rate safely. It just wasn't far enough up their priority list - and I can understand completely why the RAF thought that way.
RAF squadrons never had (and I don't know if they still do) a fixed 'establishment' as per their FAA counterparts. There were a number of assumptions baked into AP98, but on the ground, in my direct experience, squadrons swapped aircraft around on a daily basis. As the Fleet Manager for JFH, I can tell you there was a planning figure of 12 aircraft per RAF Harrier front unit, but that included aircraft in work at second line, so the actual figure of aircraft available was 9 gusting 10.
I admit to being somewhat amazed that anyone from the RAF is saying that F-35 primary role would be AD. After the billions spent on Typhoon, it has to be the nations' AD platform for at least another 30 years. F-35B is, as far as I was aware, being bought to deliver precision strike from the sea or land as required. I'm not going to go into it's air to air capabilities relative to anything else, but it's my view that it should be capable of looking after itself - FA2 showed what advanced sensors and weapons can do on a limited platform.
Hope this helps a little,
Engines
Just to get some facts out there.
Sea Harrier FRS1 squadrons were originally 7 strong, augmented to 9 or 10 during the Falklands. In my time as an AEO (88 to 90) they were increased to 9. Numbers fell during the FRS1 to FA2 conversion programme to 6, occasionally 5, then recovered back to 8.
Of course, prior to JFH, those 57 could not actually be 'augmented' in their primary role at sea by RAF aircraft. There were regular exercises to bring RAF Harriers on board, but they only served to underline the fact that RAF units were, unsurprisingly, not ready to operate from the deck. Please note that this was not down to any lack of professionalism or ability, just the simple fact that their pilots and maintainers didn't have the required experience, qualification or currency in deck operations to do so at an operational rate safely. It just wasn't far enough up their priority list - and I can understand completely why the RAF thought that way.
RAF squadrons never had (and I don't know if they still do) a fixed 'establishment' as per their FAA counterparts. There were a number of assumptions baked into AP98, but on the ground, in my direct experience, squadrons swapped aircraft around on a daily basis. As the Fleet Manager for JFH, I can tell you there was a planning figure of 12 aircraft per RAF Harrier front unit, but that included aircraft in work at second line, so the actual figure of aircraft available was 9 gusting 10.
I admit to being somewhat amazed that anyone from the RAF is saying that F-35 primary role would be AD. After the billions spent on Typhoon, it has to be the nations' AD platform for at least another 30 years. F-35B is, as far as I was aware, being bought to deliver precision strike from the sea or land as required. I'm not going to go into it's air to air capabilities relative to anything else, but it's my view that it should be capable of looking after itself - FA2 showed what advanced sensors and weapons can do on a limited platform.
Hope this helps a little,
Engines
Thanks for the facts Engines. To go back to my original point though, the UK F-35B buy will be significantly larger than the 48 already committed to. Whether its the 138 currently listed as the programme of record is anyone's guess, and we'll have to wait until the SDSR in 2015 to find out.
As to the F-35B acting as the UK's primary air defence platform, I remember the RAF representative's comments raising a few eyebrows when he said it.
As to the F-35B acting as the UK's primary air defence platform, I remember the RAF representative's comments raising a few eyebrows when he said it.
Or to go back a little further, F-35 was never designed to be, nor will it ever be an air superiority fighter. Some very good self-defence and, perhaps, some self-escort capability, but it would be fair to say that F-22 does all the above much better. Don't let anyone confuse the two platforms and what they are supposed to do.
It would probably stretch the imagination of some here to claim that the Typhoon will remain a better air-superiority platform than F-35, but I maintain the figures I offered to this Forum last year concerning energy agility and energy at launch. Big issues in the modern air war.
Over..
It would probably stretch the imagination of some here to claim that the Typhoon will remain a better air-superiority platform than F-35, but I maintain the figures I offered to this Forum last year concerning energy agility and energy at launch. Big issues in the modern air war.
Over..
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems astonishing that the Typhoon, designed to perform well in air to air combat, would be sidelined in UK air defense by the F35, which is designed to be stealthy from the front and to drop bombs.
Then again, the Tornado ADV fulfilled the role for long enough.
But it must be a slightly hairy prospect to routinely wander off to find Bears far out over a rough cold sea with that one engine.
Then again, the Tornado ADV fulfilled the role for long enough.
But it must be a slightly hairy prospect to routinely wander off to find Bears far out over a rough cold sea with that one engine.
But it must be a slightly hairy prospect to routinely wander off to find
Bears far out over a rough cold sea with that one engine.
F-16 operators, such as Norway and Netherlands have been operating over the rough North Sea for decades, as have the Swedes with the Gripen in more recent times, and as the French used to do with the Mirage-series aircraft. Also, the USAF routinly flies its F-16s over Alaska, so the single-engine v twin-engine debate isn't the issue some make it out to be.
Getting back to F-35 air defence capabilities though, it is interesting that the majority of those signed up for it will not be operating mixed-fighter fleets, but will be fielding the Lightning II as their primary fighter. Will be v interesting to see how this develops...
Melmoth,
Good point there re not operating mixed forces. I wonder what imperative there is for that. I can only wonder if the early concept of the F-35 as a stealth platform still leads the customer to belive that it doesn't nead any escort. Maybe also that it can also perform a UKAD role. Typhoon will still be there for a long time yet, but could F-35 be the real all-purpose UK FJ as F-16 etc (as you rightly point out) have been for a number of countries?
Good point there re not operating mixed forces. I wonder what imperative there is for that. I can only wonder if the early concept of the F-35 as a stealth platform still leads the customer to belive that it doesn't nead any escort. Maybe also that it can also perform a UKAD role. Typhoon will still be there for a long time yet, but could F-35 be the real all-purpose UK FJ as F-16 etc (as you rightly point out) have been for a number of countries?
One would hope that by the time the F-35 comes on stream for the UK, the Typhoon will have begun receiving the upgrades that will turn it into a full all-rounder also. If that happens, the RAF will in theory have two 'omni-role' (to coin the French term) fast jets to choose from.
Countries such as the Norway, Netherlands, Denmark, and Turkey will be fielding the F-35 as their sole type so you'd hope for their sakes that it has a more-than-credible air defence capability.
Actually, despite what I said earlier half of the nations currently singed up will have a mixed fleet, so interesting to see how they task the F-35 in relation to their other assets. Until I heard the RAF comments, had always assumed it would be roled a bomber, with the 'other' type (Typhoon/F-15/F-16 etc) acting as the fighter, but now not so sure.
Countries such as the Norway, Netherlands, Denmark, and Turkey will be fielding the F-35 as their sole type so you'd hope for their sakes that it has a more-than-credible air defence capability.
Actually, despite what I said earlier half of the nations currently singed up will have a mixed fleet, so interesting to see how they task the F-35 in relation to their other assets. Until I heard the RAF comments, had always assumed it would be roled a bomber, with the 'other' type (Typhoon/F-15/F-16 etc) acting as the fighter, but now not so sure.
