F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
RAFEngO74to09,
"In service"? Three years before likely IOC? And all that PR bollocks by McCain and the heads of LM? Even by this thread's standards, this has got to be a new low.
Some wonderful lines in the first vid:
"In service"? Three years before likely IOC? And all that PR bollocks by McCain and the heads of LM? Even by this thread's standards, this has got to be a new low.
Some wonderful lines in the first vid:
Yet another milestone
The very best fighter in the world today
Very committed to our customer and to out international partners around the world
...to deliver these airplanes on schedule and on budget
Well we should all believe that old tripe. And great news regarding the unit cost from The Telegraph yesterday:The very best fighter in the world today
Very committed to our customer and to out international partners around the world
...to deliver these airplanes on schedule and on budget
Lockheed Martin would not give details of the cost of each aircraft until the contract is finalised
Let's hope the UK signs up to that deal!
RAFEngo:
The acid test will be when the USMC actually deploys a det, or a squadron, of F-35B's. I am not sure they are ready to do that yet.
We'll see how things go in the coming year.
The acid test will be when the USMC actually deploys a det, or a squadron, of F-35B's. I am not sure they are ready to do that yet.
We'll see how things go in the coming year.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the Avweek article:
Marine IOC includes the first squadron, VMFA-121, with 10-16 F-35Bs and enough trained pilots and maintenance officials to deploy for war.
The first F-35B unit is slated for its initial deployment in 2017 to Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, Japan.
The first F-35B unit is slated for its initial deployment in 2017 to Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, Japan.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 66
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it is true to say that the development of both the Typhoon and Rafale for that matter, has been delayed many times due to political or financial reasons. The F35 project, as one of the, if not the highest priority Pentagon projects, that has basically had money thrown at it.
I feel that comparing the development programs only makes the F35 more out on a limb.
I feel that comparing the development programs only makes the F35 more out on a limb.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excerpts from an article in the WSJ:
Oct. 29, 2014 8:09 p.m. ET
The Air Force says the U.S. bombing campaign against Islamic extremists is exacerbating its shortage of plane-maintenance experts—a gap that is rekindling tensions with Congress about how to manage the nation’s combat aircraft.
To keep U.S. planes flying over Syria and Iraq, Air Force officials said they have had to deploy hundreds of midlevel maintenance personnel to the overseas missions.
The development has forced officials to block a planned transfer of maintenance staff from other aircraft to the military’s newest plane, the F-35, officials said. That means a possible delay in the deployment of the new-generation fighter jet so older planes can keep flying at a high tempo.
The Air Force has said it intends to declare the F-35 operational in 2016. But the shortage of maintenance experts could push back that target by two years or more, officials say.
The Air Force had planned to move a squadron of older F-15s to the Air National Guard, freeing up 350 maintenance experts to join the F-35 program.
The Air Force also must now devote a larger portion of its maintenance force to the older A-10 “Warthog” fleet. Officials had planned to retire the A-10s and retrain experienced maintenance staff to work on the F-35s. But Congress blocked retirement of the A-10 last year, and both the House and Senate have readied measures requiring the Air Force to keep flying the A-10s.
The Air Force says the U.S. bombing campaign against Islamic extremists is exacerbating its shortage of plane-maintenance experts—a gap that is rekindling tensions with Congress about how to manage the nation’s combat aircraft.
To keep U.S. planes flying over Syria and Iraq, Air Force officials said they have had to deploy hundreds of midlevel maintenance personnel to the overseas missions.
The development has forced officials to block a planned transfer of maintenance staff from other aircraft to the military’s newest plane, the F-35, officials said. That means a possible delay in the deployment of the new-generation fighter jet so older planes can keep flying at a high tempo.
The Air Force has said it intends to declare the F-35 operational in 2016. But the shortage of maintenance experts could push back that target by two years or more, officials say.
The Air Force had planned to move a squadron of older F-15s to the Air National Guard, freeing up 350 maintenance experts to join the F-35 program.
The Air Force also must now devote a larger portion of its maintenance force to the older A-10 “Warthog” fleet. Officials had planned to retire the A-10s and retrain experienced maintenance staff to work on the F-35s. But Congress blocked retirement of the A-10 last year, and both the House and Senate have readied measures requiring the Air Force to keep flying the A-10s.
The fact that the magic diagnostics/logistics system is not working can't help with the maintenance training pipeline, and may have as much to do with the delays as the retention of the A-10s - almost half of which are Guard/Reserve anyway.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 71
Posts: 842
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deployments amid IOC doubts
I have to wonder, given the predominant political narrative in the mass media at least in the US - to the effect that military service and the Armed Forces generally are passe, past their points of relevance - when the turning point will arrive. Sooner or later the voting public has to awaken to the fact that if the US and similar, allied or mostly-allied countries, want to have the freedom and flexibility to keep our systems and overall way of life without undue burdens imposed by countries with diametrically different systems, we simply will have to devote more funds and people to national defense. So many degreed college grads without jobs...hmm, I wonder what the Armed Forces would do with a bunch of low-wage, needing-experience, reasonably well-prepared civilian cadres, available to free more highly trained and useful enlisted personnel for more technical roles and assignments? I know, before you pour invective and derision on this point of view, that no mechanism presently exists to require, or enable, such a civilian cadre to be pressed into service. But if there are staff shortages, and unemployed yet highly educated (even if such educations contain loads of useless crud) young people, what is so mysterious about getting from point A to point C?
Oh, Willow. You want some invective? Naaa! I think a lot of people are starting to think that way. I don't, but that's just me. Ultimately, the voting public should have what they want, whatever that may be. Ultimately, the voting public usually gets what our politicians want, whatever that may be.
There is a case for pulling up the draw bridge and only doing national defence, the polis seem to think they need to put themselves about a bit too.
There is a case for pulling up the draw bridge and only doing national defence, the polis seem to think they need to put themselves about a bit too.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: UK
Age: 30
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turbine D, how long does it take for the US Air Force to make the individual weapon systems operational for the aircraft?
The RAF has had the Eurofighter now for around 10 years I believe, I saw it on its first display year in 2005 and fell in love with it - hence my username. Anyway, it wasn't until around 2010-11 that it took over from the Tornado F3 to protect UK airspace and it deployed to Libya for its first active deployment.... and it's still not even close to being as good as the old Tornado GR4 for ground attack roles. The aircraft still isn't fully operational (no Brimstone, no Storm Shadow and I don't think it has the Paveway IV yet) so if the USAF is anything like the RAF, how do they expect to have the F-35 operational by 2016, whether they have aircraft techies to hand or not?
The RAF has had the Eurofighter now for around 10 years I believe, I saw it on its first display year in 2005 and fell in love with it - hence my username. Anyway, it wasn't until around 2010-11 that it took over from the Tornado F3 to protect UK airspace and it deployed to Libya for its first active deployment.... and it's still not even close to being as good as the old Tornado GR4 for ground attack roles. The aircraft still isn't fully operational (no Brimstone, no Storm Shadow and I don't think it has the Paveway IV yet) so if the USAF is anything like the RAF, how do they expect to have the F-35 operational by 2016, whether they have aircraft techies to hand or not?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
More NOISE about NOISE!
Some recent noise about the old discussion on noise in this thread:
31 Oct -Noise testing on the F-35A and F-35B
http://www.jsf.mil/news/docs/2014103...ve_Summary.pdf (324Kb)
31 Oct -Noise testing on the F-35A and F-35B
"The F-35 Joint Program Office, in partnership with the Air Force Research Laboratory, conducted noise testing on the F-35A and F-35B in 2013, using production..."
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Typhoon93:
My personal opinions:
IOC for the USAF version of the F-35 in 2016 is a pipe dream. Call it development in progress. The USAF brass are trying to find a way to present a delay of IOC to the US Congress to preserve both funding and aircraft levels that were predicated by the 2016 IOC date. Actually, they will be seeking additional funding for the F-35. Blaming the high usage of older aircraft leading to a shortage of mechanics is a clever way to disguise current problems and additional ones that will crop up as time goes on with the current F-35 and new ones to come. IOC declared before most systems (offense & defense) are in place and fully operational is risky business for the pilots in real combat situations should they occur. Think 2020 as the year that most systems function (some will not) on the USAF F-35s and that's not to say the entire aircraft functions at all as originally promised.
My personal opinions:
IOC for the USAF version of the F-35 in 2016 is a pipe dream. Call it development in progress. The USAF brass are trying to find a way to present a delay of IOC to the US Congress to preserve both funding and aircraft levels that were predicated by the 2016 IOC date. Actually, they will be seeking additional funding for the F-35. Blaming the high usage of older aircraft leading to a shortage of mechanics is a clever way to disguise current problems and additional ones that will crop up as time goes on with the current F-35 and new ones to come. IOC declared before most systems (offense & defense) are in place and fully operational is risky business for the pilots in real combat situations should they occur. Think 2020 as the year that most systems function (some will not) on the USAF F-35s and that's not to say the entire aircraft functions at all as originally promised.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Aw&ST: New Strategy Would Cut F-35s, Boost Bombers and UAVs
Today’s U.S. power-projection forces, and those currently planned for the future, will not be able to operate effectively or efficiently against anti-access/area-denial (A2AD) weapons and doctrine being developed by China and other adversaries, according to a new report by the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) that details a new approach to defense strategy known as Third Offset.
Instead, the Pentagon should immediately refocus its development efforts on a global surveillance and strike (GSS) system based on long-range, very stealthy aircraft—including the Long-Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) and a new family of unmanned combat air systems (UCAS)—and submarines. Tactical fighter, surface combatant and heavy land-force programs should be cut back, the report suggests, to pay the bills and rebalance the force.
The CSBA report carries far more weight than usual because it was drafted under the leadership of deputy defense secretary Robert Work (AW&ST March 31, p. 20) and his senior advisers, according to a source directly involved in its production. It is intended to launch a detailed discussion of a major change in national strategy, inside and outside the Pentagon. Author Robert Martinage, a former senior Pentagon official, “can neither confirm nor deny” the extent of Work’s involvement, he tells Aviation Week.
The CSBA paper details the roles of new and existing systems in the Third Offset strategy. It recommends a larger role for the Long-Range Strike Bomber, suggesting that the program could be “accelerated and expanded.” Along with the B-2 and another proposed new weapon, a boost-glide missile launched from submarines, it is the only system able to deal with hard and deeply buried targets in a medium- to high-threat environment. According to the paper, too, it has a stand-in airborne electronic attack capability and can perform high-volume precision strike missions............
Funding the new N-UCAS and MQ-X could call for “reduction in manned tactical aviation force structure” across all services and “scaled-back procurement of all F-35 variants—including possible cancellation of the F-35C, replaced with advanced Super Hornets and eventually N-UCAS.” In July 2011, during Work’s tenure as deputy Navy secretary, he directed the service to study alternatives to the F-35B/C.
The limits on the effectiveness of fighters—including the “semi-stealthy” F-35, so described to discriminate it from the wide-band, all-aspect stealth technology of the UAVs and LRS-B—include survivability and their dependence on tankers, which are vulnerable and difficult to protect. Martinage concurs with Aviation Week’s assessment of the Chengdu J-20 as an offensive counter-air fighter aimed at tankers and other air assets. “With an extended-range air-to-air missile the J-20 can push the tanker 800-900 mi. back. [U.S.] fighters can’t even make it to the beach.”...........
Today’s U.S. power-projection forces, and those currently planned for the future, will not be able to operate effectively or efficiently against anti-access/area-denial (A2AD) weapons and doctrine being developed by China and other adversaries, according to a new report by the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) that details a new approach to defense strategy known as Third Offset.
Instead, the Pentagon should immediately refocus its development efforts on a global surveillance and strike (GSS) system based on long-range, very stealthy aircraft—including the Long-Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) and a new family of unmanned combat air systems (UCAS)—and submarines. Tactical fighter, surface combatant and heavy land-force programs should be cut back, the report suggests, to pay the bills and rebalance the force.
The CSBA report carries far more weight than usual because it was drafted under the leadership of deputy defense secretary Robert Work (AW&ST March 31, p. 20) and his senior advisers, according to a source directly involved in its production. It is intended to launch a detailed discussion of a major change in national strategy, inside and outside the Pentagon. Author Robert Martinage, a former senior Pentagon official, “can neither confirm nor deny” the extent of Work’s involvement, he tells Aviation Week.
The CSBA paper details the roles of new and existing systems in the Third Offset strategy. It recommends a larger role for the Long-Range Strike Bomber, suggesting that the program could be “accelerated and expanded.” Along with the B-2 and another proposed new weapon, a boost-glide missile launched from submarines, it is the only system able to deal with hard and deeply buried targets in a medium- to high-threat environment. According to the paper, too, it has a stand-in airborne electronic attack capability and can perform high-volume precision strike missions............
Funding the new N-UCAS and MQ-X could call for “reduction in manned tactical aviation force structure” across all services and “scaled-back procurement of all F-35 variants—including possible cancellation of the F-35C, replaced with advanced Super Hornets and eventually N-UCAS.” In July 2011, during Work’s tenure as deputy Navy secretary, he directed the service to study alternatives to the F-35B/C.
The limits on the effectiveness of fighters—including the “semi-stealthy” F-35, so described to discriminate it from the wide-band, all-aspect stealth technology of the UAVs and LRS-B—include survivability and their dependence on tankers, which are vulnerable and difficult to protect. Martinage concurs with Aviation Week’s assessment of the Chengdu J-20 as an offensive counter-air fighter aimed at tankers and other air assets. “With an extended-range air-to-air missile the J-20 can push the tanker 800-900 mi. back. [U.S.] fighters can’t even make it to the beach.”...........
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even entertaining the thought for a moment that the F35 is canceled, there are a couple of problems.
The current generation of manned fighters is limited, and there always needs to be the sad evolutionary factor of having something else being developed to keep and edge.
The unmanned fighter thought is a bit far away in my book, and there is always the have all your eggs in one basket scenario. Imagine developing a whole fleet of unmanned fighters, only for your enemy to have a way of disabling the remote control systems. Imagine if you didn't know about it until the most inconvenient time!
The current generation of manned fighters is limited, and there always needs to be the sad evolutionary factor of having something else being developed to keep and edge.
The unmanned fighter thought is a bit far away in my book, and there is always the have all your eggs in one basket scenario. Imagine developing a whole fleet of unmanned fighters, only for your enemy to have a way of disabling the remote control systems. Imagine if you didn't know about it until the most inconvenient time!
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
USMC F-35B DISTRIBUTED STOVL OPERATIONS Plan 2015
The USMC can always make use of your empty decks....
MARINE AVIATION PLAN 2015
LtGen Jon “Dog” Davis - Deputy Commandant for Aviation
https://marinecorpsconceptsandprogra...ion%20Plan.pdf (16.5Mb)
MARINE AVIATION PLAN 2015
LtGen Jon “Dog” Davis - Deputy Commandant for Aviation
"...DISTRIBUTED STOVL OPERATIONS
... - Scheduled aircraft maintenance conducted on sea base (LHA, LHD or a coalition carrier, such as the UK's Queen Elizabeth II) or at main base away from threat...."
... - Scheduled aircraft maintenance conducted on sea base (LHA, LHD or a coalition carrier, such as the UK's Queen Elizabeth II) or at main base away from threat...."
At the risk of sounding like a Luddite and a raw contrarian, this pile of thinkers remind me of those silver bullet pinheads who were all agog over nuclear weapons as a way to reduce armed forces expenditures back in the 1950's.