Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

Old 28th Feb 2015, 21:13
  #5741 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 43
Posts: 552
Just make the diameter smaller, job jobbed.
Thelma Viaduct is offline  
Old 28th Feb 2015, 22:43
  #5742 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Originally Posted by Pious Pilot View Post
Just make the diameter smaller, job jobbed.
What and loose out on all that "warfighters enablement" bonuses?

Come on it's F-35 --fill those corporate wallets....
glad rag is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2015, 00:15
  #5743 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,960
What a great idea...build a bomb and then design an aircraft around it
Hempy is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2015, 08:24
  #5744 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 62
Posts: 371
An aircraft also needs an engine that works properly. As far as I am aware most of the fleet is still restricted as to flight envelope.
PhilipG is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2015, 10:07
  #5745 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 804
Originally Posted by Hempy View Post
What a great idea...build a bomb and then design an aircraft around it
Or even better: Design an aircraft, then a bomb and then re-design the aircraft to fit the bomb...
henra is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2015, 10:50
  #5746 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,274
Or even better: Design an aircraft, then a bomb and then re-design the aircraft to fit the bomb..
Nothing new under the sun.....

ORAC is online now  
Old 1st Mar 2015, 11:20
  #5747 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 62
Posts: 6,996
How about ...



CoffmanStarter is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2015, 08:28
  #5748 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,274
Not that I'm cynical you understand, but compare the statements about the 2B software with the official report I linked to here on 17th Feb. And whats the performance loss with the interim fix?.....

Late Software Not Expected To Jeopardize U.S. Marine Corps F-35 IOC

The Joint Strike Fighter program now estimates a 4-5 month delay in delivering the aircraft’s fully functional software package and is working to recover that slippage after prioritizing work to support the U.S. Marine Corps initial operational capability (IOC) date of July 1.

The Marine Corps, the first Lockheed Martin F-35 customer slated to declare IOC, is using the 2B software package to stand up its first squadron of aircraft at MCAS Yuma, Arizona. Although the 2B is limited to employing three weapons—the 1,000-lb. GBU-32 Joint Direct Attack Munition, GBU-12 500-lb. [email protected] Bomb and Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile AIM-120 series—the F-35B will surpass the current capability of the AV-8B Harrier jump jet and F/A-18C twin-engine Hornets, the Marines say.

All of the software testing needed to enable close air support (CAS) operations for the Marines—a primary mission, as the F-35B will support the Marine Air-Ground Task Force—is complete, says Lorraine Martin, F-35 executive vice president for Lockheed Martin. The entire 2B software package was expected to wrap up testing in January, but she says “single-digit” numbers of tests requiring specific conditions have yet to be finished. Completion of those was slated for February.........

USAF Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, the Pentagon’s program executive officer, says the initial remedy is effective for a fault that caused a catastrophic fire in an F-35A’s Pratt & Whitney F135 engine last year, but the program is seeking to improve it. The fix—producing the polyimide engine lining with a “trench” for stators in the third-stage integrally bladed rotor roughly 1/8th of an inch deeper—has been approved for production aircraft, according to Chris Flynn, who served as Pratt’s F135 and F119 vice president during the engine fault investigation. The company aims to deliver the first set of “pre-trenched” stators in February, he says. By the first quarter of 2016, Pratt hopes to have added the fix to all engines in the fleet already fielded. “Hopefully, we don’t have to talk about this that much any more,” he says, acknowledging the engine fire and subsequent fleet grounding cost the program time............
ORAC is online now  
Old 2nd Mar 2015, 10:26
  #5749 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,960
the F-35B will surpass the current capability of the AV-8B Harrier jump jet and F/A-18C twin-engine Hornets, the Marines say.
umm ooookay..in what decade?

Hempy is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2015, 11:13
  #5750 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tarn et Garonne, Southwest France
Posts: 5,283
Good point, well made, Hempy.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2015, 17:36
  #5751 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
What could have been....

glad rag is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2015, 22:53
  #5752 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 809
umm ooookay..in what decade?
Like all things, does it not depend upon how you define the metric?
rh200 is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2015, 23:23
  #5753 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 645
Really? Apples with apples here guys...

The AIM-7, Maverick, HARM, SLAM-ER, and Mk-82/83 slicks don't need to be integrated with F-35.

Shall we substitute these with AIM-120C/D, SDB II/Brimstone, AARGM (Block 4), JSM (Block 4A) and all the JDAM versions, and I'd argue the F-35 stacks up very well. Also, lets compare the F-35A's 18,500lb internal/external load with the Hornet's 12,500lb capacity.

Oh, and where is the F/A-18s's internal weapons bay? And do we want to compare internal fuel capacities?
FoxtrotAlpha18 is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2015, 00:42
  #5754 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Annapolis
Posts: 109
Yup, SH carries or will carry all those as well, and sooner in most cases and concurrently in others, excepting the Brimstone.
Maus92 is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2015, 08:54
  #5755 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Since when will a 35a fly off a carrier?
glad rag is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2015, 12:47
  #5756 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,545
Glad rag - It might be possible once but it would be a short flight.

While we're all used to PowerPoint-vs.-real loadouts, it's quite difficult to get to the F-35's alleged 18,000 pounds. You have 11 stations, which looks impressive, but one is gunpod-only (maybe other non-droppable items later), four are single-purpose (2 x AIM-120, 2 X SRAAM), two are size-constrained and only two are wet.
LowObservable is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2015, 18:11
  #5757 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,545
This is interesting - see pp 14-15...

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AP/AP...G-20150226.pdf

Today, there are a multitude of high risk regions where a crisis response operation would require large Joint strike packages to soften or blind the threat.... Such strike packages require coordination across services and combatant commands and take weeks and months to assemble.
This same kind of access can be attained with a single detachment of 4 to 8 F-35s.


It seems those aircraft would be pretty busy supporting CAP, doing ISR and generating strike packages - that's about the same number of SHARs that the Invincibles carried, just for hack-the-shad and a few other missions. Not to mention you still don't have AEW&C.

The sensors and communications equipment of our F-35s allow pilots and forward air controllers to see through the clouds to exchange high fidelity pictures in environments we would consider a no go today.

You what? Through the clouds = SAR/GMTI from a fighter radar. That doesn't sound like a source of "high-fidelity pictures" in a CAS context. And still no Rover yet.

Comments? GK121? Spaz? Anybody?
LowObservable is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2015, 18:28
  #5758 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
I think "high fidelity" is a "how long is a piece of string" question. Personally, if I can meet my ID criteria for a target with sufficient visual acuity that's good enough. In Gulf War 2 people were successfully doing it "in a CAS context" using gyro-stabilised binoculars from 20,000 feet. The SAR-map quality of modern radars is truly spectacular.
MSOCS is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2015, 18:30
  #5759 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,545
That's true to a point, but whether APG-81 can detect/track dismounts is a good question. 1-meter resolution is a nice map, but not really what JTACS are used to, and more importantly I can't keep that radar consistently on a ground target.
LowObservable is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2015, 18:40
  #5760 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Yes LO, but these are being described correctly as "pictures", not video. Let's not muddy the waters. I don't for one second believe the article's quote was trying to compare the persistent field of view or resolution of a Lightning III or Sniper pod with that of a modern AESA SAR map. Given the choice I'd use the pod for CAS over SAR Map any day but the article makes a good point that, whereas in the past any ability to conduct CAS through cloud would be limited, the F-35 has a number of other strings to its bow. The same could be said for F-18 etc but they would undoubtedly be much more vulnerable in a "no go" area. As a pilot, I'd rather fly an F-35 on an opposed CAS mission in contested airspace over anything else.
MSOCS is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.