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 26th Jan 2016, 18:32
  #8301 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 66
Posts: 1,954
If the F-35Bs advanced systems and capabilities are not needed in Syria, then why did the USAF insist that the F-22A was necessary to defeat Syrian air defenses during the initial airstrikes in that campaign?
The thinking was that if air power was used against Syrian forces in direct support of rebel forces, that the Syrians would use their air defenses against such aircraft. That never happened. Instead, air power has been used to target ISIL/ISIS forces, which effectively supports Syrian forces rather than opposes them. So the Syrians have not used their air defenses against those aircraft. If things changed and US and/or NATO forces were to directly target Syrian forces in direct support of rebel forces, that would likely require F-22/F-35.
KenV is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2016, 19:14
  #8302 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,549
So why are they using the F-22, then?
LowObservable is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2016, 19:21
  #8303 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 66
Posts: 1,954
So why are they using the F-22, then?
1. Show of force/intimidation
2. Electronic vacuum cleaner.
KenV is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2016, 21:10
  #8304 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 1,874
Originally Posted by LowObservable View Post
But there was that big sea trial back in May that conclusively showed... Oh, wait...

http://www.pogoarchives.org/straus/2...D-FOIA-ocr.pdf

Interesting read, not unexpected to have problems. Hope the UK authorities have read this, some gotcha's that could be eliminated now before the QE & PoW are fitted out.
You have to wonder how much space will be taken up by spare engine power modules.
Kitbag is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 11:39
  #8305 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: River Thames & Surrey
Age: 71
Posts: 8,660
Rumoured on spotters websites to be 5 scheduled to appear at this years Farnborough Airshow:
2 x USAF; 2 x USMC; 1 x RAF.
http://www.farnborough.proboards.com...1/airshow-news
chevvron is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 11:52
  #8306 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bourton-on-the-Water
Posts: 908
Not just spotters, chevvron - here's a press release from Farnborough
FARNBOROUGH INTERNATIONAL AIRSHOW COULD WELCOME UP TO FIVE F-35s AT SUMMER SHOWCASE

UK MoD, US Marine Corps and US Air Force aircraft plan to participate in flying display at international trade show case and public weekend
Up to five F-35 joint strike fighter aircraft are planned to participate in the flying display at the Farnborough International Airshow this summer. Continuing a long tradition of aviation firsts for the event, this will be the first opportunity for many of the organisations involved in the development of the aircraft to showcase their achievements in the making of the aircraft to a major international trade audience.

Speaking about the announcement, FIL Commercial Director, Amanda Stainer, said, "The fact that the UK MoD, US Marine Corps and US Air Force have chosen the Farnborough International Airshow to demonstrate the aircraft is testament to the show’s standing as a major international aerospace event. The F-35 joint strike fighter programme is very significant for many companies that participate in the show and they will be very excited at the opportunity to demonstrate their participation in the programme."

In the last few days both the US Marine Corps and US Air Force have announced that they plan to bring both the F-35A and F-35B aircraft to demonstrate at the show, Furthermore, at least one British jet is expected to participate. Defence Secretary Michael Fallon said. "The F-35s are the most advanced fast jets in the world. Whether operating from land or from one of our two new aircraft carriers - the UK’s largest ever - they will ensure we have a cutting edge and formidable fighting force."

"The plan for F-35 aircraft to take part in air shows here in the UK this summer is a significant milestone – for our RAF and Royal Navy personnel training hard to fly the F-35; for British industry who are contributing an impressive 15 per cent of every aircraft; and for the British public who will have their first opportunity to see this remarkable aircraft in action."

As well as during the trade show, the F-35 will also participate in the flying display at the public weekend allowing the general public to enjoy the spectacle of this major new aircraft. Responding to the news, Shaun Ormrod, Chief Executive for Farnborough International Ltd said, "Its great news that we can welcome the F-35 to the show, visitors at the public weekend will be amongst the first to see this aircraft outside the US. "
However, RIAT and FIA may be pipped in the 'international début' stakes by the Netherlands. Aerospace Daily says the RNlAF show at Leeuwarden is hoping to have an F-35 flying at the show the month before.

airsound
airsound is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 13:09
  #8307 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The sunny South
Posts: 765
Originally Posted by Kitbag
...You have to wonder how much space will be taken up by spare engine power modules
The QECs have nine decks of store rooms with hangar volumes of 29,000 cubic metres so there shouldn't be any problem stowing the odd spare.

Originally Posted by chevvron
Rumoured on spotters websites to be 5 scheduled to appear at this years Farnborough Airshow:
2 x USAF; 2 x USMC; 1 x RAF.
http://www.farnborough.proboards.com...1/airshow-news
How annoying for the F-35 doom mongers if this transpires. Anyone reading this forum would expect Lightning IIs to be falling out of the skies like flies despite achieving circa 60,000 flying hours (open to correction) to date without any significant aerial mishap.
FODPlod is online now  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 13:32
  #8308 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 62
Posts: 371
Whilst it is good to see that F35s will be flying to the UK this year, I do wonder what sort of display they will be allowed to undertake, considering that only the USMC planes have achieved IOC, that is assuming that the two planes coming over are from that squadron.

The "displays" that have been conducted in the US so far have been quite pedestrian as I understand it, basically just flying in and out of the destination.

Displaying with a "test load" software might bring up some interesting liability questions.
PhilipG is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 13:40
  #8309 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The sunny South
Posts: 765
Might the USMC aircraft be F-35Bs? Incidentally, what's wrong with calling the F-35B Sea Lightning anyway?
FODPlod is online now  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 14:59
  #8310 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Annapolis
Posts: 109
@PhillipG: There is not an approved demo flight routine for US F-35s. That is the case for now, as it was two years ago prior to the F-35A flailing itself to death on the runway at Eglin. Last year at Oshkosh, the F-35As flew an arrivals routine, and an extended taxiing routine to the parking stand (that was unintentional: the pilot got lost - so much for sensor fusion.)

Whether or not the UK F-35 will have limits, IDK for sure, but I think the follow whatever the JPO decides/allows.
Maus92 is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 16:21
  #8311 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 62
Posts: 371
@Maus92: I think that we are thinking the same, it is unlikely that anything more than arrival and departure flights as at Osckosh, with better situational awareness one hopes, will be on the cards.

Reducing expectations a long way well before the event...

Last edited by PhilipG; 27th Jan 2016 at 16:22. Reason: Take out non working smilly
PhilipG is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 16:42
  #8312 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 135
"Real" Demos

Two years ago at MCAS Cherry Point, the demos included short takeoffs and landings, hovering, high and low speed passes, and mixed-type formations. They certainly weren't as aggressive and dynamic as say, a Belgian F-16 routine, but weren't basic vanilla, either.


More pictures here.
Vzlet is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 16:43
  #8313 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,608
what's wrong with calling the F-35B Sea Lightning anyway?
because it's not it's name?

Official: Lightning II (ignore fact Americans have no regard for EE Lightning)

Unofficial: Dave.......
ORAC is online now  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 17:10
  #8314 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The sunny South
Posts: 765
One. Did you click on the "Sea Lightning" link?
FODPlod is online now  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 17:21
  #8315 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bourton-on-the-Water
Posts: 908
because it's not it's name?
You are, of course, right, ORAC. But there's more to it, isn't there?
There is presumably no difference between the F35B flown by a fishhead and one flown by a crab. Indeed, they'll all be flying them together, whether from a landlocked runway or a floating one. So a "Sea" Lightning is exactly the same as any other kind....

As far as Dave is concerned - I've forgotten how that came about. Anyone remember? (It is rather good though)

airsound
airsound is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 17:22
  #8316 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,587
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
because it's not it's name?

Official: Lightning II (ignore fact Americans have no regard for EE Lightning)

Unofficial: Dave.......
The original American Lightning was the P-38.
You are welcome.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 18:30
  #8317 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 92
Posts: 1,890
Might the USMC aircraft be F-35Bs? Incidentally, what's wrong with calling the F-35B Sea Lightning anyway?
If there were a 'Sea' Lightning it would, in any case, be the F-35C.

Which is rather appropriate!
Willard Whyte is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 18:39
  #8318 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,608
The name being bestowed by the British, Lonewolf. Which, being followed by the EE Lightning, should mean it being called the Lightning III, if courtesy prevailed.....

Lockheed P-38 Lightning - Heavy Fighter / Fighter-Bomber - History, Specs and Pictures - Military Aircraft
ORAC is online now  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 20:56
  #8319 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,587
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
The name being bestowed by the British, Lonewolf. Which, being followed by the EE Lightning, should mean it being called the Lightning III, if courtesy prevailed.....

Lockheed P-38 Lightning - Heavy Fighter / Fighter-Bomber - History, Specs and Pictures - Military Aircraft
As it was made in America, I suggest to you that, like the Thunderbolt II (aka the A-10) since Thunderbolt was the P-47 .... naming the F-35 the Lightning II makes perfect sense.

The Lightning you refer to, the jet, was named the Lightning.
By your just now argued naming convention, it ought to have been named the Lightning II.
But it wasn't.

Go wave your finger at someone else.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2016, 21:34
  #8320 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 355
Japanese F3

If F35 turns out to rubbish, we could always take a look at the Japanese F3:

Japan Ready For Next Fighter Engine Core | F-3 | TRDI | IHI Corp. | Defense content from Aviation Week



If they ever finish it, it might be awesome, ceramic turbine blades, etc.

It would be ironic if F35, which is going to have to last a veeeery long time given how much money is being spent on it, gets immediately obsoleted by a home-grown Japanese design.

And if they're going it alone they'd be beholden to nobody else. An enviable position... They're 'in' the F35 program but apparently are grumbling about unit cost increases. Who isn't? It'd be very easy to argue that the funding would be better spent on a home grown F3 that will produce a lot of dual use (and commercially valuable) technology. Especially as they 'like' grand engineering projects like that.

It will also depend on whether their strategic nerve holds; F35 may be closer to being in service.
msbbarratt 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.