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 1st Jan 2017, 19:20
  #10061 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 5,222
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
The Israeli Air Force have got their first two examples.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/20..._135900142.htm
Fareastdriver is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2017, 07:20
  #10062 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Exiled in England
Age: 48
Posts: 1,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
All I know is that my shares in Spatchcock and Shinney ( Turd Polish suppliers to the MOD ) are going up in value faster than the price of Dave, at this rate by the time the "wonderjet" deploys on an operation I will be I the position to buy one myself
cornish-stormrider is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2017, 10:26
  #10063 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So that'll probably be this year:

USMC F-35B to West Pacific, already confirmed.

USAF F-35A deployment has been suggested by their top brass.
MSOCS is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2017, 11:58
  #10064 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hope they’ve got the Mains wired up properly then!
glad rag is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2017, 16:22
  #10065 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, one of us hasn't had our "Mains" wired up properly Glad Rag, because I don't have a clue what you're on about (per usual).

May I respectfully ask you for a more complete sarcastic reply, please?
MSOCS is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2017, 18:09
  #10066 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by MSOCS
Well, one of us hasn't had our "Mains" wired up properly Glad Rag, because I don't have a clue what you're on about (per usual).

May I respectfully ask you for a more complete sarcastic reply, please?


Well all the other IOC's have had trouble with the mains why should this one be any different?

And the fuel that’s too hot, imaginary role play, reboots etc, etc

But as cluster****s go, it'll be a

"oustanding"

one.
glad rag is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2017, 19:29
  #10067 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thank you for making me none-the-wiser, GR.
MSOCS is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2017, 19:41
  #10068 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Exiled in England
Age: 48
Posts: 1,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I understood it

A politically driven despairing push to show its worth does not make a "warfighter" ( sorry, stupid terminology)

When it's doing proper deployments and working like say a plastic bug then I'll be convinced
cornish-stormrider is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2017, 21:34
  #10069 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: virginia, USA
Age: 56
Posts: 1,060
Received 15 Likes on 10 Posts
Well I still do not understand glad's meaning of "Mains" or "mains" either...


I do see the U.S. desire to forward deploy the F-35 earlier than other platforms. While it is partially political, it might also be desirable to see how the F-35 works, gain valuable training for crews and allies (and perhaps boost sales) and see how it will influence doctrine in the services. Even if the F-35 is not fully up yet, they offer some impressive capabilities.


Why not deploy them? Why wait until FOC? The system will be constantly be updated over the life of the program. Do you wait until all your dream home improvement projects are completed to perfection to have friends over? Nah, I say invite them over- most won't care if your don't have the bamboo floors in yet....


In the US, there was some flack about not deploying the F-117, B-2, F-22 and B-1 to certain engagements or hot spots.
sandiego89 is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2017, 23:25
  #10070 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Anyway, setting cryptic diatribes to one side for a moment - and regardless of the few problems which the Program is nugging its way through - the current 3i block capability would bring a hell of a lot to any Joint Commander's AOR in my opinion.

So yeah, it will likely happen, and why not? If it succeeds on a par with the Pentagon's confidence, the silence from F-35's detractors will be deafening.
MSOCS is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2017, 23:48
  #10071 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If it succeeds on a par with the Pentagon's confidence, the silence from F-35's detractors will be deafening.
It's best not to count your chickens before they hatch...
Turbine D is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2017, 23:54
  #10072 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks Mom!
MSOCS is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2017, 01:52
  #10073 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If it succeeds on a par with the Pentagon's confidence, i
1. What do you mean "if"$$$$$$$$$$ ?

2. That's the problem there, the one person who has ensured that there has been some transparency is being moved on....
glad rag is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2017, 09:53
  #10074 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Must. Clutch. At. Straws.
MSOCS is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2017, 18:32
  #10075 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK on a crosswind
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Correct me if I'm wrong - but a Sukhoi SU-33 has a maximum take off weight of a little over 72,000 lbs and a reheat thrust of 2X 28,214 lbs. The SU-33 uses the STOBAR Russian carriers. A Rafale has maximum take off weight of 54,000 lbs and reheat thrust of 2 X 17,000 lbs. So why couldn't Rafales use Queen Elizabeth without catapults as STOBAR?
Royalistflyer is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2017, 19:02
  #10076 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So why couldn't Rafales use Queen Elizabeth without catapults as STOBAR?
1. Still need arresting gear, which QE does not have.
2. Thrust to weight is only one of numerous variables that affect STOBAR performance. You'd need to compare many other variables to make a meaningful comparison.
KenV is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2017, 20:38
  #10077 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
In Canberra, 1999, arrived the US marketeer for JSF. His sales pitch was based on - forget Typhoon, JSF will be half the price with a vastly superior capability. Right!!
jindabyne is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2017, 21:40
  #10078 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, at least he was half right!
MSOCS is offline  
Old 5th Jan 2017, 06:40
  #10079 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,231
Received 1,502 Likes on 679 Posts
The F-35C has hit another major snag that could take years to fix - Business Insider

The Pentagon has established a "red team" to address considerable shortcomings with the F-35C, the carrier-based naval variant of the most expensive weapons project in history.

The F-35, subject to cost overruns and delays throughout its production, reached an initial state of military readiness with its Air Force and Marine variants in 2016, but the Navy's variant lags behind in part due to an issue with its nose gear during catapult-assisted takeoffs from aircraft carriers, Inside Defense uncovered on Wednesday. Essentially the problem, detailed in a Navy report with data dating back to 2014, deals with rough takeoffs that hurt and disorient pilots at the critical moment when they're taking off from a carrier.

The Pentagon's red team found the problem was due to several factors central to the plane's design, and recommended several fixes that will take several months to several years to fully fix. The report states that long term actions to address the problem will not take place until 2019, at which point they'll take 12-36 months to implement. Redesigns to the plane, as well as to carriers, may be necessary to fully address the problem.

A Pentagon deficiency report in 2015 stated that extreme movements in the cockpit during launch risked pilot health. One hundred and five pilots completing catapult launches rated their level of pain or discomfort on a scale of one to five. Of the 105, 74 pilots reported "moderate" pain or a 3, 18 pilots reported "severe" pain or a 4, and one pilot reported "severe pain that persists" after launching from an aircraft carrier. "The oscillations shake the pilot's head sufficiently to impair their ability to consistently read flight critical data, which poses a safety of flight risk," reads the report cited by Inside Defense.

This pain, more than a mere inconvenience, threatens the ability of pilots to read flight-critical data as they perform the complicated task of launching from a moving platform at sea. Exacerbating the problem, some pilots locked down their harnesses to avoid jostling around during the launch, but this makes it more difficult for the pilot to eject, should they need to........
ORAC is offline  
Old 5th Jan 2017, 06:58
  #10080 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,565
Likes: 0
Received 50 Likes on 44 Posts
I'm told that persons may take advantage of a free month for Navy newsletter to see this full article. I cannot so take what I have been given on good faith - this is what Lute Generale Bogged Down has said re above issue:
"...F-35 Program Executive Officer Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan told reporters during a Dec. 19 roundtable at his office in Arlington, VA, "there's no doubt" his team has to find a solution to the nose gear.

However, he stressed, "the only time that is a problem with the C model is at very light gross weights. At medium weights and at heavy weights you don't see this problem at all."

Bogdan said his office is considering numerous short-term fixes, including changing the way pilots strap themselves into the aircraft and how they hold the straps.

"The long-term fix surely would be one that you would mechanically fix so that you don't have to make the pilots do any kind of special combinations," Bogdan said. "That fix is probably a couple of years off."..."
https://insidedefense.com/daily-news...mends-possible
SpazSinbad is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.