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 7th Mar 2017, 14:56
  #10341 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
Thanks for the clarification. That was what I meant by "under some circumstances" but I was trying to be brief and didn't intend to imply that the jet had missed its bring-back KPP (which would be a shame, considering the time and money it has cost to meet it).
George K Lee is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2017, 15:40
  #10342 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lon UK
Posts: 276
I wonder if, being on an RN vessel releases them from USN 'dry ship' rules?
George I was referring to this...
https://news.usni.org/2014/07/01/hun...nd-alcohol-sea
Brat is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2017, 16:13
  #10343 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 66
Posts: 1,954
I wonder if, being on an RN vessel releases them from USN 'dry ship' rules?
I can answer that. I served on a foreign exchange cruise with the Royal Netherlands Navy whose ships are not dry. There were no drinking restrictions other than the restrictions imposed by the RNlN. Hope this was helpful.
KenV is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2017, 16:14
  #10344 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
Do you think I or anyone else here did not know about Sec. Daniels (a nasty piece of work he was too)?
George K Lee is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2017, 17:26
  #10345 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 71
Posts: 1,938
Thanks 'Engines' always an 'old faithful' of brill info :-)

Billie Flynn Canuckian F-35 Test Pilot quoted in AirForces Monthly Magazine July 2014 which was reproducing a Canadian Skies magazine article:
"...The F-35 is designed to operate from the extremes of 55C [131F] down to well below -40C [-40F]...."
US Mil Spec Hot day was 32.1C, 1013Mb. — UK Hot Day 35.5C, 992Mb.

Development of the Shipborne Rolling Vertical Landing (SRVL) Manoeuvre for the F-35B Aircraft
"(footnote page 4)...Ambient Temperature: 35.5ºC and Pressure: 992mb..."
https://vtol.org/store/product/devel...craft-9024.cfm
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2017, 17:42
  #10346 (permalink)  
FOG
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wherever sent
Posts: 63
Approximately ten years ago there was interest in B’s being able to work on/off CVNs, hence the interest in SRVL.

At a working lunch in Ft. Worth (Rail Head BBQ, show id and get 50% off except for beer) with working class knuckle draggers a few things were discussed and brought up to the big brains at LM, NAVAIR, and PAX. The relative easy issue was the differences in LSO TTPs between the Harrier community (and the proposed B) and all the other fixed wing communities.

The part we couldn’t figure a cheap, easy or workable solution to was SRVL with the deck rigged. Under perfect-very good landings there was clearance between the nozzle and wires. Beyond the (high) probability of nozzle strikes on the wires what are/were the effects of the high heat on the wires over X time frame as the acft. rolled past.

The only solution we could come up with to operate Bs from a CVN was to re-rig and then re-rig for everyone else. Not exactly optimal for ops beyond the original concern Harrier style landing patterns being integrated into normal CVN recovery ops. Plus decreasing safety in an already very dangerous arena with increased rigging and derigging…

S/F, FOG
FOG is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2017, 18:00
  #10347 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 124
US Mil Spec Hot day 32.1C — UK Hot Day 35.5C

Hence that "mad dogs and Englishmen" bit?
Vzlet is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2017, 18:07
  #10348 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 71
Posts: 1,938
And now... Something Completely Different.... 07 Mar 2017

Have Israel?s new F-35s seen combat? | Air Forces Monthly
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2017, 13:31
  #10349 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: virginia, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 775
And now... Something Completely Different.... 07 Mar 2017

That would indeed be interesting, Israel seems to put systems into use quite quickly.
sandiego89 is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2017, 14:20
  #10350 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,393
But sandiego89, they didn't properly declare IOC! They can't have used them to drop bombs!
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2017, 14:35
  #10351 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 71
Posts: 1,938
Israeli F-35A pilots did not fly the aircraft under training in USofA. They flew only in the Full Mission Simulator there. Once the aircraft were flown to Israel by American pilots (delayed by fog) the Israeli pilots started to fly their F-35As.
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 9th Mar 2017, 16:45
  #10352 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
The Israelis may have used the aircraft. The capabilities claimed by the program would support a fixed-target strike from a main base. However, the S-300 has been around for some time and I would expect that the IAF already had ways to deal with it.

The question is whether this operation indicates that the contractual requirements for F-35 SDD completion, including a formal IOT&E, are mere bureaucratic pettifogging or whether they actually matter. I suspect that they do, when it comes to sustained combat and training with normal contractor support.
George K Lee is offline  
Old 9th Mar 2017, 17:32
  #10353 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 350/3 Compton
Age: 72
Posts: 256
As far as I know, I was the first (and only!) pilot to carry out an SRVL in the jumping bean. It was on 1st May 1982 and I was not sure whether I would be able to hover due to a slight difference of opinion with a Spanish-speaking gentleman with a big gun. Result - Gert big 'ole in my tail and damage to my rear end! All was well and the jet was flying again in the morning.

Nothing new etc!
Mogwi is offline  
Old 9th Mar 2017, 21:59
  #10354 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: A better place.
Posts: 1,634
If true that is a very interesting story about the IAF F-35s.
Gotta admire them - no mucking around.
Mazeltov!
tartare is offline  
Old 9th Mar 2017, 22:49
  #10355 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lon UK
Posts: 276
As far as I know, I was the first (and only!) pilot to carry out an SRVL in the jumping bean. It was on 1st May 1982 and I was not sure whether I would be able to hover due to a slight difference of opinion with a Spanish-speaking gentleman with a big gun. Result - Gert big 'ole in my tail and damage to my rear end! All was well and the jet was flying again in the morning.

Nothing new etc!
And very good reading your account of that made. Congratulations and respect.
Brat is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2017, 00:33
  #10356 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hants
Posts: 63
As far as I know, I was the first (and only!) pilot to carry out an SRVL in the jumping bean
...in the 20th century. It's been done in the 21st (on a French ship with an older jet).

Well done by the way. We suspected it had already bin-dun but I didn't have any proper info on your event before the 2007 demo.
NoHoverstop is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2017, 21:35
  #10357 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 71
Posts: 1,938
'NoHoverstop' I had read somewhere that the VACC Harrier only did SRVL approaches to CdeG in 2007 - I would have to go search for that quote though. Meanwhile USMC F-35B at their first Red Flag in 2016 part of summary quote from an FOI PDF available: https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...rt-of-Red.html OR http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=24330 (PDF 0.4Mb OCRed here)
“...Overall, the F-35 was far more survivable then the participating legacy aircraft. Debrief analysis of each F-35 loss was either the result of a pilot's individual employment error or the result of a scenario/airspace limitation. Due to the large number of assets involved, pilots were, limited to a 1000 foot altitude block. Block adherence and no-fly areas within the range complex prohibited pilots from positioning themselves in the most lethal or survivable position. Even with those restrictions, it was extremely difficult for the opposing red force to acquire and successfully engage F-35s. As the squadron commander, I am extremely proud at the humble professionalism we brought to this exercise. Our maintenance department worked hard and delivered combat capable aircraft !or every vul. Our pilots seamlessly integrated with other aircrew and cyber/space operators. We capitalized on our opportunities to lead the events as Mission Commanders, Package Commanders, and Tactical Mentors. Most notably, our pilots were the Mission Commanders for the event with the most capable enemy threat laydown as well as the VIP event with the Secretary of the Air Force and USAF Chief of Staff present. This was the first Red Flag exercise with F-35 participation and the USMC lead [led?] from the front....”
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2017, 22:29
  #10358 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,114
One presumes they picked the most serviceable and reliable they had...

....VMFA-121 also left a seventh jet behind at its base in Arizona due to a malfunctioning integrated power package (IPP), which provides electrical power for the aircraft, Bardo noted. In all, fewer than two of the squadron’s fighters— 23 percent—were “full mission capable” at any one time, on average. Crews kept approximately 53 percent of the six planes “partial mission capable” throughout Red Flag 16-3. “Notably, these numbers only reflect the six aircraft deployed to Nellis AFB,” Bardo stressed.....
ORAC is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2017, 00:46
  #10359 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hants
Posts: 63
'NoHoverstop' I had read somewhere that the VACC Harrier only did SRVL approaches to CdeG in 2007 - I would have to go search for that quote though.
Are you sure you haven't mis-remembered a description of the HMS Illustrious 2008 trial, rather then the 2007 PA Charles de Gaulle demo? SRVL approaches were flown then to overshoot (or to stop alongside and VL), with the overshoot usually being very low (initiated past the point where on a QEC ship with nominal aim point geometry, the aircraft would have already crossed the stern). SRVL landing on Illustrious wasn't done because with the ramp at the bow and one of the two experimental Bedford Arrays actually on (rather than in) the flight deck at the stern*, it was "VL room only". Charles de Gaulle the previous year had neither of those two issues, but it also didn't have North Atlantic in Winter waves.

Oh and it's VAAC - Vectored-thrust Aircraft Advanced flight Control

*in the cases where this array was used the overshoot had to be a bit higher.
NoHoverstop is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2017, 00:55
  #10360 (permalink)  
FOG
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wherever sent
Posts: 63
ORAC,

In actual fact few naval aircraft are Full Mission Capable (FMC), most are partial mission capable (PMC).

The short version is that everything has to 100%, no outstanding work to be done (such as updates, etc.) to be considered FMC by the MESM. As an example and acft has dual GPS and dual INS with whatever scheme of cross loading and one of the four goes down. The acft is PMC. Another acft in the same squadron is the hanger queen, no INS or GPS working and only one radio that works in one band. The hanger queen is also PMC if it can take off and land safely in VMC.

The MESM codes aircraft A-Z. FMC-PMC-NMC.

The real question is how many, if any, missions were changed or dropped due availability.

S/F, FOG
FOG 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.