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 21st Jun 2019, 15:27
  #11921 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,198
[] adding two 600-gal. external tanks on an F-35A []
I'll be that'll have the test pilots queuing up to do the asymmetric stores jettison trials.
BEagle is online now  
Old 25th Jun 2019, 02:31
  #11922 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 2,108
UK F35

UK stealth fighter jets join fight against Islamic State https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48745027

Used on Ops already. Not bad for a jet that weve only had in the UK for a few months.

BV
Bob Viking is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2019, 05:02
  #11923 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 13,177
Just over a year. Tempus fugit.....
ORAC is online now  
Old 25th Jun 2019, 05:18
  #11924 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 2,108
ORAC

Twelve months can still be classed as a few in my book. 😉

Time does indeed fly.

BV
Bob Viking is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2019, 08:47
  #11925 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 1,087
The not-so-subliminal message of the BBC's clip above is quite different from the claimed objective of 'going after IS remnants'.
jolihokistix is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2019, 23:46
  #11926 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
She added: "It obviously has some incredible capabilities which are really putting us in the lead."

Excellent. Heart warming that IS is proving to be a real test of it's capabilities.
weemonkey is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 20:54
  #11927 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 67
Posts: 3,654
External tanks on pylons would obviously be highly adverse to the radar signature - but properly designed conformal tanks could have a minimal impact.
I wonder if it would be practical to design conformal tanks that could be jettisoned if combat was imminent?
tdracer is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2019, 13:02
  #11928 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 2,306
U.S. Air Force F-35A Lightning IIs, center, lead a formation of Israeli Air Force F-35I, right, and Royal Air Force F-35B, left, during Exercise Tri-Lightning over the Eastern Mediterranean Sea, June 25, 2019. Tri-Lightning is a defensive counter air exercise involving the U.S., U.K. and Israel. The exercise is designed to improve interoperability and coordination in air operations among the U.S. and its partners. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Keifer Bowes)

​​​​​​​
https://www.afcent.af.mil/News/article/1886852/
TEEEJ is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2019, 18:04
  #11929 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 654
Can someone please point me to a balanced article on F35?

I see a lot of bashing about stealth, costs and snags, but little with an overall balanced view.

Im wondering at $100m a pop this is not much more than an F18E now (and when in full prod), but has proper LO which can be maintained, has brilliant SA and sensor suite. Do the speed and agility compromises need to be seen in that context? Would anyone really want an F18 instead? Also from a Uk perspective we make the back end (?) so much of our bn investment will be seen again in Salmesbury? etc. through the 3000 production run.

I realise it is not all roses but struggle to find articles that bring out some of these positives.

PS What would you - today - rather go and drop some paveway with - Typhoon/F18 or F35?
JFZ90 is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2019, 19:25
  #11930 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 13,177
has brilliant SA and sensor suite. Do the speed and agility compromises need to be seen in that context? Would anyone really want an F18 instead?
The sensor suite is old, because of the protracted delay, and far from modern standards and already contracted to be replaced, the same or better is already planned for other airframes. Yes. Ask the USN......

Ohhh! And the new Ford class carriers won’t be able to operate them till their mid life updates....

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...ve-f-35s-64051
ORAC is online now  
Old 28th Jun 2019, 20:01
  #11931 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
Originally Posted by JFZ90 View Post
Can someone please point me to a balanced article on F35?

Post 11858 refers.
weemonkey is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2019, 20:10
  #11932 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post


The sensor suite is old, because of the protracted delay, and far from modern standards and already contracted to be replaced, the same or better is already planned for other airframes. Yes. Ask the USN......

Ohhh! And the new Ford class carriers wont be able to operate them till their mid life updates....

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...ve-f-35s-64051

Same old same old. RAF Typhoon targeting [lightning 5?] pods 3+ gen ahead of geriatric F35 standard fit. No Raptor pod, uplinking, brite cloud etc, etc.

Yeah everything's good.
weemonkey is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2019, 21:57
  #11933 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 67
Posts: 3,654
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post


The sensor suite is old, because of the protracted delay, and far from modern standards and already contracted to be replaced, the same or better is already planned for other airframes. Yes. Ask the USN......

Ohhh! And the new Ford class carriers wont be able to operate them till their mid life updates....

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...ve-f-35s-64051
OK, what's different about the F35 that the Ford class can't handle them? The linked article is strangely silent on what that might be.
tdracer is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2019, 23:11
  #11934 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
So just what is the inverted time limitation on the '135 engine. Nice shot indeed.
weemonkey is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2019, 10:15
  #11935 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 654
Originally Posted by weemonkey View Post
Post 11858 refers.
Many thanks.

I guess the UK NAO might shed some light, but Ive never found the NAO very balanced - too busy trying to find some issue, blow it out if proportion and big themselves up as having found something and provided direction and hence saved the day. As a result they often fail to comment on positives or see the bigger picture.

Is the GAO similar?
JFZ90 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2019, 12:12
  #11936 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
This may help.

https://wordhistories.net/2016/12/28...urse-sows-ear/
weemonkey is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2019, 13:25
  #11937 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 654
Originally Posted by weemonkey View Post
Is it really so simple to mock?

What would have been the alternative? If you ignore the vstol variant for a moment and focussed on what you needed to replace F16 and F18 etc. Would their replacements have been very different to F35?

Or would the requirements driving stealth, SA sensors and networking etc. have resulted in very similar - if not the same - technical risks and delays that F35 saw? But possibly duplicated in two very expensive programmes?

And if you argue to just upgrade F16 and F18 instead, you cant bolt on stealth so youre abandoning that as a requirement?

Is the cost of stealth a price worth paying?

I assume no one is pretending a stealthy pure F16 (and parallel programmes for F18 etc) would have been any cheaper than F35?
JFZ90 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2019, 15:17
  #11938 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
Originally Posted by JFZ90 View Post


Is it really so simple to mock?

What would have been the alternative? If you ignore the vstol variant for a moment and focussed on what you needed to replace F16 and F18 etc. Would their replacements have been very different to F35?

Or would the requirements driving stealth, SA sensors and networking etc. have resulted in very similar - if not the same - technical risks and delays that F35 saw? But possibly duplicated in two very expensive programmes?

And if you argue to just upgrade F16 and F18 instead, you cant bolt on stealth so youre abandoning that as a requirement?

Is the cost of stealth a price worth paying?

I assume no one is pretending a stealthy pure F16 (and parallel programmes for F18 etc) would have been any cheaper than F35?

I guess if you don't want to read the facts presented in the annual NAO report[s] and internally digest the failings, or read this thread, that's up to you.

Cheers.
weemonkey is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2019, 06:56
  #11939 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 4,636
"I guess the UK NAO might shed some light, but Ive never found the NAO very balanced - too busy trying to find some issue, blow it out if proportion and big themselves up as having found something and provided direction and hence saved the day. As a result they often fail to comment on positives or see the bigger picture. "

Care to list some positives from recent UK military procurement?

They are the National AUDIT Office - it's their job to find out what is over budget, where the money is short and where illogical optimism rules - and heaven knows they're not short of examples............
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2019, 07:07
  #11940 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Can you point me to the part of the NAO reports that deal with the actual threat?
orca 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 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.