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 14th Mar 2013, 19:53
  #1301 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
"Not one is combat capable. Even in training flights they face restrictions"

it's called lrip sdd
JSFfan is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 20:29
  #1302 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 48
Posts: 505
Denmark Relaunches Fighter Jet Competition | Defense News | defensenews.com
LONDON — Denmark has restarted a competition to select a fighter jet to replace the Air Force’s fleet of F-16s and has reopened the door to a bid from Eurofighter with the Typhoon.
Anybody here willing to bet if they really will abandon the JSF and go for something a little bit more affordable and sensible?
If they do it will be very hard for the Dutch DoD to convince their parliament to go ahead with their JSF plans, a new multi-party acquisition program ala F16 in the late 70'ies might once again be a very real possibility.
Personally I'm rooting for a B/NL/DK and maybe a 4th partner like CANADA joint venture and then, hopefully a split buy , Gripen NG + EF T3 or GripenNG + F18SSH ,possibly even with EODAS(like Northrop already said would be available for other platforms) + latest most powerful F414 engines

Too many advantages over the JSF to simply disregard.
-more involvement in developping high asset core systems
-cheaper purchasing costs
-2 platforms , optimal use, cheap to operate over the long run.
-lots of commonality between the possible fighters , RADAR+ weapons in case of the EF+GnG, engines+ possibly other Northrop kit that could be implemented on the Gripen, even an EJ200 (26,000Lbs thrust) equipped Gripen might be a possibility.
-2 seater available, I know some of you think that it is a thing of the past but I still believe their are many missions that benefit from the second pair of eyes ,hands and brain-halfs.

Like a clever Admiral said before, we shouldn't be too focused on stealth and maybe go for the more fiscally attainable alternative(s).




fingers crossed, but I'm realist enough to know that this is possibly a small politically correct detour to the inevitable JSF.

PS
If the JSF gets chosen by the nations involved we'll be looking at
30 for the Danish Air Force
38 for our Dutch friends (forget about the 55 figure quoted last week)
20-ish for our Belgian Air Component
if all is payed for , the pilots can be happy to clock 100 hours per year, after that , the wallet is empty.

Next step will be to just give up completely on maintaining an air Force because it will be more Farce then Force.
The guys at Lockheed have then effectively done what not even the Sovjets could for 50 years post WWII , destroying the core of the West European Air forces.
kbrockman is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 20:41
  #1303 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
"The guys at Lockheed have then effectively done what not even the Sovjets could for 50 years post WWII , destroying the core of the West European Air forces."

I'm pretty sure it's self inflicted...what is EU designed to replace the eurocanards?
JSFfan is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 20:51
  #1304 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 57
Posts: 909
This....



Edited to add. Well, not really a European design.

Last edited by hval; 14th Mar 2013 at 20:52.
hval is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 20:56
  #1305 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Home alone
Posts: 295
silly articles?
Interesting view, despite the fact that it's by a long way, the most informed article I've ever seen written on the JSF and it's not been written by a 'know-nothing' journalist.

20-ish for our Belgian Air Component
This really is a tragedy...presumably they'll have around 13/14 operational? Subtract 2 or 3 for an OCU/OEU component, gives them the ability to surge 6 to a combat zone and have 3, maybe 4 (at a push) deployed over the long term. Given typical availability of a FJ fleet and the evidence above, that'll probably leave them with the ability put 2 (max 3) aircraft into the air in a Gulf War 1 type scenario and 1 (max 2) into the air in an Afghanistan type scenario...

Even if I'm off by a factor of 50% on deployable assets, the numbers are still so tiny it remains nothing more than a token contribution. What Lockheed will have done is neuter the Belgian Air Force.
Bastardeux is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 20:59
  #1306 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Home alone
Posts: 295
P.S. JSFfan, the French have proven the Rafale to be a war winner and the Swedes seem pretty damn happy with the Gripen. Yes the Typhoon started out as a clusterf**k, but even that is maturing into a decent multi-role aircraft...and reliable too!
Bastardeux is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 21:03
  #1307 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 57
Posts: 909
Bastardeux,

Yes the Typhoon started out as a clusterf**k, but even that is maturing into a decent multi-role aircraft...and reliable too!
To be fair, using that very same argument the F35 will turn out to be an excellent aircraft. After all, given time and money anything can be made to work well.

I still think it is too ugly and should have been put down at birth.
hval is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 21:15
  #1308 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 1,023
Originally Posted by kbrockman
20-ish for our Belgian Air Component
That half the number of F-104's the BAF lost in accidents
GeeRam is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 21:16
  #1309 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Bastardeux, the eurocanards are fine for now, but as I said, "what is EU designed to replace the eurocanards?" come 2030
JSFfan is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 21:33
  #1310 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,454
What Lockheed will have done is neuter the Belgian Air Force
Not quite. The Belgians themselves have done that over the past thirty years. You get what you pay for. (And you don't get what you won't pay for).

I still think it is too ugly and should have been put down at birth.
hval, the EA-6B is one of the ugliest planes I've ever seen, but it sure did a fantastic job for a long time, and is still out there doing missions.

Ugly is hardly a criterion for acceptance.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 22:02
  #1311 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 48
Posts: 505
I'm pretty sure it's self inflicted...what is EU designed to replace the eurocanards?
JSFfan,
I realize my statement is very black and white (it's the internet therefore,...) and that is not solely LM who is to blame, our politicians and their disdain of most things military and a large part of the population that just cares too little about defense matters have done nothing good for our defense budget and how the money is spent.
I would love to see us spending at least 2-2.5% of GDP on defense like agreed upon by most NATO partner nations.

However, now we have come to a point that we don't even get the technological and monetary feedback any more, we used to get from programs like the F16 before, now we just write a check , get a token contractor-deal making large volume but mostly low tech parts (forget about making something like Carapace or something similar), and are basically committed to it for the next 30-40 years no matter what upgrades, future unforeseen maintenance issues, or specific new weapons or new system integrations are going to cost us (price- time and politically wise).

The F35 will eventually work just fine, I'm sure about that, I have great confidence in the engineering prowess of the designers, workers, pilots and engineers involved.
This will change nothing about the facts that it is way too expensive and...
-very heavy, no follow up for what are basically LWF's like the F16 and 18 or M2000
-very bulky and aerodynamically challenged (yes I know it can carry some of its ordnance inside) , the ability to get away heroically and quickly from the battlefield once the bombs are dropped and the missiles are gone is not of insignificant importance.
The JSF is a pig going into the fight ,like almost all other platforms will be too, but unlike the others it will still be a pig going home which could be very problematic if you're operating in contested airspace.
-a big big engine that is therefore also very thirsty, noisy and expensive to replace/maintain if necessary, fuel cost money too you know.
- the best part, its sensor suite (EO DAS) is suitable for many/most other fighters acc to Northrop anyway.


About your remark about the Eurocanards, that's just pure BS, you might as well ask why the US isn't already working on anything more than just a concept to replace their F22's (same timeframe).
the Rafale and EF have the biggest part of their life in front of them and are very relevant, certainly if a partnership of nations decides to buy them in sufficient numbers and contractually demand system upgrades and development in the future.
The Gripen NG is an equivalent of the Hornet saga, a good idea evolving into its own follow up, almost entirely a new plane, new airframe, larger wings, new engines , new avionics/sensors, etc... .
I ask you, where do you think most state of the art weapon systems come from besides the US? China? Russia? anywhere else? I don't think so !
Besides our American friends, only our European companies have shown the ability to design, develop and build large complex state of the art large weapon systems
We might not spend enough of our money on defense but we still manage to make cutting edge system.
Granted we also have our fair share of failures ,A400M, although that looks better and better lately and the needless NH90 (what does it deliver that the Blackhawk cannot?) but we also have perfectly good systems ,Gripen, many ships and subs, A330MRTT, RAFALE, and even the Typhoon which is a fantastic fighter notwithstanding all of its development problems, and many many more ... .
kbrockman is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 22:05
  #1312 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,543
GK121 - The Navy "pays" for all F-35Bs and F-35Cs. They all come out of the same pot of aviation investment. Marine air was described to me by a CV-community guy as "the obnoxious little brother" that everyone tolerated up to a point. "But now he's getting expensive".
LowObservable is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 22:10
  #1313 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 57
Posts: 909
Lonewolf 50,

hval, the EA-6B is one of the ugliest planes I've ever seen
Uhmmm, I think I must have a problem. I actually find it quite attractive. Take away all the jewellery, the piercings and the wrinkles so that she looks as young as she once did and she is a pretty design; ish.

Edited to add. Not even the Mother and Father of the F35 could ever admit that their child has class, elegance or even is attractive. Nope, plain ugly.

Last edited by hval; 14th Mar 2013 at 22:14.
hval is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 22:10
  #1314 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tarn et Garonne, Southwest France
Posts: 5,283
kbroc,

Excellent post.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 22:16
  #1315 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
I didn't even suggest EU can't. I said there is nothing planned and the eurocanards won't be day 1
JSFfan is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 22:21
  #1316 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,543
KB - In fact the trend is for the US to become less of a factor in international markets as its over-spec'd products cease to be affordable solutions to anyone's needs.

The US no longer exports most land-warfare weapons (GD is a big player in armored vehicles, but through Euro subsidiaries) and has not exported a warship in decades. With the exceptions of Apache and Chinook, the US has been pushed out of most helicopter markets. The A400M and KC-390 will outlast the C-17 in production and the latter will start to eat the C-130E/H replacement market. The only places where the US is strong in large UAVs are MidEast markets who don't buy stuff from Those People.

JSF is the US industry's last stand in the fighter market.
LowObservable is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 22:28
  #1317 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 57
Posts: 909
LowObservable,

JSF is the US industry's last stand in the fighter market.
I enjoyed what you wrote, not just the above that I have quoted, but your other comments. I hadn't actually looked at the situation in this way.

I am not sure I agree/ disagree and shall have to go away and think about it.
hval is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 22:30
  #1318 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Home alone
Posts: 295
JSFfan, well I know BAE are working on 'Taranis'; which would fill the stealthy, deep strike capability of the F35 pretty well...it doesn't have to contend with humans (and all the many performance limitations and aircraft complexities that entails), a lift fan or a million and one different specifications from different services. And I think it's due to fly this year.

As for the development of an aircraft that can hoover up information and then distribute it to all his pals in the airspace, I don't see why that couldn't be integrated into later model 'eurocanards' as you put it.
Bastardeux is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 22:37
  #1319 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
"over-spec'd "

no problem then. In the asian century the EU can bury their planes [iraq] or not even bother to take off [libya]
JSFfan is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2013, 22:55
  #1320 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 48
Posts: 505
I'm pretty sure it's self inflicted...what is EU designed to replace the eurocanards?
I'm not suggesting you said we cannot build them, I was just elaborating on your remark.
You did however imply that there is already a need to replace the Eurocanards, I strongly disagree, there is no more need for a Eurocanard replacement then there is need for a F22 (or even F35) replacement.

Your remark about a day 1 weapon is somewhat of a false dichotomy remark, it suggests that there is only 1 way/weapon-type to achieve a successful first day war scenario.
different type of adversaries demand different type of capabilities, lot's of possible adversaries don't need stealthy weapons (MALI/Afghanistan type wars.
Wars against more potent adversaries (for the sake of argument let's say the likes of IRAN or the old IRAQ) can be fought in day 1 with other weapons like UCAV, Tomahawk, Scalp or ,like already specified by US military, better long range (stand off) weapons.
Real large scale wars (think China) will need much more than just a limited amount of difficult to maintain and operate stealth aircraft like the likes of F35 are, numbers will be important and the JSF doesn't have them.

I think that every single manned aircraft stealth program so far has delivered too little because it is too complex and therefore not attainable in sufficient numbers ,F117 (already retired), B2 , F22 and now it seems also the F35.
It seems to be a good thing for small and fairly light UAV's but anything more than that is too much of a compromise for the platform as a whole.
kbrockman 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.