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 19th Mar 2013, 19:29
  #1341 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Devon
Posts: 2,489
Following on from my posts from earlier pages here and here, there is a good article over on/at Eaglespeak, which links to (and refers to) comments by the late Neptunus Lex.

Over the past few weeks, we have discussed on Midrats at various times the concept of an F-35B equipped "small carrier" force (listen to Captain Wayne Hughes here, our discussion with Lieutenant Colonel James W. Hammond IIIhere). Lex, of course, beat us by a couple of years.

His argument - that the Navy needs twin engine fighters for the "big deck" carriers was then, and is now, correct. But we also need versatility. And Lex's suggestion is a pathway to having that flexibility that allow us to respond to all sorts of events appropriately. We want to avoid that "all problems are nails" problem, don't we?

The Marines (and Army, if it comes to that) need more - local air support with rapid sortie rates. Small carriers (of which we have several) offer optinons. In Lex's words:

The new America class of amphibious assault ships represent a fork in the road for Naval Aviation. The USMC needs to embrace the concept and run with it. . . . While big-deck CVNs will continue to be the centerpiece of American overseas crisis response for the foreseeable future, the dynamics of the Arab Spring have shown us that we do not have enough assets to cover all of our interests simultaneously. The F-35B+LHA combination could be one of the most cost effective and efficient solutions for engagement in the changing landscape of crisis response.
WE Branch Fanatic is online now  
Old 19th Mar 2013, 20:30
  #1342 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,736
The F-35B+LHA combination could be one of the most cost effective and efficient solutions for engagement in the changing landscape of crisis response.
That must be the first time anyone's read 'F-35' and 'cost-effective' in the same sentence....

Last edited by BEagle; 19th Mar 2013 at 20:32.
BEagle is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2013, 22:20
  #1343 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 49
Posts: 506
Quote:
The F-35B+LHA combination could be one of the most cost effective and efficient solutions for engagement in the changing landscape of crisis response.
That must be the first time anyone's read 'F-35' and 'cost-effective' in the same sentence....
Could be but isn't going to be since the original plans of acquiring 6 LHA's have already been altered, the LHA's will be cut @2 , the following ones will once again be LHD's (with well deck).
kbrockman is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2013, 22:32
  #1344 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
fixed it for you

The F-35B+LHA/LHD combination could be one of the most cost effective and efficient solutions for engagement in the changing landscape of crisis response.

while a Wasp operating in the sea control or 'harrier carrier' configuration carries 20 Harriers (though some ships of the class have operated as many as 24), supported by six Sikorsky SH-60 Seahawk helicopters for anti-submarine warfare

Last edited by JSFfan; 19th Mar 2013 at 22:41.
JSFfan is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2013, 23:03
  #1345 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Great Midwest
Posts: 246
The Marines (and Army, if it comes to that) need more - local air support with rapid sortie rates.
It is interesting that we are now justifying the F-35B because it provides close air support. Given the stealth, high-end onboard avionics, and other costly systems, we will now use the aircraft in a role that the “low cost” A-10 is optimized to perform.
Bevo is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2013, 23:06
  #1346 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,617
A-10's don't fly off of boats.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2013, 00:09
  #1347 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Great Midwest
Posts: 246
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50 View Post
A-10's don't fly off of boats.
Agreed - however one has to wonder when either the U.S. Marines or the Army will be in a position to need close air support when there are no big deck carriers are available or no Air Force presence. I guess during the next big Marine only amphibious assault.
Bevo is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2013, 00:11
  #1348 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,550
A smaller or low-cost carrier could be a useful complement to a CVN for the US, or a means for a smaller power to afford sea-based air power.

Here is how not to do it:

1 - Start with a ship that isn't really an aircraft carrier at all, because much of its internal volume comprises a dock, barracks, garage and infantry supply depot.

2 - Decide that what you need is a fighter with the operating empty weight of an F-15 and a price tag 60-70 per cent of an F-22. Better yet, one that can't do CAS until Block 4 or 5.

3 - Ignore the need for AEW, tanking, EA &c.

If the Marines were actually serious about doing expeditionary air power off 3,000-foot runways (can't go shorter because they need C-130 support) they'd look at JAS 39E. Then do an SCB-125-type job on a few amphibs and go with Sea Gripen.
LowObservable is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2013, 13:26
  #1349 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,617
Please remember, BEvo, that USMC combined arms includes airborne fires and CAS from the Cobra. It isn't only fast jets that brings it from the air.

LO: Agreed on the AEW and tanking matter.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2013, 17:40
  #1350 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Under a recently defunct flight path.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,154
RAF's first operational F-35 pilot flies first training sortie

Amidst all the bickering, progress continues to be made

Flight International
The first operational UK pilot selected to fly the Lockheed Martin F-35B undertook his first training sortie in the Joint Strike Fighter on 19 March at Eglin AFB, Florida.

"It flies very smoothly," says Royal Air Force Sqn Ldr Frankie Buchler, who previously flew the Sepecat Jaguar and Eurofighter Typhoon. "Nothing unexpected, it went pretty well."

US Marine Corps Capt Daniel Flatley, who was flying as Buchler's instructor in another F-35B, says the purpose of the first training sortie was primarily to familiarise the student with the differences between the simulator and the real aircraft. Additionally, the student had to familiarise himself with flying the F-35B around the traffic pattern at the base.
Click on the link for the remainder of the article.
Lyneham Lad is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2013, 20:42
  #1351 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 63
Posts: 6,995
Some interesting "quotes" here just out of Nellis ...

Orlando Carvalho, Executive Vice President Lockheed Martin Aeronautics ... said squadron's pilots and maintainers "would take the F-35's performance to new heights and define the very tactics the F-35 will one day use to defend freedom around the world."


Nellis Press Release F-35

Coff.

Last edited by CoffmanStarter; 20th Mar 2013 at 21:00.
CoffmanStarter is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2013, 20:46
  #1352 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: the heathen lands
Posts: 357
dear god they don't half talk some utter fcuking c0ck.
cokecan is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2013, 21:04
  #1353 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,617
cokecan, I feel your pain, given that I had to do a lot of work with the USAF while I was in the USN.
One of the focus areas for the 422nd TES will be operational testing to develop tactics for the aircraft and pilots.
OK, straightforward enough, once they figure out the color and logo on their ascots.
The second priority of the warfare center is integrating the capabilities of air, space and cyberspace to achieve greater warfighting effect in the battlespace.
Uh, what was that again? Are we gonna overwhelm the enemy with buzzwords?
The final warfare center's priority is to use the triad of live flying, virtual or simulator flying, and the constructive or synthetic threats and battlespace to test and develop tactics and conduct advanced training of future leaders using the F-35A.
Trying to translate that into English. In Navese, I think it means "train the way you expect to fight" but I may have missed a few idiomatic, and idiotic, tidbits of Air Force jargon there.
Nellis is scheduled to receive 36 F-35A Lightning IIs by 2020.
I guess we wouldn't want to be hasty, seeing as how it is currently 2013. How many will they have crashed by then, I wonder?

I think I discovered the source of Global Warming. The fusion of the LM and Air Force PR machines.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2013, 21:12
  #1354 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
I think you may have missed what's up, I took it as the flag waving seppo stuff like 'defend freedom around the world'
JSFfan is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2013, 22:14
  #1355 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: the heathen lands
Posts: 357
i can only hope that LM and the USAF are playing 'bollock-speak bingo' - if they actually talk like that, they must have achieved the highest concentration of men never to have touched a woman in all of human history.

they make Royal Artillery SO3's sound positively 'hip'...

Last edited by cokecan; 20th Mar 2013 at 22:15.
cokecan is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2013, 22:18
  #1356 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,617
JSFfan:

You could argue that the "around the world" line is either
a reference to how many different nations will be (they hope) flying the bird, or
what the LM spokesman hopes is his forthcoming evening's entertainment as resourced by his expense account.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2013, 23:17
  #1357 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: london,uk
Posts: 568
cyberspace
Where is that?

Do they think they are in TRON?
peter we is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2013, 23:37
  #1358 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,617
The USAF think that anything with the word "space" in it is their domain.

Airspace
Outer space
cyber space
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 21st Mar 2013, 08:21
  #1359 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 63
Posts: 6,995
LW50 ...

So Hydrospace belongs to the US Navy
CoffmanStarter is offline  
Old 21st Mar 2013, 13:32
  #1360 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,617
I hope so, but I'll not put it past the Air Force to try and own that. You may or may not recall that the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, a few back, by name of McPeak, claimed that seapower was a sub set of air power. He also advocated a thing called "virtual presence" as an asset of air power.

Sorry, the "thinkers" in the USAF tend to be loony. The pilots tend to be pretty good.

In other space news, the Army wants to own battlespace, but IIRC someone in the Navy coined that phrase during the roles and mission debates of the early 90's.
Lonewolf_50 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.