F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: .
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stuffy
the Chinese are just learning how to run a ship
the Russians have taken their carrier out of service and are completely rebuilding it in preparation for the delivery of their Mig-29K fleet. Their ski-ramp SU-33 fleet have been (or are in the process of being) withdrawn. They were big aircraft and the suggestion is they were too big to fly from the deck loaded.
Theres even a rumour that when (if?) Kuzetsnov reappears it may have catapults. It probably depends on what the Indians discover.
India are getting their Mig-29K's first. The big question is whether they can be flown with a payload. These are smaller and maybe capable of STOBAR with a payload. However the Indians haven't sent them to sea yet as their Russian built carrier is not yet in service.
But....all the videos I can find of the Mig-29K prototypes flying from russian ships shows them unarmed.
And.... the fact that only a year or ago India were still discussing Sea Griffin and Seaphoon suggests all may not be well with the Russian aircraft.
There isn't a STOBAR aircraft in service which has shown it can launch with a payload
the Chinese are just learning how to run a ship
the Russians have taken their carrier out of service and are completely rebuilding it in preparation for the delivery of their Mig-29K fleet. Their ski-ramp SU-33 fleet have been (or are in the process of being) withdrawn. They were big aircraft and the suggestion is they were too big to fly from the deck loaded.
Theres even a rumour that when (if?) Kuzetsnov reappears it may have catapults. It probably depends on what the Indians discover.
India are getting their Mig-29K's first. The big question is whether they can be flown with a payload. These are smaller and maybe capable of STOBAR with a payload. However the Indians haven't sent them to sea yet as their Russian built carrier is not yet in service.
But....all the videos I can find of the Mig-29K prototypes flying from russian ships shows them unarmed.
And.... the fact that only a year or ago India were still discussing Sea Griffin and Seaphoon suggests all may not be well with the Russian aircraft.
There isn't a STOBAR aircraft in service which has shown it can launch with a payload
But....all the videos I can find of the Mig-29K prototypes flying from russian ships shows them unarmed.
There isn't a STOBAR aircraft in service which has shown it can launch with a payload
There isn't a STOBAR aircraft in service which has shown it can launch with a payload
Nostalgia is not what it used to be:
Last edited by Just This Once...; 31st Mar 2013 at 20:40.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London
Age: 64
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Milo,
Sound information, I had been quoting a site promoting the Sea Typhoon.
The Queen Elizabeth class carriers are powered by diesel and gas turbine, apparently steam catapults are not possible ? The electro-magnetic catapults have problems of their own, allegedly.
Can the UK afford any of this ?
But back to the original question.
What is to be done if the F-35 is cancelled?
The Germans and French don't want it. What about India?
Posts wax lyrical about the F-35. But as yet, nobody has addressed the issue.
Cancellation and the alternatives.
No country is too big to fail. No currency or bank is too big to fail and likewise no project is too big to fail.
Sound information, I had been quoting a site promoting the Sea Typhoon.
The Queen Elizabeth class carriers are powered by diesel and gas turbine, apparently steam catapults are not possible ? The electro-magnetic catapults have problems of their own, allegedly.
Can the UK afford any of this ?
But back to the original question.
What is to be done if the F-35 is cancelled?
The Germans and French don't want it. What about India?
Posts wax lyrical about the F-35. But as yet, nobody has addressed the issue.
Cancellation and the alternatives.
No country is too big to fail. No currency or bank is too big to fail and likewise no project is too big to fail.
Last edited by Stuffy; 31st Mar 2013 at 20:45.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's the thing Stuffy there's a lot of 'oh we will just do' Seaphoon going around on the net. However it doesn't meet the realities of defence procurement and how these projects are specified and then built. It would not be some quick turn around whatever hopeful mutterings there are on the net.
Ignoring the difficulties of using Stobar from a training point of view, as has been pointed out the concept of operations of the pre-existing STOBAR carriers is not so much strike and more fleet protection and CAP.
Even if the basic top level technical requirements are somewhat brief and generic they will become ever more specific as they get atomised down, it takes years to get to that stage and everything has to be signed off.
Compound it with the fact it's an aircraft and there will all sorts of safety hoops and certification to get through all of which costs lots and lots of money. People get very very thorough when it's their name on safety certificates.
Stuffy, it has been addressed if the F35 is cancelled out right (never going to happen) then odds on are is that we will have two very big LPH's without davit's and off loading options and no maritime strike at all. You don't just magic away the money that has already been spent and all of the intellectual and industrial workshares. It would be monumentally stupid from an industrial capability point of view. The unit orders may well go down and the individual price will go up and we will end up buying later and later in the production cycle.
Ignoring the difficulties of using Stobar from a training point of view, as has been pointed out the concept of operations of the pre-existing STOBAR carriers is not so much strike and more fleet protection and CAP.
Even if the basic top level technical requirements are somewhat brief and generic they will become ever more specific as they get atomised down, it takes years to get to that stage and everything has to be signed off.
Compound it with the fact it's an aircraft and there will all sorts of safety hoops and certification to get through all of which costs lots and lots of money. People get very very thorough when it's their name on safety certificates.
Stuffy, it has been addressed if the F35 is cancelled out right (never going to happen) then odds on are is that we will have two very big LPH's without davit's and off loading options and no maritime strike at all. You don't just magic away the money that has already been spent and all of the intellectual and industrial workshares. It would be monumentally stupid from an industrial capability point of view. The unit orders may well go down and the individual price will go up and we will end up buying later and later in the production cycle.
Last edited by eaglemmoomin; 31st Mar 2013 at 20:51.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
Quotes about F-35B Exhaust Effect on Pads/Decks
For 'LowObservable' quotes above - here are some more for the collection....
Corps preps for F-35 with landing pads, hangars By James K. Sanborn - Staff writer Posted : Tuesday Dec 6, 2011
Corps preps for F-35 with landing pads, hangars - Marine Corps News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Marine Corps Times
"The Marine Corps is pushing ahead with infrastructure upgrades to accommodate the anticipated arrival of the F-35B.
The recent announcement of a multimillion-dollar project to build five pads for vertical landings at Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, S.C.,...
...The new pads will “consist of a combination of advanced high-temperature concrete material, standard runway grade concrete and asphalt materials,” according to the pre-solicitation, posted Nov. 22 on FedBizOpps.gov.
Despite plans for the vertical landing pads, the F-35B has not proven as unwieldy as critics of the program initially predicted. Some said, for example, that the F-35B would damage decks and injure crew aboard ships.
But successful sea trials conducted aboard the amphibious assault ship Wasp in October proved them wrong. The trials were the first to see the aircraft land on a ship while underway and went without a hitch.
“There was no special pad required for the initial ship trials,” according to Victor Chen, a Naval Air Systems Command spokesman in Patuxent River, Md...."
_______________
F-35C first flight (and heat and noise concerns...) June 14, 2010
https://cencio4.wordpress.com/2010/0...-first-flight/
“...Lockheed Martin spokesman John Kent responded to the story this morning, saying, without providing any documentation, that the documents “cited in your story are out of date and incorrect. The information presented in those documents was based on worst-case analysis before extensive testing of the actual F-35B aircraft was conducted during January through March 2010. Results of the aircraft testing show that the difference between F-35B main-engine exhaust temperature and that of AV-8B is very small and is not expected to require any significant CONOPS changes for F-35B....” [quote near the end of initial post above]
______________________
http://ve.ida.org/rtoc/open/SIP/jsf.html [no longer working URL]
“…Lockheed Martin has developed a STOVL lift system that uses a vertically oriented Lift Fan. A two-stage low-pressure turbine on the engine delivers the horsepower to drive the STOVL Lift Fan. The Lift Fan generates a column of cool air that produces nearly 20,000 pounds of lifting power using variable inlet guide vanes to modulate the airflow, along with an equivalent amount of thrust from the downward vectored rear exhaust to lift the aircraft. The Lift Fan has a clutch that engages for STOVL operations and a telescoping “D” -shaped hood to provide thrust deflection. Because the lift fan extracts power from the engine, exhaust temperatures are reduced by about 200 degrees compared to traditional STOVL systems….”
______________________
PARLIAMENTARY JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS, DEFENCE & TRADE | Department of Defence annual report 2010-11 | 20 MARCH 2012
House of Representatives Committees – Parliament of Australia
“...Mrs GASH: [Who shall not be ditched] I have a very naive question — I am a female after all. How do we handle the bad publicity that you guys are getting on this aircraft? How do you expect us to handle that when we do not know all the ins-and-outs like you do? I come from HMAS Albatross [NAS Nowra, South Coast, NSW Australia], and you have got a place down there, and I get this regularly — not on a daily basis, but it is fairly regular. How do I answer that?...
...Air Cdre Bentley: I think the urban myths get out there and stay out there, and it is very hard to get rid of them. One of those urban myths, for instance, was that when we landed on an LHD the downwash would blow people off the deck and it would melt the deck. Neither of those things were true. However, we were seeing comments that the aeroplane had scorched the deck, because there was a black mark on the deck. It is very hard to try to convince the sceptics that these things are not happening, and the proof of the capability is being put out there. When you have urban myths on the internet they are always there; you cannot remove those myths from the internet despite what you say....”
______________________
Navy Sees Few Anomalies in F-35B Ship Trials Oct 31, 2011 by Amy Butler Onboard the USS Wasp
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...ne=Navy&next=0
...Thermal impacts to the ship’s deck have been a concern leading up to these trials. Though formal data haven’t yet been analyzed, Tom Briggs, the integrated test team engineering lead at Patuxent River who is helping to oversee the ship trials, says the aircraft is performing as predicted by the models in terms of heat ingestion on the ship. Officials had been concerned that the F-35B would reingest its own hot exhaust, im-pacting performance of the propulsion system and potentially damaging hardware. There are no such perfor-mance impacts thus far, Cordell says. “We feel like we are running where we intended to crawl.” Additionally, there is “nothing mysterious” about the thermal qualities of the F-35B on the deck, says Ansis Kalnajs, a test director for Naval Sea Systems Command who is leading the effort to study the aircraft impacts on the ship.”
_____________________
Aviation Week & Space Technology October 3, 2011; pages 31-32
Vertical Validation by GUY NORRIS | LOS ANGELES
"Positive handling test results underline a turnaround in progress of F-358 trials...
...Tasks also included evaluations of two areas of potential concern to F-35B shipboard operations: measurement of the impact of the hot exhaust on the landing pad and deck environment, and hot gas ingestion into the inlet. Vertical landings at Pax River have been conducted on two pads made from standard extruded AM-2 aluminum tile mats measuring 120 ft. and 150 ft. square, respectively.
“We’ve been recording the points on the pad where the nozzle is pointed and, after initial landings, removed the specific tile and tested it for strength. There was no loss of strength,” Wilson says. “Now we’re waiting for 10 vertical landings on one specific tile before we do the next strength test.” As of late September, fewer than half of the required number of landings on the particular tile had occurred. Overall, results of the testing to date “give no cause for concern for AM-2 compatibility,” Wilson says.
Additionally, ground personnel have gradually moved closer to the pad for each vertical landing, as part of systematic efforts to determine the safest proximity to the touchdown area. Wilson says that so far these tests indicate safe distances similar to those of current Harrier operations...."
_______________________
Continuing to “Work” the Problem By Ed Timperlake | August 30, 2011
SLD Forum: Debating the Future
“...The story ‘Under Fire’ treats the issue of the future of naval aviation from the perspective of the Tac Air memo we cited earlier....
...With regard to the article, we were surprised to see the only photo in the story as showing an F-35B landing on AM-2 matting at Pax River. And here we learn that “Aluminum matting is used to protect the surface from the F135 engine exhaust.”
Having watched many Harriers land on AM-2 matting last week at an airfield in North Carolina, we were surprised to learn that AM-2 matting in the photo was being deployed for engine exhaust of another aircraft.
So we decided to call the USMC HQ specialist on the matter Major Brad Alello & he told us that “AM-2 matting has been used by the USMC since BEFORE the Vietnam War.” But for Av Week’s imaginative purpose they make this a modification for the F-35B. Perhaps some facts checking in the rest of the article might be called for....”
Corps preps for F-35 with landing pads, hangars By James K. Sanborn - Staff writer Posted : Tuesday Dec 6, 2011
Corps preps for F-35 with landing pads, hangars - Marine Corps News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Marine Corps Times
"The Marine Corps is pushing ahead with infrastructure upgrades to accommodate the anticipated arrival of the F-35B.
The recent announcement of a multimillion-dollar project to build five pads for vertical landings at Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, S.C.,...
...The new pads will “consist of a combination of advanced high-temperature concrete material, standard runway grade concrete and asphalt materials,” according to the pre-solicitation, posted Nov. 22 on FedBizOpps.gov.
Despite plans for the vertical landing pads, the F-35B has not proven as unwieldy as critics of the program initially predicted. Some said, for example, that the F-35B would damage decks and injure crew aboard ships.
But successful sea trials conducted aboard the amphibious assault ship Wasp in October proved them wrong. The trials were the first to see the aircraft land on a ship while underway and went without a hitch.
“There was no special pad required for the initial ship trials,” according to Victor Chen, a Naval Air Systems Command spokesman in Patuxent River, Md...."
_______________
F-35C first flight (and heat and noise concerns...) June 14, 2010
https://cencio4.wordpress.com/2010/0...-first-flight/
“...Lockheed Martin spokesman John Kent responded to the story this morning, saying, without providing any documentation, that the documents “cited in your story are out of date and incorrect. The information presented in those documents was based on worst-case analysis before extensive testing of the actual F-35B aircraft was conducted during January through March 2010. Results of the aircraft testing show that the difference between F-35B main-engine exhaust temperature and that of AV-8B is very small and is not expected to require any significant CONOPS changes for F-35B....” [quote near the end of initial post above]
______________________
http://ve.ida.org/rtoc/open/SIP/jsf.html [no longer working URL]
“…Lockheed Martin has developed a STOVL lift system that uses a vertically oriented Lift Fan. A two-stage low-pressure turbine on the engine delivers the horsepower to drive the STOVL Lift Fan. The Lift Fan generates a column of cool air that produces nearly 20,000 pounds of lifting power using variable inlet guide vanes to modulate the airflow, along with an equivalent amount of thrust from the downward vectored rear exhaust to lift the aircraft. The Lift Fan has a clutch that engages for STOVL operations and a telescoping “D” -shaped hood to provide thrust deflection. Because the lift fan extracts power from the engine, exhaust temperatures are reduced by about 200 degrees compared to traditional STOVL systems….”
______________________
PARLIAMENTARY JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS, DEFENCE & TRADE | Department of Defence annual report 2010-11 | 20 MARCH 2012
House of Representatives Committees – Parliament of Australia
“...Mrs GASH: [Who shall not be ditched] I have a very naive question — I am a female after all. How do we handle the bad publicity that you guys are getting on this aircraft? How do you expect us to handle that when we do not know all the ins-and-outs like you do? I come from HMAS Albatross [NAS Nowra, South Coast, NSW Australia], and you have got a place down there, and I get this regularly — not on a daily basis, but it is fairly regular. How do I answer that?...
...Air Cdre Bentley: I think the urban myths get out there and stay out there, and it is very hard to get rid of them. One of those urban myths, for instance, was that when we landed on an LHD the downwash would blow people off the deck and it would melt the deck. Neither of those things were true. However, we were seeing comments that the aeroplane had scorched the deck, because there was a black mark on the deck. It is very hard to try to convince the sceptics that these things are not happening, and the proof of the capability is being put out there. When you have urban myths on the internet they are always there; you cannot remove those myths from the internet despite what you say....”
______________________
Navy Sees Few Anomalies in F-35B Ship Trials Oct 31, 2011 by Amy Butler Onboard the USS Wasp
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...ne=Navy&next=0
...Thermal impacts to the ship’s deck have been a concern leading up to these trials. Though formal data haven’t yet been analyzed, Tom Briggs, the integrated test team engineering lead at Patuxent River who is helping to oversee the ship trials, says the aircraft is performing as predicted by the models in terms of heat ingestion on the ship. Officials had been concerned that the F-35B would reingest its own hot exhaust, im-pacting performance of the propulsion system and potentially damaging hardware. There are no such perfor-mance impacts thus far, Cordell says. “We feel like we are running where we intended to crawl.” Additionally, there is “nothing mysterious” about the thermal qualities of the F-35B on the deck, says Ansis Kalnajs, a test director for Naval Sea Systems Command who is leading the effort to study the aircraft impacts on the ship.”
_____________________
Aviation Week & Space Technology October 3, 2011; pages 31-32
Vertical Validation by GUY NORRIS | LOS ANGELES
"Positive handling test results underline a turnaround in progress of F-358 trials...
...Tasks also included evaluations of two areas of potential concern to F-35B shipboard operations: measurement of the impact of the hot exhaust on the landing pad and deck environment, and hot gas ingestion into the inlet. Vertical landings at Pax River have been conducted on two pads made from standard extruded AM-2 aluminum tile mats measuring 120 ft. and 150 ft. square, respectively.
“We’ve been recording the points on the pad where the nozzle is pointed and, after initial landings, removed the specific tile and tested it for strength. There was no loss of strength,” Wilson says. “Now we’re waiting for 10 vertical landings on one specific tile before we do the next strength test.” As of late September, fewer than half of the required number of landings on the particular tile had occurred. Overall, results of the testing to date “give no cause for concern for AM-2 compatibility,” Wilson says.
Additionally, ground personnel have gradually moved closer to the pad for each vertical landing, as part of systematic efforts to determine the safest proximity to the touchdown area. Wilson says that so far these tests indicate safe distances similar to those of current Harrier operations...."
_______________________
Continuing to “Work” the Problem By Ed Timperlake | August 30, 2011
SLD Forum: Debating the Future
“...The story ‘Under Fire’ treats the issue of the future of naval aviation from the perspective of the Tac Air memo we cited earlier....
...With regard to the article, we were surprised to see the only photo in the story as showing an F-35B landing on AM-2 matting at Pax River. And here we learn that “Aluminum matting is used to protect the surface from the F135 engine exhaust.”
Having watched many Harriers land on AM-2 matting last week at an airfield in North Carolina, we were surprised to learn that AM-2 matting in the photo was being deployed for engine exhaust of another aircraft.
So we decided to call the USMC HQ specialist on the matter Major Brad Alello & he told us that “AM-2 matting has been used by the USMC since BEFORE the Vietnam War.” But for Av Week’s imaginative purpose they make this a modification for the F-35B. Perhaps some facts checking in the rest of the article might be called for....”
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 31st Mar 2013 at 21:20. Reason: Formatting - again...
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SpazSinbad. I'm sure we all appreciate your efforts to keep us informed with the latest developments.
However the fact may be that any information related to or coming from those who benefit may well be viewed as less than "robust" by some members.....
However the fact may be that any information related to or coming from those who benefit may well be viewed as less than "robust" by some members.....
Last edited by glad rag; 31st Mar 2013 at 21:25.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LO.
The flight 0 America class are aviation focussed ships they've been after doing this for a long time witness the original LHA's. You can argue that it's not successful or whaTever but the fact is they keep trying to implement it. Doctrinally air sea manouver is seen as important, island hoping in the pacific and all that. I don't see any sign of that going away.
Maybe I'm missing your point here but really really I don't see how planning assumptions from multiple decades ago flow into current planning assumptions. By that logic (I'm exagerating I know) we should break out HMS Tremaire and the flat boats cos the RN managed successful beach landing amphib operations during the Seven Years war in 1761?
There are also clearly big proponents of having a well deck available so the next flight will certainly have them but they will be smaller, personally I think the next flight will end up being a couple of 1000 tonnes in displacement heavier again in the same way the flight 0's are heavier than the Makin Island 'sub class' LHD.
There are more high hat maintenance areas, workshops in the back for maintenance duties, much more storage for aviation fuel and additional bunkerage for ammunition doesn't really sound like a lash up to me?
The flight 0 America class are aviation focussed ships they've been after doing this for a long time witness the original LHA's. You can argue that it's not successful or whaTever but the fact is they keep trying to implement it. Doctrinally air sea manouver is seen as important, island hoping in the pacific and all that. I don't see any sign of that going away.
Maybe I'm missing your point here but really really I don't see how planning assumptions from multiple decades ago flow into current planning assumptions. By that logic (I'm exagerating I know) we should break out HMS Tremaire and the flat boats cos the RN managed successful beach landing amphib operations during the Seven Years war in 1761?
There are also clearly big proponents of having a well deck available so the next flight will certainly have them but they will be smaller, personally I think the next flight will end up being a couple of 1000 tonnes in displacement heavier again in the same way the flight 0's are heavier than the Makin Island 'sub class' LHD.
There are more high hat maintenance areas, workshops in the back for maintenance duties, much more storage for aviation fuel and additional bunkerage for ammunition doesn't really sound like a lash up to me?
Last edited by eaglemmoomin; 31st Mar 2013 at 21:35.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ SpazSinbad
Whatever mate, the arguments have become obscured and the pertinent facts so clouded it's hard to sit back and be constructive TBH.
Last edited by glad rag; 31st Mar 2013 at 21:40.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: .
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stuffy
OK, lets take your question at face value and look at the options if the F-35B is cancelled
Assuming the decision is to maintain fixed wing you have two basic choices.
STOBAR
Catapult
If STOBAR the only available off-the-shelf aircraft is the Russian Mig-27K (the SU-33 is not in production) - assuming it works. I can't see the Russians letting us have those, and there may be a few other political problems....
Of the other possible aircraft - Typhoon, Griffin, Rafale, for all STOBAR is a pipe dream, years away if ever.
I suppose you could buy a few prop driven COIN aircraft and just use the carriers for bush wars......but that would hardly be efficient use of them.
If you want catapults then you have several options
You're right in saying the turbines and diesels won't produce steam, but in theory there were going to be spaces left for steam generation gear. Assuming there really are, you'd have to cut the ships open to fit multiple steam gennys, fit miles of high pressure steam pipes and massively rework the beast
Or you could go cap it hand back to General Atomics and ask for a new slot in the EMALS supply chain. But that would mean a delay until (I guess) 2025 and the problems inherent in the design are still there.
Or you could go back to Converteam (Alsthom as was) cap in hand and ask them to restart the cancelled EMCAT system. But as Converteam are now USA owned I think we'd get a USA-government instructed rebuttal, even though the work would be in the UK and France
Either of those two electrical systems would require heavy engineering to the deck, and radical redesign of the ships electromotive propulsion system.
Or you could go down the madcap route of ICCALS - "Internal Combustion Catapult Launch System" - which is exactly what it sounds like and would need combustion chambers to restrain the explosions.
The choice of aircraft is irrelevant. It could be F-35C, F-18, Rafale. The problem is, whatever is purchased theres no way of launching them without massive construction delays and massive remedial work to the vessels.
OK, lets take your question at face value and look at the options if the F-35B is cancelled
Assuming the decision is to maintain fixed wing you have two basic choices.
STOBAR
Catapult
If STOBAR the only available off-the-shelf aircraft is the Russian Mig-27K (the SU-33 is not in production) - assuming it works. I can't see the Russians letting us have those, and there may be a few other political problems....
Of the other possible aircraft - Typhoon, Griffin, Rafale, for all STOBAR is a pipe dream, years away if ever.
I suppose you could buy a few prop driven COIN aircraft and just use the carriers for bush wars......but that would hardly be efficient use of them.
If you want catapults then you have several options
You're right in saying the turbines and diesels won't produce steam, but in theory there were going to be spaces left for steam generation gear. Assuming there really are, you'd have to cut the ships open to fit multiple steam gennys, fit miles of high pressure steam pipes and massively rework the beast
Or you could go cap it hand back to General Atomics and ask for a new slot in the EMALS supply chain. But that would mean a delay until (I guess) 2025 and the problems inherent in the design are still there.
Or you could go back to Converteam (Alsthom as was) cap in hand and ask them to restart the cancelled EMCAT system. But as Converteam are now USA owned I think we'd get a USA-government instructed rebuttal, even though the work would be in the UK and France
Either of those two electrical systems would require heavy engineering to the deck, and radical redesign of the ships electromotive propulsion system.
Or you could go down the madcap route of ICCALS - "Internal Combustion Catapult Launch System" - which is exactly what it sounds like and would need combustion chambers to restrain the explosions.
The choice of aircraft is irrelevant. It could be F-35C, F-18, Rafale. The problem is, whatever is purchased theres no way of launching them without massive construction delays and massive remedial work to the vessels.
Last edited by Milo Minderbinder; 31st Mar 2013 at 21:35.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
glad rag....This is a new point, So we should disregard anything the US, partners, Israel, Japan and probably Singapore and Sth Korea say because they will benefit from the f-35?
I don't know how valid the point is, It doesn't work for me
I don't know how valid the point is, It doesn't work for me
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JSFFan I think it's fair to say yearly audit reports and so on are the best source of information. Lets not pretend because there has been one year that corrective actions taken in recent years have started to bear fruit that it's been a bed of roses. It clearly has not and there have been c*ck*ps of epic proportions. I still think binning the F136 engine was myopically short sighted.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: .
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm still trying to get my head round something.
Is it the current belief that the F-35B does or doesn't cause scadding and spalling to conventional runway surfaces?
Because if it does cause that, then we won't be able to deploy them overseas, other than on the ships, or a surface prepared in advance.
Makes a nonsense of "rapid deployment"
Is it the current belief that the F-35B does or doesn't cause scadding and spalling to conventional runway surfaces?
Because if it does cause that, then we won't be able to deploy them overseas, other than on the ships, or a surface prepared in advance.
Makes a nonsense of "rapid deployment"
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
'glad rag' whatever your interest perhaps may explain your level of knowledge and willingness to cut through to a more realistic appraisal of some of the items on this forum thread. I do not have the time to investigate them all - NOR the interest. However my previous NavAv experience (allbeit a long time ago in a galaxy far far away) means that (notwithstanding our RAAF purchase of the F-35A) which usually meant I had no interest whatsoever, the possibility of having F-35Bs on our new LHDs sparked my interest and I'm playing catchup. Yes - now I realise that any 'visiting LHD F-35Bs' will be from the several other countries likely to buy them; and they will only visit our LHDs to get a few VLs and SkiJumps under their belts. I look forward to the videos and detailed public reports.
Being a longstanding civilian today I rely on news reports and not some claimed inside information. There is good and bad. To characterise all the quotes above as being from LM is silly - if you read them - but nevermind. I just expect a few people to bother to look at the entire articles from which only a few selective quotes have been lifted. Anyone can play that game and I'm willing.
And yet... Relying on only a few sources (which may be incorrect - based on old information as pointed out) then it is worthwhile to add to the more recent bunch; if only for the record. People search the internet and find this stuff - which is a good thing. I'm sitting at a computer on the outer western fringes of Sydney Australia. I'm never likely to see an F-35B carry out any ski jumping or other 'running, jumping, standing still' tricks. Oh well... It is interesting nevertheless.
Good luck with your F-35B job lot on the CVFs. Perhaps new innovations will come from the RN FAA (oops forgot the RAF - but hey - any air force is always easily forgettable if you have ever been in the FAA - RAN for the use of).
BTW most of my material is contained in the PDFs I make freely available online - once again your interest will motivate you to download them - or not. Nevermind.
Being a longstanding civilian today I rely on news reports and not some claimed inside information. There is good and bad. To characterise all the quotes above as being from LM is silly - if you read them - but nevermind. I just expect a few people to bother to look at the entire articles from which only a few selective quotes have been lifted. Anyone can play that game and I'm willing.
And yet... Relying on only a few sources (which may be incorrect - based on old information as pointed out) then it is worthwhile to add to the more recent bunch; if only for the record. People search the internet and find this stuff - which is a good thing. I'm sitting at a computer on the outer western fringes of Sydney Australia. I'm never likely to see an F-35B carry out any ski jumping or other 'running, jumping, standing still' tricks. Oh well... It is interesting nevertheless.
Good luck with your F-35B job lot on the CVFs. Perhaps new innovations will come from the RN FAA (oops forgot the RAF - but hey - any air force is always easily forgettable if you have ever been in the FAA - RAN for the use of).
BTW most of my material is contained in the PDFs I make freely available online - once again your interest will motivate you to download them - or not. Nevermind.
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 31st Mar 2013 at 23:36. Reason: Text correction/addition
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My understanding is that there were major concerns about the possibility of it. Which to me is the point of an integration testing program you test for the worst case envisaged to see what mitigations you may or may not need.
It appears that the more histronic fears are just that and they have already done the testing and have generated some required alterations but not at the level of the worst case scenario. All that said I had thought on land the standard operating procedure would be a conventional landing or some variant of a rolling vertical landing anyway.
It appears that the more histronic fears are just that and they have already done the testing and have generated some required alterations but not at the level of the worst case scenario. All that said I had thought on land the standard operating procedure would be a conventional landing or some variant of a rolling vertical landing anyway.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm still trying to get my head round something.
Is it the current belief that the F-35B does or doesn't cause scadding and spalling to conventional runway surfaces?
Because if it does cause that, then we won't be able to deploy them overseas, other than on the ships, or a surface prepared in advance.
Makes a nonsense of "rapid deployment"
Is it the current belief that the F-35B does or doesn't cause scadding and spalling to conventional runway surfaces?
Because if it does cause that, then we won't be able to deploy them overseas, other than on the ships, or a surface prepared in advance.
Makes a nonsense of "rapid deployment"
For LHA, the V-22 is a bigger problem than the f-35b, either way there will be a long life durable surface used
there will also be long life durable pads for training vertical landings on home bases.
Last edited by JSFfan; 31st Mar 2013 at 23:25.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
THERMION
For 'JSFfan':
F-35 Introduces Change Across the Maritime Fleet Oct/31/2011
http://www.sldinfo.com/the-f-35-introduces-change-across-the-maritime-fleet/
"During the visit to the USS Wasp on October 18th, the NAVSEA 05 Engineering Director provided an update on both the preparation for tests aboard the USS Wasp as well as a sense of test results and the relationship between the tests and the way ahead. Ansis Kalnajs, the NAVSEA 05 Engineering Director, made it clear that the ship was well instrumented to determine impacts of the F-35B on the ship. And in some cases the changes being tested aboard the USS Wasp are being put in place to shape new cap-abilities down the road. One key example is the new surface coating [THERMION] which is being laid down for F-35B tests. It must be remembered that many changes which are being made with the introduction of the F-35s are really being down to enhance capabilities across the fleet. The new shipboard surface is a case in point.
SLD Question: Presumably this change in the flight deck, the material that you’ve laid down might be applicable to other amphibious ships?
Kalnajs: One of the reasons we are looking at the non-skid surface on the USS Wasp for the tests, is the deck coating tends to break down after six or seven months of activity. The materials [THERMION] we are looking at now may be able to last for years and give us a new longevity for the surface of the Amphibious fleet. Not to have to change that nonskid every 6-12 months would be a big gain.
The NAVSEA official provided insight into the types of sensors inserted on the deck to inform the F-35 program about test results.
Kalnajs: On the deck, we have thermacouples on the underside, and we also have the sensors to measure the deflection and also screenings. That enables us to understand what the thermal effects are and what the resulting stresses are on the underdecks. And we also instrumented the ship with acoustic sensors. And our updated collection is very repeatable, which give you good predictions.
Kalnajs was asked by a reporter on board the USS WASP the following question: Have you been able to see any of the data and thermal data to determine yet if there are any effects that are out of the norm?
Kalnajs: We have real time data, but it’s not anything out of the norm. So, we’re pretty confident that there’s nothing mysterious going on that will affect us at this point.
Of course, NAVSEA has seen this process before with the MV-22 & shipboard testing.
SLD Question: You went through this with the V-22, right?
Kalnajs: The V-22 was a big lesson learned for us because the V-22 was a new thermal environment to the ship, so based on that knowledge that we have now, we were evaluating it’s total effects as well. It’s not just a matter of real loads anymore, it’s a matter of thermal effects as well."
F-35 Introduces Change Across the Maritime Fleet Oct/31/2011
http://www.sldinfo.com/the-f-35-introduces-change-across-the-maritime-fleet/
"During the visit to the USS Wasp on October 18th, the NAVSEA 05 Engineering Director provided an update on both the preparation for tests aboard the USS Wasp as well as a sense of test results and the relationship between the tests and the way ahead. Ansis Kalnajs, the NAVSEA 05 Engineering Director, made it clear that the ship was well instrumented to determine impacts of the F-35B on the ship. And in some cases the changes being tested aboard the USS Wasp are being put in place to shape new cap-abilities down the road. One key example is the new surface coating [THERMION] which is being laid down for F-35B tests. It must be remembered that many changes which are being made with the introduction of the F-35s are really being down to enhance capabilities across the fleet. The new shipboard surface is a case in point.
SLD Question: Presumably this change in the flight deck, the material that you’ve laid down might be applicable to other amphibious ships?
Kalnajs: One of the reasons we are looking at the non-skid surface on the USS Wasp for the tests, is the deck coating tends to break down after six or seven months of activity. The materials [THERMION] we are looking at now may be able to last for years and give us a new longevity for the surface of the Amphibious fleet. Not to have to change that nonskid every 6-12 months would be a big gain.
The NAVSEA official provided insight into the types of sensors inserted on the deck to inform the F-35 program about test results.
Kalnajs: On the deck, we have thermacouples on the underside, and we also have the sensors to measure the deflection and also screenings. That enables us to understand what the thermal effects are and what the resulting stresses are on the underdecks. And we also instrumented the ship with acoustic sensors. And our updated collection is very repeatable, which give you good predictions.
Kalnajs was asked by a reporter on board the USS WASP the following question: Have you been able to see any of the data and thermal data to determine yet if there are any effects that are out of the norm?
Kalnajs: We have real time data, but it’s not anything out of the norm. So, we’re pretty confident that there’s nothing mysterious going on that will affect us at this point.
Of course, NAVSEA has seen this process before with the MV-22 & shipboard testing.
SLD Question: You went through this with the V-22, right?
Kalnajs: The V-22 was a big lesson learned for us because the V-22 was a new thermal environment to the ship, so based on that knowledge that we have now, we were evaluating it’s total effects as well. It’s not just a matter of real loads anymore, it’s a matter of thermal effects as well."
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
F-35B on Two Columns of air Hot/Cold relatively speaking
'John Farley', 'Engines' and other worthies have mentioned this aspect of how the F-35B will VL on two columns of air (I recall the Farley InfraRed photo - those relevant posts are excellent IMHO) but I do not recall this snippet being on the forum.
The Ultimate Fighter? Air & Space magazine, February 2012 By Richard Whittle
The Ultimate Fighter? | Military Aviation | Air & Space Magazine
"...Now the F-35B can hover or land on two columns of air, one hot, one cold (by thermodynamic standards), and each moving fast enough to provide about 18,000 pounds of lift. Two far smaller streams of exhaust funnel down ducts to a small nozzle under each wing called a roll post, providing roughly 2,000 more pounds of lift apiece plus side-to-side balance and control. Unlike the Harrier, whose pilot has to manipulate the aircraft’s stick, throttle, and controls to swivel the nozzles by hand, the F-35B has flight control computers to do all the work of balancing the airplane atop its thrust.
Part of the lift fan’s genius is that it allowed designers to put the F-35’s engine at its rear, the best placement in a non-STOVL aircraft as well, says Paul Park, who left Lockheed last year after three decades but previously led the team of engineers who determined the outer shape, internal arrangement, and other major aspects of the F-35. Having two equally powerful columns of vertical thrust is yet another big advantage in a STOVL plane, Park adds, for in designing such an aircraft, “the number-one challenge is not just the lift, it’s getting the vertical lift balanced around the weight.” That’s why the Harrier’s engine is in the center of the fuselage, he says. The cool air coming from the F-35B’s lift fan also “shields people around the airplane from the hot exhaust in the back,” Park says, and helps prevent the engine from ingesting its hot exhaust, which could cause it to stall...."
The Ultimate Fighter? Air & Space magazine, February 2012 By Richard Whittle
The Ultimate Fighter? | Military Aviation | Air & Space Magazine
"...Now the F-35B can hover or land on two columns of air, one hot, one cold (by thermodynamic standards), and each moving fast enough to provide about 18,000 pounds of lift. Two far smaller streams of exhaust funnel down ducts to a small nozzle under each wing called a roll post, providing roughly 2,000 more pounds of lift apiece plus side-to-side balance and control. Unlike the Harrier, whose pilot has to manipulate the aircraft’s stick, throttle, and controls to swivel the nozzles by hand, the F-35B has flight control computers to do all the work of balancing the airplane atop its thrust.
Part of the lift fan’s genius is that it allowed designers to put the F-35’s engine at its rear, the best placement in a non-STOVL aircraft as well, says Paul Park, who left Lockheed last year after three decades but previously led the team of engineers who determined the outer shape, internal arrangement, and other major aspects of the F-35. Having two equally powerful columns of vertical thrust is yet another big advantage in a STOVL plane, Park adds, for in designing such an aircraft, “the number-one challenge is not just the lift, it’s getting the vertical lift balanced around the weight.” That’s why the Harrier’s engine is in the center of the fuselage, he says. The cool air coming from the F-35B’s lift fan also “shields people around the airplane from the hot exhaust in the back,” Park says, and helps prevent the engine from ingesting its hot exhaust, which could cause it to stall...."