F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 45
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A question for the two seat chaps: Is there a need for a two seat F-35? Not thinking about the cost of developing a two seater at this stage there are several missions that have been the domain of the two seater. Long range interception, Fast FAC, SEAD and numerous others. Add to the mix conversion training would be simplified (that seams less of a bother these days) so is there a need for a TF-35? (F-35D?)
Interesting question, Dat. Of course, you'd have to take that stupid lift fan out to make room, which might be a problem. Or move the fan back and take out even more fuel - but then the term 'long-range' would be even less appropriate.
There are better jets to do long-range interception, in my opinion, but the systems and cockpits of today make that a perfectly viable single-seat role anyway. JSF is still more 'strike' than 'fighter'. Some of the other roles you mention could be done by either, but some scenarios COULD benefit from a two-place a/c. Perhaps a bigger issue is using such an expensive asset to get in close and mix it in the battlespace (or is it battlesphere today?); the 'close' bit could fut JSF in an environment where it derives little protection from its stealth, whilst being disadvantaged by its other characteristics that have come about due to the compromises that stealth demands.
Hey, here's a thought. Maybe they could design a WSO pod to go in the weapons bay. It could have all his displays and controls in it and a plexiglass nose section for visibility. If required to look outside, the bay could open, pop him out in the airflow and then put him away again when no longer required. Even better than the 'nav-in-the-nose' Canberra. As long as he doesn't get launched or dropped.
There are better jets to do long-range interception, in my opinion, but the systems and cockpits of today make that a perfectly viable single-seat role anyway. JSF is still more 'strike' than 'fighter'. Some of the other roles you mention could be done by either, but some scenarios COULD benefit from a two-place a/c. Perhaps a bigger issue is using such an expensive asset to get in close and mix it in the battlespace (or is it battlesphere today?); the 'close' bit could fut JSF in an environment where it derives little protection from its stealth, whilst being disadvantaged by its other characteristics that have come about due to the compromises that stealth demands.
Hey, here's a thought. Maybe they could design a WSO pod to go in the weapons bay. It could have all his displays and controls in it and a plexiglass nose section for visibility. If required to look outside, the bay could open, pop him out in the airflow and then put him away again when no longer required. Even better than the 'nav-in-the-nose' Canberra. As long as he doesn't get launched or dropped.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yawn, no wonder you are here and not in system and platform evaluations
UK slashes F-35B numbers but might look to split buy with F-35As
(condensed)
UK Defence Secretary Philip Hammond said the UK would order 48 F-35Bs to equip the UK's future carrier strike force. He added that a follow-on conventional take-off and landing (CTOL) F-35A would be set out in a future Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR), with the aim of replacing the Eurofighter Typhoon in UK service.
We will not finalise our decisions on the F-35 programme until SDSR in 2015
dat581, there is a lot of automation on the f-35, freeing the pilot fot tactical, sld is the best site to read about it
UK slashes F-35B numbers but might look to split buy with F-35As
(condensed)
UK Defence Secretary Philip Hammond said the UK would order 48 F-35Bs to equip the UK's future carrier strike force. He added that a follow-on conventional take-off and landing (CTOL) F-35A would be set out in a future Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR), with the aim of replacing the Eurofighter Typhoon in UK service.
We will not finalise our decisions on the F-35 programme until SDSR in 2015
dat581, there is a lot of automation on the f-35, freeing the pilot fot tactical, sld is the best site to read about it
Last edited by JSFfan; 16th Apr 2013 at 10:06.
JSFfan,
Are your remarks directed at me? If so, let me take you through it all slowly.
1st para, you can disregard, it's called jesting.
3rd para, you can disregard, it's called absurdity.
There are better jets to do long-range interception - aircraft that really are long-endurance and long-range that are designed for air-to-air with no compromises for other purposes. This does not diminish the effectiveness of JSF in other roles, it's simply not its prime function.
the systems and cockpits of today make that a perfectly viable single-seat role anyway - so it can be done by today's single seat a-a aircraft for the reasons you make in your statement "there is a lot of automation on the f-35". That's nothing new, there is a lot of automation in all modern cockpits. Again, an aswer to Dat.
Some of the other roles you mention could be done by either - single seat OR two-seat. But, look at my previous statement, so you probably don't need two-seat (answering part of Dat's question).
JSF is still more 'strike' than 'fighter' - Already been discussed here and elsewhere at length. Don't worry yourself, it doesn't mean JSF isn't going to be good in its intended role.
Perhaps a bigger issue is using such an expensive asset to get in close and mix it in the battlespace... ...put JSF in an environment where it derives little protection from its stealth, whilst being disadvantaged by its other characteristics that have come about due to the compromises that stealth demands. - Another old argument. Dat asked about fast-FAC, my response: fine as long as it doesn't incolve getting in close where JSF is not optimised to operate.
As for
Surely that's old news. What is the relevance?
Are your remarks directed at me? If so, let me take you through it all slowly.
1st para, you can disregard, it's called jesting.
3rd para, you can disregard, it's called absurdity.
There are better jets to do long-range interception - aircraft that really are long-endurance and long-range that are designed for air-to-air with no compromises for other purposes. This does not diminish the effectiveness of JSF in other roles, it's simply not its prime function.
the systems and cockpits of today make that a perfectly viable single-seat role anyway - so it can be done by today's single seat a-a aircraft for the reasons you make in your statement "there is a lot of automation on the f-35". That's nothing new, there is a lot of automation in all modern cockpits. Again, an aswer to Dat.
Some of the other roles you mention could be done by either - single seat OR two-seat. But, look at my previous statement, so you probably don't need two-seat (answering part of Dat's question).
JSF is still more 'strike' than 'fighter' - Already been discussed here and elsewhere at length. Don't worry yourself, it doesn't mean JSF isn't going to be good in its intended role.
Perhaps a bigger issue is using such an expensive asset to get in close and mix it in the battlespace... ...put JSF in an environment where it derives little protection from its stealth, whilst being disadvantaged by its other characteristics that have come about due to the compromises that stealth demands. - Another old argument. Dat asked about fast-FAC, my response: fine as long as it doesn't incolve getting in close where JSF is not optimised to operate.
As for
Originally Posted by JSFan
UK slashes F-35B numbers but might look to split buy with F-35As
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JSFfan that article in Janes is supposition by a journalist nothing more so I wouldn't put too much store by it. All we really know is that 48 F35B is the initial buy and a final decision on total numbers will be taken in the next review due in 2015. Theres been nothing about split buys.
I also have to say before you start chucking stones. Can I ask if you are either a pilot or an engineer involved in military aerospace activities? Otherwise it seems like a statement designed to get scorn and ridicule poured on you.
I also have to say before you start chucking stones. Can I ask if you are either a pilot or an engineer involved in military aerospace activities? Otherwise it seems like a statement designed to get scorn and ridicule poured on you.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm surprised some people here seem to know for fact that the F35 will replace the Typhoon.
Follow up orders , if at all in originally planned numbers, will only be decided at SDSR2015.
Also drop2 T1 typhoon upgrades are ongoing with drop 3 upgrades already in the testphase and drop 4 is already in the planning stage, meaning the 2019 planned T1 retirement is no longer a fact.
The first F35A's will eventually replace the Tornado's ,which are currently getting their final upgrades, and only the oldest Typhoons will be replaced by the F35 if they get them in sufficient numbers.
Typhoon is here to stay till at least the middle of the century and in all lkelyhood in larger numbers than the UK's F35A+B.
Also, speaking of the twinseater issue, I've read an interesting piece explaining that in the future twinseaters might proove to be a big asset, certainly when hybrid UCAV-manned-AC operations are more common.
The F35 just has no place and weightmarging to make a twinseater likely.
There has been very little relevant news lately concerning the F35, which seems to have taken the focus of the whole F35 saga for now but besides some vague longterm commitements there also has been little good news about the F35, for many nations, it still is by no means a reasonable follow up for the platforms it was envisioned to replace at its conception.
Follow up orders , if at all in originally planned numbers, will only be decided at SDSR2015.
Also drop2 T1 typhoon upgrades are ongoing with drop 3 upgrades already in the testphase and drop 4 is already in the planning stage, meaning the 2019 planned T1 retirement is no longer a fact.
The first F35A's will eventually replace the Tornado's ,which are currently getting their final upgrades, and only the oldest Typhoons will be replaced by the F35 if they get them in sufficient numbers.
Typhoon is here to stay till at least the middle of the century and in all lkelyhood in larger numbers than the UK's F35A+B.
Also, speaking of the twinseater issue, I've read an interesting piece explaining that in the future twinseaters might proove to be a big asset, certainly when hybrid UCAV-manned-AC operations are more common.
The F35 just has no place and weightmarging to make a twinseater likely.
There has been very little relevant news lately concerning the F35, which seems to have taken the focus of the whole F35 saga for now but besides some vague longterm commitements there also has been little good news about the F35, for many nations, it still is by no means a reasonable follow up for the platforms it was envisioned to replace at its conception.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 45
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The F-35 may enter service with enough sensors and computing power on board to make the starship Enterprise look like sopwith camel but one computer cannot be upgraded and that sits between the pilots ears. You can have all the automation you want but for example during close air support having a single crew member fly the aircraft, watch the air to air situation and try to listen to a frantic soldier in a fire fight on the ground screaming for help to save his men is a big ask. I once asked an RAAF Super Hornet pilot about "helmet fires" and he told me that they sometimes get information overload on a mission with data coming in from the radar, targeting pod and link 16. When his WSO spoke up he said: "That only happens to nose gunners". 
The point they made was two heads are better than one no matter how much wizardry is on board.
Other wise I will defer to Courtney's professional experience ( at least until I can fly FAC missions in a C182).
The point they made was two heads are better than one no matter how much wizardry is on board. Other wise I will defer to Courtney's professional experience ( at least until I can fly FAC missions in a C182).
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well if you want longer range than a f-22, that's the f-35
the systems and cockpits of today ....SH, phoon, rafale, gripen are all 4th gen and are not comparable to the f-35 systems and cockpit, even the f-22 doesn't measure up
JSF is still more 'strike' than 'fighter....I think it will do both of those roles and the more roles that are mapped out for it..quite sufficiently
Perhaps a bigger issue is using such an expensive asset ...but it's cheaper than some and only a bit dearer than others and if you count capability, it's a bargan
@.... I know we like the twin seats and it was an initial concern of mine but the H/SH and the f-35 are diffferent animals
the systems and cockpits of today ....SH, phoon, rafale, gripen are all 4th gen and are not comparable to the f-35 systems and cockpit, even the f-22 doesn't measure up
JSF is still more 'strike' than 'fighter....I think it will do both of those roles and the more roles that are mapped out for it..quite sufficiently
Perhaps a bigger issue is using such an expensive asset ...but it's cheaper than some and only a bit dearer than others and if you count capability, it's a bargan
@.... I know we like the twin seats and it was an initial concern of mine but the H/SH and the f-35 are diffferent animals
Last edited by JSFfan; 16th Apr 2013 at 11:25.
I agree with the three previous posts (Moomin, Kbrock and Dat). Kbrock, I think Moomin's comment about the mixed buy is spot on. So, like you, I don't think anyone does know that yet.
Last edited by Courtney Mil; 16th Apr 2013 at 11:24.
Originally Posted by JSFfan
SH, phoon, rafale, gripen are all 4th gen and are not comparable to the f-35 systems and cockpit
Originally Posted by JSFfan
JSF is still more 'strike' than 'fighter....I think it will do both of those roles and the more roles that are mapped out for it..quite sufficiently
Last edited by Courtney Mil; 16th Apr 2013 at 11:42.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps a bigger issue is using such an expensive asset ...but it's cheaper than some and only a bit dearer than others and if you count capability, it's a bargan
I do however remember many generals saying that the acquisition and , more importantly, the operational costs are the biggest cause of concern.
I also remember Gen Bogdan stating that we might have to give up some of its capabilities to make the F35 work (something like a Chevy iso a Ferrari).
PS , About the split buy, I seem to remember that back in 2005-2006, the RAF even planned to go for the F35C iso A as the replacement for TORNADO, that was long before the whole carrier VSTOL vs CATOBAR controversy.
But I agree , before 2015 nobody knows how many , if at all, and what type of F35 will be added in the future.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 66
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can I just add a penny's worth here, computing power increases as we all know Moore's Law, the systems in the F22 are ancient as I understand it.
There is implicitly no reason why all the on board systems from an F35 could not be put on a 4.5 generation plane as I understand it, obviously it would help that the F35's integrated helmet could be demonstrated to work.
That is if it was thought worth while changing out the sensor suite and architecture of a functioning aircraft to put in the F35's so superior systems...
There is implicitly no reason why all the on board systems from an F35 could not be put on a 4.5 generation plane as I understand it, obviously it would help that the F35's integrated helmet could be demonstrated to work.
That is if it was thought worth while changing out the sensor suite and architecture of a functioning aircraft to put in the F35's so superior systems...
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@eaglemmoomin I didn't know UK Defence Secretary Philip Hammond was a journalist
the f-35 is costing a mint for the US to develop, but the actual plane isn't too bad for the partners and FMS
yep 2015 will tell us more about what the UK plans are
the f-35 is costing a mint for the US to develop, but the actual plane isn't too bad for the partners and FMS
yep 2015 will tell us more about what the UK plans are
Last edited by JSFfan; 16th Apr 2013 at 11:57.
JSFfan,
You seemed to have accidentally missed the questions again.
QUESTION 1:
QUESTION 2:
You seemed to have accidentally missed the questions again.
QUESTION 1:
Originally Posted by JSFfan
SH, phoon, rafale, gripen are all 4th gen and are not comparable to the f-35 systems and cockpit
Originally Posted by Courtney Mil
Have you used, experienced or worked on any of those cockpits? Have you any experience of their configurations or functionality at all?
QUESTION 2:
Originally Posted by eaglemmoomin
Can I ask if you are either a pilot or an engineer involved in military aerospace activities? Otherwise it seems like a statement designed to get scorn and ridicule poured on you.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no, I referred him to SLD to read all about it from pilots that are actually flying it and I'm paraphrasing what they have said
looking through the eyes of a 3rd or 4th gen pilot not in the loop will tell you nothing..that is also indicated by the pilots flying the f-35
looking through the eyes of a 3rd or 4th gen pilot not in the loop will tell you nothing..that is also indicated by the pilots flying the f-35
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is implicitly no reason why all the on board systems from an F35 could not be put on a 4.5 generation plane as I understand it, obviously it would help that the F35's integrated helmet could be demonstrated to work.
They also stated that it was not out of the realm of possibilities that their systems could be in use in other fighters before the F35 reached IOC.
Hmm. Maybe the questions were worded badly or not clear enough, JSFfan.
Have you used, experienced or worked on any of those cockpits? Have you any experience of their configurations or functionality at all?
Can I ask if you are either a pilot or an engineer involved in military aerospace activities?
Have you used, experienced or worked on any of those cockpits? Have you any experience of their configurations or functionality at all?
Can I ask if you are either a pilot or an engineer involved in military aerospace activities?
Last edited by Courtney Mil; 16th Apr 2013 at 12:13.