F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: UK
Age: 30
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is pretty confusing. Am I right in assuming that:
F-35A is conventional take-off and landing. I'm assuming that will be for the U.S Air Force.
F-35B is V/STOL which will be used by the US Marine Corps, RAF and FAA.
F-35C is conventional take-off and landing which will be modified for the US Navy's carriers, like the F/A-18.
The reason why I am asking is because it's bloody confusing!
How many other customers have invested in to this aircraft?
F-35A is conventional take-off and landing. I'm assuming that will be for the U.S Air Force.
F-35B is V/STOL which will be used by the US Marine Corps, RAF and FAA.
F-35C is conventional take-off and landing which will be modified for the US Navy's carriers, like the F/A-18.
The reason why I am asking is because it's bloody confusing!
How many other customers have invested in to this aircraft?
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst the jury is still out as to whether there is such a thing as a stupid question, it is true that you are able to make yourself look a little daft by asking something easily found out elsewhere.
Typhoon93,
You could (theoretically) try to modify a modern fighter to take a cat shot and arrested recovery but it would stand you into danger. Best to design it that way from the start.
But in answer to your question Canada, Australia, Italy, Norway, Denmark, The Netherlands and Turkey are A model partner nations. The UK and Italy are B model partner nations. The US services are as you assume. Israel and Japan are Foreign Military Sales customers. Three variants and nine partner nations, so actually less complex than a decent round.
Typhoon93,
You could (theoretically) try to modify a modern fighter to take a cat shot and arrested recovery but it would stand you into danger. Best to design it that way from the start.
But in answer to your question Canada, Australia, Italy, Norway, Denmark, The Netherlands and Turkey are A model partner nations. The UK and Italy are B model partner nations. The US services are as you assume. Israel and Japan are Foreign Military Sales customers. Three variants and nine partner nations, so actually less complex than a decent round.
Speaking of arrested recoveries, Norway is apparently paying an extra $246 million for a brake-parachute installation. The first sketches of this, many years ago, showed the chute deploying from a little pimple. Not so much any more, and what is that huge THING going to do to the RCS?
http://aviationweek.com/defense/norw...35-acquisition
http://aviationweek.com/defense/norw...35-acquisition
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Typhoon93.
Typhoon93, what the hell are you talking about? You express amazing views here, but you appear to have zero grasp of what the subject of this thread is about. You are in danger of appearing to be a bit of a troll. Read up for a few months and come back when you understand at least the subject, even if you haven't even seen or understood the issues.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T93, you're very inconsistent in your posts. Here, try this, Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Or read the last two hundred and sixty something pages of thi thread. Actually, do read at least some of this thread and understand some of the issues before you start another hamster wheel here.
Generally I just read this thread.
Or read the last two hundred and sixty something pages of thi thread. Actually, do read at least some of this thread and understand some of the issues before you start another hamster wheel here.
Generally I just read this thread.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been trying to work out what the deal is with Typhoon.
He initially came on here in newbie happy mode saying hello. Then he scatter gunned every thread in sight, and recently he has started giving authoritative opinions cut pasted badly from others opinions yet now back to childlike questions.
I'm guessing about 12 yrs old?
He initially came on here in newbie happy mode saying hello. Then he scatter gunned every thread in sight, and recently he has started giving authoritative opinions cut pasted badly from others opinions yet now back to childlike questions.
I'm guessing about 12 yrs old?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: essex
Age: 76
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
here we go another bit of useless trivia for the price of 1 F35B (£98.5 millionish) you could have bought 140 spitfire Mk 1's (£12,604 in 1938 = roughly (£0.7 million today) I know what I would rather have but there again I'm old and out of touch. On a more serious note it highlights the problem equipping the modern air force, capital vaule of the current miserably few assets is probably similar to that of the force in 1939
mikip, I know we've done this here before, but I don't believe your costing for the F-35B. Almost everyone here will give you a different figure and it's hard to tell which one is right. What I do know is that it's higher than most people think (or wish to believe). There's a lot of smoke and mirrors involved.
This might help explain - until it gets discredited by someone that doesn't want the cost to be too high.
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/how...t-21f95d239398
This might help explain - until it gets discredited by someone that doesn't want the cost to be too high.
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/how...t-21f95d239398
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: essex
Age: 76
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok I accept that my figure might have been low, it came from wikipedia so quite a lot a salt may be needed, if we take the figure of $251,000,000 quoted in the article you linked to = roughly £156,150,000 it just highlights the probelem of purchasing sufficient assets even more as for that you could buy 223 spitfires. I accept that it's all been done before and the figures for F35 are purely finger in the air jobbies but it's fun to speculate isn't it?
Join Date: Dec 2013
Age: 81
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Watching the F-5B Youtube vid posted by ORAC above I noted that:
1. It didn't land vertically.
2. It landed horizontally wih the fan intake door still open.
Are there things yet to be sorted?
1. It didn't land vertically.
2. It landed horizontally wih the fan intake door still open.
Are there things yet to be sorted?
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Surrey, UK
Age: 70
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Mars Bar comparison
MIKIP, re the "value" of the 1939 RAF to that of today try using the Mars Bar method of comparison; take the cost of a 1939 Mars Bar (first marketed in the UK 1932) and divide that cost into the cost of RAF at that date. Do the same with today's Mars Bar and the present RAF. Then see which gives you most bars! It may seem a little silly but economists use this method of historical comparison all the time and its surprisingly accurate! An alternative view-point could of course be that with economists thinking about chocolate its no wonder the world economy is in the state it is!!!!
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Annapolis
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@henry
Yes, there are still details to be sorted. VLs need specially prepared landing surfaces to resist heat and velocity related damage, spalling etc. It's unlikely that Miramar has installed these yet - at least in airshow areas.
All F-35s (with a few exceptions) are still limited by restrictions put in place to avoid "blade rubbing," presumably until the root cause is officially identified, and I suppose a retrofit is designed, tested and installed. Perhaps a "break-in" routine could mitigate the situation in the interim.
Finally, the F-35B has modifications that need to be performed before IOC. Some of these involve door hinges and replacing/doubling structural frames that will take some time to retrofit.
Yes, there are still details to be sorted. VLs need specially prepared landing surfaces to resist heat and velocity related damage, spalling etc. It's unlikely that Miramar has installed these yet - at least in airshow areas.
All F-35s (with a few exceptions) are still limited by restrictions put in place to avoid "blade rubbing," presumably until the root cause is officially identified, and I suppose a retrofit is designed, tested and installed. Perhaps a "break-in" routine could mitigate the situation in the interim.
Finally, the F-35B has modifications that need to be performed before IOC. Some of these involve door hinges and replacing/doubling structural frames that will take some time to retrofit.
Henry C - The public displays so far have included a lot of short/rolling vertical landings, because nobody wants to resurface the runway after the show. VLs so far have been confined to steel ship decks, AM-2 pads over concrete, and special VL pads made out of the kind of stuff you use to make pizza ovens.
F-35B acquisition costs can be found in US DoD budget:
https://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/...ROC-FY2015.pdf
Operating costs as estimated in the US don't apply to the UK, because the Marines expect to use STOVL on only 10 per cent of sorties. The F-35A is estimated as 27 per cent more costly per flight hour than the heavily used and elderly F-16 force, and the B will be substantially higher because of the cycling of the lift fan and drive mechanism twice per STOVL mission.
F-35B acquisition costs can be found in US DoD budget:
https://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/...ROC-FY2015.pdf
Operating costs as estimated in the US don't apply to the UK, because the Marines expect to use STOVL on only 10 per cent of sorties. The F-35A is estimated as 27 per cent more costly per flight hour than the heavily used and elderly F-16 force, and the B will be substantially higher because of the cycling of the lift fan and drive mechanism twice per STOVL mission.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Henry C,
Perhaps I can help out here a little on F-35B matters.
F-35B VLs require dedicated pads or steel decks. They can't do a VL onto asphalt, nor are they required to do so. (It was known at the start of the programme that, like a Harrier, hot exhaust ages will disrupt asphalt very quickly). The preferred landing option for restricted areas on land is an RVL (Rolling Vertical Landing), which is what the aircraft did in the video clip. (The runway at Miramar is very probably asphalt covered).
The lift fan door is open in this mode to allow the lift fan to operate - the door has two settings, one nearly vertical, used at lower speeds, and a lower setting (I think its around 30 degrees open) at higher speeds. You see both those settings used in the video, by the way. It's operating as designed.
Maus92 is absolutely right - the F-35Bs have a number of structural mods required in service. (By the way, so do the F-35A and the F-35C). The B also had an issue with lift fan door hinges, my sources tell me a fix is designed and being incorporated for these - not a huge job.
As I've posted before, the whole point of the F-35B is to operate from ships and short strips as required by the UK and the USMC. That powered lift capability comes at a cost, which LO is absolutely right to point out. But you can't get an F-16 to operate from a ship or a 1500 foot runway. Comparing aircraft that have totally different requirements can sometimes be slightly less useful than other more valid comparisons.
Just my view, there.
Best regards as ever to all those working hard towards F-35B IOC
Engines
Perhaps I can help out here a little on F-35B matters.
F-35B VLs require dedicated pads or steel decks. They can't do a VL onto asphalt, nor are they required to do so. (It was known at the start of the programme that, like a Harrier, hot exhaust ages will disrupt asphalt very quickly). The preferred landing option for restricted areas on land is an RVL (Rolling Vertical Landing), which is what the aircraft did in the video clip. (The runway at Miramar is very probably asphalt covered).
The lift fan door is open in this mode to allow the lift fan to operate - the door has two settings, one nearly vertical, used at lower speeds, and a lower setting (I think its around 30 degrees open) at higher speeds. You see both those settings used in the video, by the way. It's operating as designed.
Maus92 is absolutely right - the F-35Bs have a number of structural mods required in service. (By the way, so do the F-35A and the F-35C). The B also had an issue with lift fan door hinges, my sources tell me a fix is designed and being incorporated for these - not a huge job.
As I've posted before, the whole point of the F-35B is to operate from ships and short strips as required by the UK and the USMC. That powered lift capability comes at a cost, which LO is absolutely right to point out. But you can't get an F-16 to operate from a ship or a 1500 foot runway. Comparing aircraft that have totally different requirements can sometimes be slightly less useful than other more valid comparisons.
Just my view, there.
Best regards as ever to all those working hard towards F-35B IOC
Engines