No cats and flaps ...... back to F35B?
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Schiller and if we end up with the 'B' it will sneak down the port side and then plonk itself on the deck 
We should have a poll to see who believes the F-35 will be scrapped or even the carrier program will be sent to that big scrap yard in the sky.
We should have a poll to see who believes the F-35 will be scrapped or even the carrier program will be sent to that big scrap yard in the sky.
SRVL question.
If we do switch back does anyone have any idea how is the SRVL programme going?
I always wondered why we needed it in comparison to the US Marines who didn't seem to express any interest? Is it because we plan to use our aircraft with a heavier combination of weapons than the Americans and therefore need a greater bring back capability. If so is that linked to the different designs of carriers ie with the marines using a flat deck versus our use of a ski jump, meaning that our aircraft can take off with a heavier load?
I always wondered why we needed it in comparison to the US Marines who didn't seem to express any interest? Is it because we plan to use our aircraft with a heavier combination of weapons than the Americans and therefore need a greater bring back capability. If so is that linked to the different designs of carriers ie with the marines using a flat deck versus our use of a ski jump, meaning that our aircraft can take off with a heavier load?
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Hertfordshire
Age: 74
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...wondered why we needed [SRVL] in comparison to the US Marines who didn't seem to express any interest?...
...There's no need to worry about the single engine over the Arctic, as the Canadian Defence Minister has promised it will never fail...
Would Canada not be well served by something like F15 Silent Eagle for Artic work? You'd get more of them than you will F35 and a good chance they will work pretty well a lot earlier than F35 too. I hasten to add I am well out of my depth here so just thinking out loud really.
..We should have a poll to see who believes the F-35 will be scrapped or even the carrier program will be sent to that big scrap yard in the sky.
My vote is the same as Lowe Flieger.
As to Canada's requirements, I was just a shag pilot, and wouldn't feel qualified to argue with the Generals. However, I would note the following.
Complete engine failure on long oversea/night/remote area mission would be liable to result in death quite often. I can recall numerous sorties where we would have been unlikely to survive the parachute descent (surface windspeed), or died of hypothermia long before rescue reached us. I would thus be bloody unhappy about flying single-engine.
"Quantity has its own quality"
There is also a tendency to fight the last war. I would purchase Super Hornet before 2020, and get to work on UAVs right now. I strongly suspect they will be the major (but not sole) component of Air Forces by 2040. It also gives Canada, and every other smaller nation like Australia, The Netherlands, etc, a chance to get back into the aircraft building business.
As to Canada's requirements, I was just a shag pilot, and wouldn't feel qualified to argue with the Generals. However, I would note the following.
Complete engine failure on long oversea/night/remote area mission would be liable to result in death quite often. I can recall numerous sorties where we would have been unlikely to survive the parachute descent (surface windspeed), or died of hypothermia long before rescue reached us. I would thus be bloody unhappy about flying single-engine.
"Quantity has its own quality"
There is also a tendency to fight the last war. I would purchase Super Hornet before 2020, and get to work on UAVs right now. I strongly suspect they will be the major (but not sole) component of Air Forces by 2040. It also gives Canada, and every other smaller nation like Australia, The Netherlands, etc, a chance to get back into the aircraft building business.
Just changing the subject slightly, does anyone know if the Government are due to announce their decision on whether its answer B or C?
Or is this question going to continue to vex that an ill-advised decision won't be at hand until the Billions more pounds, which they seek to avoid, have been wasted and further costs accrued? And all before knowing the actual price tag of either C or B? It'd be interesting to know what each of the service Chiefs are both openly, and secretly, advising?!
FB
Or is this question going to continue to vex that an ill-advised decision won't be at hand until the Billions more pounds, which they seek to avoid, have been wasted and further costs accrued? And all before knowing the actual price tag of either C or B? It'd be interesting to know what each of the service Chiefs are both openly, and secretly, advising?!
FB
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,579
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
USMC Interest in SRVL for F-35B on CVNs Integration
Probably on the backburner for USMC now that they will share CVNs with their F-35Cs (rather than an all F-35B force). The ski jump at Patuxent River is still in midfield AFAIK.
US Marines eye UK JSF shipborne technique DATE:15/06/07 Flight International
US Marines eye UK JSF shipborne technique
“A shipborne rolling vertical landing (SRVL) technique being developed by the UK for the Lockheed Martin F-35B is being eyed by the US Marine Corps as a way to facilitate operation of short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) Joint Strike Fighters from US Navy aircraft carriers....
...For the USMC, the technique would allow a conventional approach to a short landing on the carrier and could ease integration of the F-35B with US Navy F/A-18E/Fs.
“We strongly support what the UK is doing on rolling landings,” says Lt Gen John Castellaw, USMC deputy commandant for aviation. Studies on how the F-35B will be operated continue, but SRVL “appears to be a viable option”, he says....
...“We continue to work with the navy on this,” Castellaw says, pointing out the STOVL Harrier has been operated successfully alongside US Navy fighters as part of an air wing the carrier USS Roosevelt.” [1976-7]
__________
JSF To Develop Landing Technique For U.K. carriers Oct 15 , 2010 By Graham Warwick
AVIATION WEEK
"While the future of the U.K. Royal Navy’s two new aircraft carriers is uncertain, Lockheed Martin has been awarded a $13 million contract to incorporate shipborne rolling vertical landing (SRVL) capability into the F-35B for the U.K...."
US Marines eye UK JSF shipborne technique DATE:15/06/07 Flight International
US Marines eye UK JSF shipborne technique
“A shipborne rolling vertical landing (SRVL) technique being developed by the UK for the Lockheed Martin F-35B is being eyed by the US Marine Corps as a way to facilitate operation of short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) Joint Strike Fighters from US Navy aircraft carriers....
...For the USMC, the technique would allow a conventional approach to a short landing on the carrier and could ease integration of the F-35B with US Navy F/A-18E/Fs.
“We strongly support what the UK is doing on rolling landings,” says Lt Gen John Castellaw, USMC deputy commandant for aviation. Studies on how the F-35B will be operated continue, but SRVL “appears to be a viable option”, he says....
...“We continue to work with the navy on this,” Castellaw says, pointing out the STOVL Harrier has been operated successfully alongside US Navy fighters as part of an air wing the carrier USS Roosevelt.” [1976-7]
__________
JSF To Develop Landing Technique For U.K. carriers Oct 15 , 2010 By Graham Warwick
AVIATION WEEK
"While the future of the U.K. Royal Navy’s two new aircraft carriers is uncertain, Lockheed Martin has been awarded a $13 million contract to incorporate shipborne rolling vertical landing (SRVL) capability into the F-35B for the U.K...."
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Hertfordshire
Age: 74
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just changing the subject slightly, does anyone know if the Government are due to announce their decision on whether its answer B or C?....
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Waiting to return to the Loire.
Age: 54
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I feel like a bitter old cynic, possessed with the desire to ramble like a curmudgeon.
The more I read about JSF, the more I feel that this has precious little to do with providing the key combat aeroplane for most 'Western' air forces, and the more it looks like a huge job creation scheme.
It is probably not in anyone's interest (other than the shooters at the sharp end) to get the project delivered at a Combat Effective level early, as that would means loads of money would not get thrown about for decades to come.
It seems to be a gravy train which is trying to fabricate an answer to a question for which there are tried and tested answers.
Unfortunately it links into the mindset of blokes (politicians and military) who want the 'best thing', and scores highest in a game of Top Trumps against over rivals. If I could point you in the direction of a psychologist called Cialdini, he wrote about the "6 Weapons of Influence" which affect human decision making.
I would say that all 6 could apply to the continued support for this project as opposed to good business sense.
There are other options, which have been refined over years of combat ops which are clearly not ready for the boneyard yet.
Chasing the Holy Grail (or Dave if you prefer) is not necessarily the answer.
If it is that good, why aren't we (Euro air forces) going to bin Eurofighter? If the Typhoon is so good in the FGR role, why would Euro air forces go for F-35?
I tend to agree with the posts above which talk about the Top Trumps inspired "Day 1" capability.
Is this not a role of already stealthy(ish) drones (tee-hee. Other TLAs are available) or long range guided munitions like Storm Shadow & Tomahawk?
I grew up on the Day 1 role of the Tonka GR force with JP233 which I always felt was one of the ballsiest jobs for any air arm. Would we do that the same way now, 20 years on from Op Granby?
The more I read about JSF, the more I feel that this has precious little to do with providing the key combat aeroplane for most 'Western' air forces, and the more it looks like a huge job creation scheme.
It is probably not in anyone's interest (other than the shooters at the sharp end) to get the project delivered at a Combat Effective level early, as that would means loads of money would not get thrown about for decades to come.
It seems to be a gravy train which is trying to fabricate an answer to a question for which there are tried and tested answers.
Unfortunately it links into the mindset of blokes (politicians and military) who want the 'best thing', and scores highest in a game of Top Trumps against over rivals. If I could point you in the direction of a psychologist called Cialdini, he wrote about the "6 Weapons of Influence" which affect human decision making.
I would say that all 6 could apply to the continued support for this project as opposed to good business sense.
There are other options, which have been refined over years of combat ops which are clearly not ready for the boneyard yet.
Chasing the Holy Grail (or Dave if you prefer) is not necessarily the answer.
If it is that good, why aren't we (Euro air forces) going to bin Eurofighter? If the Typhoon is so good in the FGR role, why would Euro air forces go for F-35?
I tend to agree with the posts above which talk about the Top Trumps inspired "Day 1" capability.
Is this not a role of already stealthy(ish) drones (tee-hee. Other TLAs are available) or long range guided munitions like Storm Shadow & Tomahawk?
I grew up on the Day 1 role of the Tonka GR force with JP233 which I always felt was one of the ballsiest jobs for any air arm. Would we do that the same way now, 20 years on from Op Granby?
SRVL - I think it has been intimated by those who seem to be in the know that the RN wanted to recover on a "Gulf hot day" which is more demanding than the Marine hot day.
UK decision - My bet at the moment is that there will be no early announcement and that the cat/trap decision will stand. The implications of the SAR data for the operating and acquisition costs of the F-35B are eyewatering. The propulsion system costs $21 million more than the A/C engine, at full rate.
Fox3 - A good point and one that is missed all too often. Your troubles are not all over with a successful ejection. The same goes for much of the GAFA, or the Great Australian
All. And in fact the RCAF has never used a single-engine jet dedicated to air defense - the Voodoo did that job during the F-104 era, having replaced the CF-100.
What the Canadians should really do is build the Arrow 2020 with a bloody great AESA, F110 engines and a bay full of Meteors. Suck it Ivan!
Finnpog - The JSF has created more bitter old cynics than you can imagine. And of course the result of chasing the Holy Grail is that you get your head bitten off by a rabbit, or the French squash you with a flying cow.
UK decision - My bet at the moment is that there will be no early announcement and that the cat/trap decision will stand. The implications of the SAR data for the operating and acquisition costs of the F-35B are eyewatering. The propulsion system costs $21 million more than the A/C engine, at full rate.
Fox3 - A good point and one that is missed all too often. Your troubles are not all over with a successful ejection. The same goes for much of the GAFA, or the Great Australian
All. And in fact the RCAF has never used a single-engine jet dedicated to air defense - the Voodoo did that job during the F-104 era, having replaced the CF-100. What the Canadians should really do is build the Arrow 2020 with a bloody great AESA, F110 engines and a bay full of Meteors. Suck it Ivan!
Finnpog - The JSF has created more bitter old cynics than you can imagine. And of course the result of chasing the Holy Grail is that you get your head bitten off by a rabbit, or the French squash you with a flying cow.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,579
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
LO, as mentioned earlier if the F-35B KPP (from the 'Scorecard' article) is "sea level, tropical day, 10 kts operational WOD" then what is a GULF hot day? Thanks.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,579
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
LO making assertions that cannot be backed up are not useful. How about you search to back up your 'nebulous claim'. Thanks. Sharkey Ward makes similar claims without attribution. It is a bit pathetic IMHO.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
maybe we should run a sweepstake on who will pull the plug on their F-35 buy first.....
Normally it's the Canadians or the Norwegians..................... two big countries with (relatively) small populations whose military have top table aspirations and whose politicians like spending money on "social" issues
Normally it's the Canadians or the Norwegians..................... two big countries with (relatively) small populations whose military have top table aspirations and whose politicians like spending money on "social" issues
The Conservative Canadian Government is desperate to spend money on the F-35. So much so that they've ignored all the procedures for purchasing (you wouldn't be allowed to buy a box of pencils the way they've gone about F-35). Problem is the Auditor General has just hung the dirty washing up in public, and the backlash may lead to the cancellation.
Canada is not all pinko liberals; think oil sands, seal clubbing and hockey. It's an interesting mix.
Canada is not all pinko liberals; think oil sands, seal clubbing and hockey. It's an interesting mix.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Hertfordshire
Age: 74
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
..who will pull the plug on their F-35 buy first...
Now, if F35 were a Euro-consortium programme, it would have shaken itself to bits long ago. If the US were a customer rather than producer, it would have cancelled way back and made such a dent in the production numbers that the programme would crash anyway, assuming it came through the Euro-politics. But the way it is, with the US the biggest customer and manufacturer, it is likely to survive as a commercial programme, even if initial capability does not turn out to be what was expected. Capability will be developed over a long period. This happens with complex military programmes, but F35 will likely really push the boundaries at this stage as it pushed reliance on simulation and modelling too far at an earlier one.
The biggest threat to the programme is US cancellation, which is the fear that rattled export customers when the Pentagon slowed production down a couple of months ago. I think it would take a significant new technical issue for that to happen, an as yet unknown show-stopper. As far as any outsider can tell, this is unlikely. But only a complete collapse of capability is likely to deflect the US from continuing to support it's military manufacturing base. It would be a monumental dent in their credibility too, so further glitches will not be enough to derail the project, even if the accumulation of such problems erodes military capability.
Now, an export customer or two might cut and run, and this will impact pricing somewhat. LM will work hard to sell the dream to a new client fearful of being left behind or anxious to join the big boys, and this would take up the slack. Most, I think, will wait and see. Stay with the party for now and see how it looks in a few years time.
At present F35 excites public debate because times are hard, government spending is under scrutiny, there are technical challenges which put more pressure on price and delivery dates and a strong whiff of political incompetence and public service ineptitude wherever you look. So, F35 is a politically-driven programme for now. It will only become a military programme again several years into operational use, when upgrades and associated costs to make it work as required can be assimilated in smaller, more manageable phases. These will attract little attention outside military circles but will probably determine if it's the fighting machine everyone hoped for at the outset.
Fox3 - Cancellation may be a few steps down the road. On the other hand, imposition of a cost cap will cause problems unless the program stays on plan, which would be a first.
Spaz - No need to be rude, sunshine. I was commenting on what I recalled reading here and where I remembered reading it (from two generally pro-JSF posters). At a certain point you need to take on some responsibility for doing your own research, because I have neither the time for, nor any interest in doing it for you.
Spaz - No need to be rude, sunshine. I was commenting on what I recalled reading here and where I remembered reading it (from two generally pro-JSF posters). At a certain point you need to take on some responsibility for doing your own research, because I have neither the time for, nor any interest in doing it for you.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,579
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
LO, back at you: "...At a certain point you need to take on some responsibility for doing your own research, because I have neither the time for, nor any interest in doing it for you."
I'm willing to provide my own research to all on 'Carrier Landing' for all manner of aircraft, including the F-35B/C. It is clear you have nothing to back up your claim and I'm not going to do 'your research' for you. You make the claim - you back it up. Thanks for the effort though.
_How to Deck Land March 2012 PDF 2GB folder name:
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=cbcd6...340707E6%21296
HowToDeckLand13MARCH2012.pdf name of PDF in 20 parts which re-assembled make a '2GB PDF'.
I'm willing to provide my own research to all on 'Carrier Landing' for all manner of aircraft, including the F-35B/C. It is clear you have nothing to back up your claim and I'm not going to do 'your research' for you. You make the claim - you back it up. Thanks for the effort though.
_How to Deck Land March 2012 PDF 2GB folder name:
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=cbcd6...340707E6%21296
HowToDeckLand13MARCH2012.pdf name of PDF in 20 parts which re-assembled make a '2GB PDF'.
Spaz - Let me make it clear that I am not interested in debating you about this, still less download two gigabytes of randomness. I was not trying to claim anything (because I'm not aware of any official source), merely to point to a possible answer as to why the UK led the way in SRVL, by way of helping the conversation along.
Last edited by LowObservable; 12th Apr 2012 at 23:24.