|
Well, that's not entirely true old chap. For example the current scrap doesn't really have an air threat so the B1 can do CAS on their own...given that they can employ PGMs and have the Sniper, a million or two bombs and about three hours on station.
Equally they can launch stand off stuff from 'quite a long way away' so can avoid CAP/ QRA with a bit of planning. Or, given their endurance they can probably hang around waiting for the CAP to bingo out and then press on as if nothing had happened. The reason they got a few more losses than most at Flag is that the Nellis airspace is pretty small and the regen points for Red Air are pretty close to any ingress/egress for the strikers. Wasn't being serious chaps - big B1 fan, me! |
I have quite a soft-spot for the Bone. It's the only aircraft I have flown that can move chunks of desert without moving the master arm.
:E |
fait enough, I'm guessing that if it wasn't for the sand pit, they would all be in the bone yard by now
|
F-35B Fuel Usage and Maximum Transit Distance Chart
And now for something completely different.... :}
FINAL | United States Marine Corps | F-35B West Coast Basing Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), Volume I Chapters 1-12 OCT 2010 F-35B Fuel Usage and Maximum Transit Distance www.navyf35cwestcoasteis.com/Resources/Documents/USMC_F-35B_West_Coast_EIS_Vol_I.pdf (25.6Mb) http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l2...Table2-1ed.gif Perhaps useful for figuring out 'bringback fuel for CVF/LHAs'? But of course there are always caveats. ____________________________________________ F 35B Aero Braking Lands at MCAS Miramar 30 July 2013 F 35B Aero Braking Lands at MCAS Miramar 30 July 2013 - YouTube 1st F-35B RVL MCAS Yuma - YouTube |
Oh my, check this out - Pentagon considers cancelling F-35 program, leaked documents suggest ? RT USA Do the Russians KNOW...??:eek::eek:
|
The rumor mill today is working a bit like this:
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3043/2...7a821a4099.jpg |
Originally Posted by Baron 58P
(Post 7977566)
Oh my, check this out - Pentagon considers cancelling F-35 program, leaked documents suggest ? RT USA Do the Russians KNOW...??:eek::eek:
|
F-35B Completes 500th Vertical Landing + Sea Trials Part 2 SOON
Ready For Sea Trials; F-35B Completes 500th Vertical Landing 06 Aug 2013
"FORT WORTH, Texas, Aug.6, 2013 - The Lockheed Martin F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft completed its 500th vertical landing August 3. BF-1, the aircraft which completed this achievement, also accomplished the variant's first vertical landing in March 2010 at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md. Next week, Sea Trials, known as Developmental Test 2 (DT-2) are scheduled to begin for the F-35B variant onboard the USS WASP. DT-2 is the second of three planned tests aimed at defining and expanding the F-35B's shipboard operating envelope for the U.S. Marine Corps. The first shipboard testing phase was successfully completed in October 2011. The successful completion of the upcoming Sea Trials is key to declaring F-35 Initial Operating Capability (IOC) for the U.S. Marine Corps in 2015...." |
QDR: Air Force Circles Wagons Around F-35
QDR: Air Force Circles Wagons Around F-35; No Big Push For Drones By Colin Clark 06 August 2013
QDR: Air Force Circles Wagons Around F-35; No Big Push For Drones « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary "WASHINGTON: The head of the Air Force’s Quadrennial Defense Review office made very clear today that the service will do all it can to protect the F-35 for a pretty compelling reason: ”We must be able to project power in contested environments (A2/AD) and the Joint Strike Fighter is that machine.” Kwast told reporters after his public remarks that JSF “plays a critical role in an architecture that keeps us ahead of our enemy.” It’s not like previous aircraft that specialized in providing one primary capability. When I asked him what the Air Force would do if the White House ordered cancellation of the F-35, Kwast offered a pretty standard military response: “What we would do is, if they were to make that decision, we would roll up our sleeves and find a way.” But all his comments made clear that would not be a good idea in the estimation of the Air Force...." |
Great Cartoon LO - I think it was int the Economist a few years back.............
|
QDR General: USAF Must Rethink Strategies 07 Aug 2013 By AARON MEHTA
"WASHINGTON — The man in charge of a major US Air Force review warned an audience Tuesday that the service needs to rethink long-held strategies in order to maintain air dominance in the coming decade. “In my humble opinion, there is tremendous room for maneuver here as far as being creative and being innovative,” Maj. Gen. Steven Kwast said during an event at the Center Strategic and International Studies.... ...The general also indicated that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, long identified as a service priority, would not be canceled without a presidential order to do so. “Nothing in this business is all or nothing. So everything is on the table, but it’s about the balance,” Kwast said. “The JSF fits into a very sophisticated concept of operation that is integrated that gives us the ability to do something no enemy can ever do. So everything is on the table, we say, but that JSF plays a critical role in an architecture that keeps us ahead of our enemy.”" |
I don't think anyone's expecting the F35 to be cancelled in its entirety, just that numbers are going to be substantially reduced either across all 3 variants, or by cancelling variants.
|
I do not believe any F-35 variant is going to be cancelled.
|
I personally feel that the form of words used by the General moves the decision to the White House and in a way is reminiscent of the F22 decision made by President Obama.
The USAF did not fall to pieces because not all the initially required 750 examples morphed into 187. I suppose from the Navy's point of view if the number Carrier Groups and Air Wings is reduced as some reports suggest to 8 then the old F18 squadrons will not be required and the whole air wing will be Super Hornets, bringing into question the need for the F35C. I note that the USN has decided not to repair the arson damaged USS Miami it would seem on cost grounds alone. |
The F-35C was always supposed to work with the Rhino, so even if a draw down allows the retirement of the legacy models it won't fundamentally alter the concept.
Don't forget that there are also Rhinos and Rhinos. The ones with the AESA and a few other toys are awesome, the ones with the APG-73 aren't! So perchance a draw down would also see a consolidated AESA only force. One thing is certain, that Boeing has for some time been beating the Super Hornet drum and it has many supporters within the USN, mainly as a result of it having twice the engines of a F-35. |
I do not believe any F-35 variant is going to be cancelled. Keeping only one variant instead of cutting numbers of all 3 would, at the end of the day, deliver a bigger bang for your buck...to borrow a terrible cliche. |
Keeping only one variant instead of cutting numbers of all 3 would, at the end of the day, deliver a bigger bang for your buck...to borrow a terrible cliche http://www.csbaonline.org/wp-content...on-to-SCMR.pdf Strategic Choices Exercise Outbrief | CSBA The majority look at recapitalising fleets and maintaining a qualitative edge (whether you belive it or not!) rather than running on legacy cabs, so for USAF F35 instead of running on F16s. I doubt the USN can afford another A12-like cancellation and having to wait till the F/A XX, so F35C may be safer than people think. That leaves the B and most of the thnk tanks tried to maintain LHA/LHD numbers, which when you are cutting CVBG puts a slighly higher emphasis on f/w aboard the amphibs. |
Yeah I took a look at the different think tanks' opinions when they were first published. Only one of them advocates not cutting any F35s and I have to say, I'm dubious that retiring a legacy aircraft early and ramping up production of a developing aircraft is going to save any money, when the replacement aircraft is known to be more expensive to operate; they did the exact opposite a couple of years ago to save money! I'm also dubious that the USAF would willingly take such a big capability gap over such an expansive fleet.
All the others either cut personnel numbers massively or went to town on the operating budget...and we all know that a weapon is only as good as its operator, so I wouldn't count on it being cut the way they have suggested. The worst part of all for the F35 is that this is all money that has to be saved this decade, not somewhere down the line. So any cut in numbers can't be deferred to the 2020s...meaning there is also now a threat that the countries that are maxing out their budgets for it would find the resultant price increase difficult to swallow. |
So far, nobody in the think-tank/budgetary world seems to have evaluated either whacking or deferring the F-35B/C while preserving the F-35A. The Navy Dept. versions may be a fat target when you look it at this way, because:
1 - The Navy has a jet in production with potential for improvement. 2 - The Marines are replacing their F-18s first. Half the Harriers will still be around in 2027. 3 - The B/C cost a lot more to build than the A and nearly twice as much as the Super H, even under the most optimistic assumptions. 4 - You could simplify flight test, development and production. The three versions are now so different that removing 20 Bs and 20 Cs (the current max planned rate for DoD) from the annual build is not going to send the price of the A through the roof. 5 - The assets already built or on contract could be stored and used to restart the program when money is less tight or the threat demands it. 6 - (drum roll) If you stop spending money on B/C from FY2015 you can save almost $10 billion through 2020 while giving the Marines and Navy up to 40 shiny new Rhinos per year. UK and Italy could, if they so wished, fund the FY2015-and-beyond F-35B-unique development and flight testing (it's mostly finished anyway if LockMart and the Marines are to be believed :E), leasing aircraft and facilities, and assemble their jets in the Italian FACO. |
Hence my "more bang for your buck".
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:52. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.