F-35 Multirole Joint Strike Fighter

[Belesari]

Well, IMHO the US could work around not having a B version.
The Marines would cry bloody murder but there are 11 big carriers to work with.
The Brits are going the C route anyway.
It's the Spanish and Italians which are screwed. No B version means goodbye for their carrier born fast air capability. But their numbers are insignificant in the grand theme of things, the diplomatic damage exists, though.

So the ball is in the USMC field. It's going to be interesting if they can persuade the politicians that they need an independent fixed wing capability. In times of tight budgets I am not sure about the right answer.

The marines would cry bloody murder because they want everything they would need right there with the MEU so they can immediatly start operations as soon as they arrive. Well that and the marines seem to trust other marines more than their own family (corps is mother, corps is father).

My biggest problem with the F-35 is its range. That wouldnt be so bad if we hadnt gotten rid of so many of our longer ranged assets that could act as refuelers in the act of getting more F-18 per deployment ( Note:F-18's are gas hogs) but....

 

[Waylander]

I understand the desire of the Corps to be able to bring it's own fast air to the conflict.
But one has to see the bigger picture. In a time of financial pressure one has to think about wether having 3 different services with high tech air forces is really necessary or not.
I don't see why the Corps really needs it's own fast air. Inter service rivalry shouldn't be a deciding factor.

 

[t68]

I understand the desire of the Corps to be able to bring it's own fast air to the conflict.
But one has to see the bigger picture. In a time of financial pressure one has to think about wether having 3 different services with high tech air forces is really necessary or not.
I don't see why the Corps really needs it's own fast air. Inter service rivalry shouldn't be a deciding factor.

Not all situation’s would need a Nimitz or Ford class carrier to wave the big stick, I think I would be more worried about the pocket carrier that could bring in not only fast jets but the foot soldier and associated equipment to stand their ground, which is the bigger stick?

They did not have a Marine MEU off the coast of East Timor for nothing if things got a little out of hand. No super carrier here.

 

[swerve]

Well, IMHO the US could work around not having a B version.
The Marines would cry bloody murder but there are 11 big carriers to work with.
The Brits are going the C route anyway.
It's the Spanish and Italians which are screwed. No B version means goodbye for their carrier born fast air capability. But their numbers are insignificant in the grand theme of things, the diplomatic damage exists, though.

The Armada ends up with an LHD which has a pointless ski-jump, but otherwise it's a perfectly good ship. Principe de Asturias retires at the same time as her Harriers, & the Armada agitates for a CTOL carrier as a replacement - though it could have a fight getting one.

Italy is stuck with an over-specced helicopter carrier/command ship when the last Harrier wears out, which is a bigger blow. The proposed STOVL-capable LHA (similar to Juan Carlos) to replace Giuseppe Garibaldi & supplement Cavour is cancelled, & the MM begs for a proper carrier instead.

Both have time to make the switch to cat & trap, but whether their governments would pay for it is another matter.

 

[Sea Toby]

The Armada ends up with an LHD which has a pointless ski-jump, but otherwise it's a perfectly good ship. Principe de Asturias retires at the same time as her Harriers, & the Armada agitates for a CTOL carrier as a replacement - though it could have a fight getting one.

Italy is stuck with an over-specced helicopter carrier/command ship when the last Harrier wears out, which is a bigger blow. The proposed STOVL-capable LHA (similar to Juan Carlos) to replace Giuseppe Garibaldi & supplement Cavour is cancelled, & the MM begs for a proper carrier instead.

Both have time to make the switch to cat & trap, but whether their governments would pay for it is another matter.

The Garibaldi is about the same age as PdA... The Cavour can be used as a LPH instead of a LHD, and if the F-35Bs were cancelled, Italy has the same options as Spain to build a carrier similar to the indigenious Indian carrier under construction...

 

[F-15 Eagle]

I understand the desire of the Corps to be able to bring it's own fast air to the conflict.
But one has to see the bigger picture. In a time of financial pressure one has to think about wether having 3 different services with high tech air forces is really necessary or not.
I don't see why the Corps really needs it's own fast air. Inter service rivalry shouldn't be a deciding factor.

IMHO our financial pressure does not change the world the US is in nor does it change the threats we face.

Cutting down our military will just bite us in the ass down the road just as it has done many times before.

Canceling the F-35B and replacing it with more F-35Cs and F-18s is one thing but to get rid of the Marine Corps fast movers completely?

 

[moahunter]

Cutting down our military will just bite us in the ass down the road just as it has done many times before.

Removing the Marines fast air arm wouldn't necessarily mean cutting down the military capability. The pilots / aircraft could be transferred into the Air Force or perhaps a better fit would be the Navy (since they already train marine aviators), what it would do is just eliminate a lot of useless duplication / bureaucracy on things like procurement.

 

[StingrayOZ]

The spainish only have one carrier and its 20+ years old and is too small most likely for the F-35B.

The LHD is only a temporary carrier. It could land and launch a B, but its not designed to operate them as a full carrier would. Its also a fine amphibious ship, Australia intends to operate 2 with no F-35B's. Spain was very late to the F-35 party, and I don't think have made any commitments to anything.

Australia looked at removing the jump and gaining 1 helo spot *way* up the front, away from all the refuelling re arming points, lifts and with a lot of sea spray, it was deemed not worth while to remove it (there may be a UAV that might use it anyway). Its a very minor design compromise.

The italians are the only ones that have invested big and are now a little stuck. But her carrier can definately be used as a helo carrier and has some sea lift capability.

I think it would be more likely that the F-35B gets delayed, while F-35A and F-35C are built in volume to make up for urgent lost time. Its not like the B can't fly, its just going to take more money and time to get it right.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Removing the Marines fast air arm wouldn't necessarily mean cutting down the military capability. The pilots / aircraft could be transferred into the Air Force or perhaps a better fit would be the Navy (since they already train marine aviators), what it would do is just eliminate a lot of useless duplication / bureaucracy on things like procurement.

Maybe but good luck getting that to ever happen, there would be a huge political battle to say the least.

I think it would be more likely that the F-35B gets delayed, while F-35A and F-35C are built in volume to make up for urgent lost time. Its not like the B can't fly, its just going to take more money and time to get it right.

I would agree with you, the F-35s problems are nothing they can't fix.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

I would agree with you, the F-35s problems are nothing they can't fix.

+1. Considering the F-35B rectification program is about replacing three metal components in the aircraft with better ones it is hardly an 'end of STOVL forever' moment.

 

[Kirkzzy]

Not wanting to start a new thread or anything, just wanted to get everyone's personal opinion on the best/their favourite F-35 variant. (Ignore problems with current versions, just look at the specs/concepts) I think it would be great to know what everyone thinks and if there is a clear winner. Or if is mixed.

 

[Bonza]

Not wanting to start a new thread or anything, just wanted to get everyone's personal opinion on the best/their favourite F-35 variant. (Ignore problems with current versions, just look at the specs/concepts) I think it would be great to know what everyone thinks and if there is a clear winner. Or if is mixed.

How can there be a clear "winner" when they're designed to fill different requirements?

 

[Aussie Digger]

Not wanting to start a new thread or anything, just wanted to get everyone's personal opinion on the best/their favourite F-35 variant. (Ignore problems with current versions, just look at the specs/concepts) I think it would be great to know what everyone thinks and if there is a clear winner. Or if is mixed.

For an air arm that wants to use the F-35 from conventional runways than I think the F-35A is the best choice.

For an air arm that wants to operate F-35 aircraft off catapult equipped aircraft carriers, I think the F-35C is the best aircraft.

For an air arm that wants to operate an F-35 that can take off over short distances and land vertically I think the F-35B is the best aircraft.

Anyone think otherwise?

 

[rip]

For an air arm that wants to use the F-35 from conventional runways than I think the F-35A is the best choice.

For an air arm that wants to operate F-35 aircraft off catapult equipped aircraft carriers, I think the F-35C is the best aircraft.

For an air arm that wants to operate an F-35 that can take off over short distances and land vertically I think the F-35B is the best aircraft.

Anyone think otherwise?

Here is a different set of priorities. If the F-35 can’t fly what are the alternatives? We can all agree that the A variant is the best all-around air-craft of the three types both in the air-to-air and the air-to-ground roles but that is not what is driving this. The air force already has great airplanes that mostly fulfill it assigned missions and if the F-35 was canceled, there are new and improved versions of the air planes they are already flying coming on line destined for export and in the pipeline thery could switch to. But that is not true for the Navy; it cancelled the A-12 as you remember. The F-18 is a pretty good fighter but it is never going to be the bomber the navy needs, it can’t carry enough booms or enough defencive equipment to go down town) regardless how it is improved and there is nothing else even close to what the Marine Core wants even on the drawing boards or dream works.The Air- Force get the best plane but the others need a new plane much more than they do.

Could the Marines get by with a mix of F-18's and more helicopters? Probably but they will lose the very heart of their current doctrine without having it. They will no longer be able to go into harm’s way without much more support from other sources, sources that will be less effective for their needs and to the Marine’s way of thinking, they will also be to slow and to clumsy and that will mean that it will get more Marine's killed.

If the plane doesn’t work it doesn’t work, that is a no brainer, but if it can be made to work, then regardless of what the sectary of Defense says, they will build it. Canceling the plane is more than canceling the plane; it would require a major change of doctrine in all kinds of areas that in the end would be even more expensive to Accomplish less.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Here is a different set of priorities. If the F-35 can’t fly what are the alternatives? We can all agree that the A variant is the best all-around air-craft of the three types both in the air-to-air and the air-to-ground roles but that is not what is driving this. The air force already has great airplanes that mostly fulfill it assigned missions and if the F-35 was canceled, there are new and improved versions of the air planes they are already flying coming on line destined for export and in the pipeline thery could switch to. But that is not true for the Navy; it cancelled the A-12 as you remember. The F-18 is a pretty good fighter but it is never going to be the bomber the navy needs, it can’t carry enough booms or enough defencive equipment to go down town) regardless how it is improved and there is nothing else even close to what the Marine Core wants even on the drawing boards or dream works.The Air- Force get the best plane but the others need a new plane much more than they do.

Could the Marines get by with a mix of F-18's and more helicopters? Probably but they will lose the very heart of their current doctrine without having it. They will no longer be able to go into harm’s way without much more support from other sources, sources that will be less effective for their needs and to the Marine’s way of thinking, they will also be to slow and to clumsy and that will mean that it will get more Marine's killed.

If the plane doesn’t work it doesn’t work, that is a no brainer, but if it can be made to work, then regardless of what the sectary of Defense says, they will build it. Canceling the plane is more than canceling the plane; it would require a major change of doctrine in all kinds of areas that in the end would be even more expensive to Accomplish less.

The aircraft, all 3 variants in fact certainly seems to be capable of flying, so I'm not quite sure what you are getting at here?

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQCg2IZcKPg"]YouTube - F-35 In Afterburner[/nomedia]

 

[rip]

The aircraft, all 3 variants in fact certainly seems to be capable of flying, so I'm not quite sure what you are getting at here?

YouTube - F-35 In Afterburner

Perhaps I am using too many colloquialism in my posts. Flying (A measure of great success) it means in this case that the air planes meet mission requirements and can be effectively used as they were designed to be used, not that they fly around at an air show and look pretty.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Perhaps I am using too many colloquialism in my posts. Flying (A measure of great success) it means in this case that the air planes meet mission requirements and can be effectively used as they were designed to be used, not that they fly around at an air show and look pretty.

Well development hasn't proceeded as smoothly as anyone would like I am sure, but the test points are increasingly being racked up and the F-35 is meeting it's requirements, slowly BUT surely...

With the extra testing aircraft that are being added to the fleet and fully instrumented, I am sure we will see flight testing ramping up considerably this year. L-M is even confident enough to double it's number of planned flights this year.

The program was going slowly, but they said they would hit 394 tests in 2010 and in fact they exceeded it, performing 410 flights. This year they are planning 870 odd tests, which will push the overall flight test and development program to nearly 30% complete by the end of 2011 if they do what they say they will.

Personally, there are some optimistic signs how that the program is starting to "build some steam" at least with the A and C models...

 

[rip]

Well development hasn't proceeded as smoothly as anyone would like I am sure, but the test points are increasingly being racked up and the F-35 is meeting it's requirements, slowly BUT surely...

With the extra testing aircraft that are being added to the fleet and fully instrumented, I am sure we will see flight testing ramping up considerably this year. L-M is even confident enough to double it's number of planned flights this year.

The program was going slowly, but they said they would hit 394 tests in 2010 and in fact they exceeded it, performing 410 flights. This year they are planning 870 odd tests, which will push the overall flight test and development program to nearly 30% complete by the end of 2011 if they do what they say they will.

Personally, there are some optimistic signs how that the program is starting to "build some steam" at least with the A and C models...

There has already been too much invested (in all kinds and types of ways) and well see the A and C models come on line eventually. The B variant may be in doubt, but no matter how much money it takes, if they can get it to world as intended, it will be purchased regardless of how expensive it is. But the production rate and total numbers will be affected by the cost. The final numbers of all of the air-craft ultimately will be determined by the world’s political situation because there does not seem to be is any danger of peace braking out all over.

If the B variant turns out to be much more expansive than it was expected, I think that the marines would by just enough of them each year to keep that part of the production line open. We all know that the A variant will be in production for many years so there is room for some flexibility. That way if things in the world take a bad turn, than the cost will no long be the primary concern. I say again, there is nothing in the pipeline or on the drawing boards that can really fullfill this role and it will be a long time, ten or fifteen years before there could be, even if they started working on it now.

 

[ItsEden]

Soon we will have this baby too
2012-2014..
(Israel air force..)

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Perhaps I am using too many colloquialism in my posts. Flying (A measure of great success) it means in this case that the air planes meet mission requirements and can be effectively used as they were designed to be used, not that they fly around at an air show and look pretty.

I still think an F-35 would be able to put on a good airshow, can't wait to see an actual F-35 demo.