F-35B/C - Naval Air Discussions (USN & USMC)

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #403
Looks like the fixes for the F-35 programme is now sufficiently mature for Singapore to get started in its acquisition process. In the past, I always wondered why Singapore, as an early Security Cooperative Participant (SCP), took until March 2019 to place our first order (for 4 F-35). There must have been some issues that were awaiting resolution before the 1st order.
 
Last edited:

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Defensenews has a summary of current F-35 issues. The link here describes a problem with the stealth coating when exceeding Mach 1.2, first noticed a while back and newer coatings have since been applied but the problem isn't fully addressed. The strange part is it seems to only be an issue with the B and C according to the article.

Supersonic speeds could cause big problems for the F-35′s stealth coating
Most of the B & C aircraft operate in a maritime environment so there could be chemical interactions with the higher concentrations of salt within that environment and the heat that is created by friction of the passing air particles during supersonic flight.
 
Looks like the fixes for the F-35 programme is now sufficiently mature for Singapore to get started in its acquisition process. In the past, I always wondered why Singapore, as an early Security Cooperative Participant (SCP), took until March 2019 to place our first order (for 4 F-35). There must have been some issues that were awaiting resolution before the 1st order.
Likely waiting on these almost free, (80 million), F-35A's, LOL
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Maybe old news, but was looking at the video of the USS Wasp entering Sydney harbour a couple of weeks ago and couldn't help but notice half a dozen F35B's on the flight deck.
Would I be correct that this is the first time the F35B variant has been seen in Australia.
If so this is a significant event. The USN do not have many ships capable of operating the F35B at this stage.
Certainly a privilege to be granted access to train with such a Ship / Aircraft system such as their LHD and suggest this says something of the relationship between our two countries.
Will be interesting if the F35Bs stay on board for Talisman Sabre or are based on land.

Maybe the US could benefit from the ADF attitude of not wasting space for embarked fixed wing aircraft in preference for additional vehicles / Helicopters.
Those US Marines certainly have a lot to learn
Maybe TS19 will be an eye opener for them!!!!

Ah yes, that old conversation


Regards S
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
An interesting article on the refueling of the F35 using older techniques
F-35 operations benefit from 1950s equipment
I was wondering would if this has been used in the R.A.A.F previously and if there were benefits for its usage here ,the article claims savings on time and money and there not any safety concerns ,perhaps members with experience could comment on its feasablity here.
It's back to basics, allows for hot refueling, quick sortie regeneration and has been SOP for decades so shouldn't be an issue. Basic equipment and easily used and maintained if they can access or create spares.
 

oldsig127

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Maybe the US could benefit from the ADF attitude of not wasting space for embarked fixed wing aircraft in preference for additional vehicles / Helicopters.
Those US Marines certainly have a lot to learn
Maybe TS19 will be an eye opener for them!!!!

Ah yes, that old conversation


Regards S
Maybe the USN has much bigger LHDs built with the intention of being able to do both, and with the crews, capital cost and ongoing sustainment to match.

Or we can snipe from the sidelines like jealous schoolgirls or be willing to give up our makeup allowance to pay. THAT old conversation.

oldsig
 

Stampede

Well-Known Member
The jealous schoolgirl will continue to observe the trends of overseas navy's; and yes is mindful that one can only buy so much make-up with a given allowance.
So will this "Old conversation" develop or dissipate" in the years ahead?
Have your bet
Some would say zero chance for the ADF getting this capability.
My view is, that I'd give it a 95% chance within a decade we will have our own F35B's flying off the Canberra Class.
.
Time will tell oldsig, so remember this post!

I value your opinion and input


Regards S
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
The jealous schoolgirl will continue to observe the trends of overseas navy's; and yes is mindful that one can only buy so much make-up with a given allowance.
So will this "Old conversation" develop or dissipate" in the years ahead?
Have your bet
Some would say zero chance for the ADF getting this capability.
My view is, that I'd give it a 95% chance within a decade we will have our own F35B's flying off the Canberra Class.
.
Time will tell oldsig, so remember this post!

I value your opinion and input


Regards S
Can we please leave this poor, deceased horse alone? The Moderators have stepped in before and shut down threads which devolved into whether or not the RAN would get or have fast jet capabilities from carriers or the LHD's. I would rather not tempt fate to see if it would happen again. If the RAN, ADF, or gov't made announcements regarding doing so, the situation would be different, but for right now there does not seem to be any movement towards such a capability.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The jealous schoolgirl will continue to observe the trends of overseas navy's; and yes is mindful that one can only buy so much make-up with a given allowance.
So will this "Old conversation" develop or dissipate" in the years ahead?
Have your bet
Some would say zero chance for the ADF getting this capability.
My view is, that I'd give it a 95% chance within a decade we will have our own F35B's flying off the Canberra Class.
.
Time will tell oldsig, so remember this post!

I value your opinion and input


Regards S
@Stampede Lay off this claptrap. You're derailing a non Australian thread with it and you and other recalcitrant posters have been warned about posting on this topic before. Consider this a formal warning.
 

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
WASHINGTON — The F-35 pilot who flew the two infamous supersonic missions that inflicted damage to the jet’s stealth coating and tail wants to set the record straight.
When pilots conduct supersonic intercepts or find themselves needing to race away from an enemy during combat, they will be able to take the F-35 to its furthest limits of speed and altitude — most likely without any permanent damage to the aircraft, he told Defense News in an exclusive interview.
Last June, Defense News revealed that the Pentagon had instituted time limits on the number of seconds the F-35B short-takeoff-and-landing variant and the F-35C carrier variant could spend at supersonic speeds...

...According to the documents, both incidents took place during flutter tests where the B and C models were flying at speeds of 1.3 Mach and 1.4 Mach. However, that damage didn’t occur in a vacuum, Flynn said. It materialized after F-35B and F-35C test articles flew repeated supersonic runs that pushed to the plane’s maximum of 1.6 Mach, making it the result of cumulative pressures on the aircraft.
“I was flying out at 700 knots in the C model up and down the East Coast of the state of Maryland and Delaware — that’s where we fly at Pax River — and then out over the ocean, firing missiles at almost 1.6 Mach as we cleared out the weapons for the airplane. That’s extreme speed, and that’s repeated flights in those environments,” said Flynn, who has flown more than 800 hours in all three F-35 variants.
“Make a run at 700 knots, make another run at 700 knots, go to an aerial refueling tanker, get fuel for myself … and then race out again and again and again. Repeat this cycle for four- and five-hour missions,” he added.
Similarly, the flights for the B model involved aggressive maneuvering at the edge of the aircraft’s flight envelope for hours at a time.
“Nobody is going to do [that] tactically,” he said. “There’s not a combat scenario where that is going to happen.”...

...To cut down the risk of damage to the jet, the Pentagon imposed time limits on how long F-35B and F-35C pilots can spend at supersonic speeds in full afterburner. An F-35C can only fly at Mach 1.3 in afterburner for 50 cumulative seconds, meaning that a pilot cannot clock 50 seconds at that speed, slow down for a couple seconds and then speed back up. The F-35B can fly for 80 cumulative seconds at Mach 1.2 or for 40 seconds at Mach 1.3 without risking damage.
So as usual a bit of context is everything here. Supersonic flight restrictions were imposed as a result of two events (one in B model, one in C) induced by repeatedly flying at extreme speeds in a single sortie back in 2011 (never repeated since, and never seen in the A model). My bet is the restrictions could readily be ignored without undue concern if the situation called for it during operations.
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #418
IOC met for 1st US Navy and US Marines F-35C Squadrons with carrier deployments to follow
1. The F-35C was declared as operationally ready to deploy in Feb 2019. This IOC declaration comes after the US Navy’s first F-35C squadron, Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 147 was carrier qualified last year.

2. This latest non-news is VFA-147 going to sea with USS Carl Vinson, for its first deployment in 2021. In late Aug 2020, the ship is underway for sea trials and will arrive at its new homeport in San Diego, Calif., before beginning the months-long training period to integrate the air wing and surface forces for the anticipated 2021 first operational deployment of the F-35C. F-35C modifications to USS Carl Vinson added classified spaces to the carrier and replaced the carrier’s jet-blast deflectors. The ship’s current carrier launch and recovery systems don’t require modifications to handle the new fighters. The next carrier up for an extended maintenance on the West Coast, USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71), is set to arrive at the Puget Sound yard sometime in 2021, USNI News understands. When that process is completed in 2023, the US Navy will have more carriers that operate the F-35C.

3. In keeping with its other aircraft, Naval Aviation Warfighting Development Center’s (NAWDC) F-35Cs in May 2020, could not only support TOPGUN, but they could also allow Fallon instructors to fly stealthy tactics with and against fleet squadrons when they come to the Nevada air station on pre-deployment training. More importantly, having a its own stable of F-35Cs will allow NAWDC to more rapidly test new tactics and procedures that could greatly benefit the fleet. The arrival of a single F-35C at Fallon, which occurred with little fanfare, is a big moment for Naval aviation and another milestone in the navalized Joint Strike Fighter's young history.

4. In more good news, the first US Marine Corps F-35C carrier-variant Joint Strike Fighter squadron received a “safe for flight” operations certification that will allows them operate independently of the US Navy’s fleet replacement squadron. US Marine VMFA-314 was certified on 20 Mar 2020 after working over a period of five months to train the squadron’s pilots and maintainers to work with the new aircraft.

5. VMFA-314 is the second F-35C squadron to reach safe for flight, after the US Navy’s “Argonauts” of VFA-147 hit the milestone in December 2018. VFA-147 is expected to deploy with USS Carl Vinson in 2021, with VMFA-314 deploying on a still-unnamed carrier shortly afterwards (which is likely to be USS Abraham Lincoln or USS George Washington).

6. The F-35C has 20,000 lbs of internal fuel vs 14,000 lbs for F-35B. That's a huge difference. It also has a larger weapons bay that allows F-35C to carry more missiles or 2x 2,000 lbs weapons (vs 1,000 lbs weapons on the F-35B). This is also why Singapore asked for information on the F-35C, the F-35A, and also indicated that the initial buy of 4x F-35Bs (with an option for 8 more) in 2026 is for ‘testing’.
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #419
Looks like the fixes for the F-35 programme is now sufficiently mature for Singapore to get started in its acquisition process. In the past, I always wondered why Singapore, as an early Security Cooperative Participant (SCP), took until March 2019 to place our first order (for 4 F-35). There must have been some issues that were awaiting resolution before the 1st order.
Apologies, when I posted on 14 Jun 2019, I did not know if it was the A or B model. MINDEF has clarified that it placed an initial order of 4 F-35Bs (for delivery of 1st 4 in 2026) with an option for 8 more; which I believe will be exercised by 2022.

Good to see a growing F-35B user club in Asia, with the Japanese order (and the Korean order that is expected to follow). Japan has plans to eventually acquire 42 F-35Bs to operate alongside its planned fleet of 105 conventional-takeoff-and-landing F-35As, making it the top customer of the F-35 outside the United States.

The 42 F-35Bs include 18 to be contracted over the next five years, with Japan setting aside approximately US$795 million in its current 2020 defense budget to acquire six. It is also converting the helicopter destroyer Izumo, which has a 245-meter flight deck and was originally designed to carry helicopters primarily for anti-submarine warfare, to operate the F-35B.

The US Marines will be the force of choice for international cooperation in STOVL operations.
 
Last edited:

RogerP

New Member
The Navy F35 was designed to not need a carrier and to be vertical takeoff, thus it is a total failure

Mod edit: Temp ban instituted and poster's false claim regarding the F-35C noted and added to Mod team discussion regarding the poster's behavior.

Mod Edit: Ban changed to permanent for trolling.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top