which to cut F-35B or F-35C

[aussienscale]

I have not wiki searched with a "That'll do" solution. If you read earlier on in the thread, the point I am making is that the requirement itself needs to change, a bit of lateral thinking as it were. In other words, I am not saying that the ST is equivalent to the F-35 because it is not, but in terms of suiting a revised requirement i.e. a more modest and strict CAS role, the Super Tucano would be an ideal solution. Remember, the B-model may well be cancelled anyway, regardless of anything else and so there will be no fixed-wing aviation from an amphib deck.

Remember that the USAF are considering a system such as the ST; a thought that would not have even been imagined 10 years ago.

But if you change the requirement you change the force construct not just for that platform but everything else put into place across the force, the capability gap would be almost impossible to overcome. If they scrapped the B the role still needs to be filled from somewhere, and that would be either the Navy or Airforce, but it just isnt that easy to be realistic about it.

Yes the USAF is "looking" at the ST and other similar airframes, but you are talking very limited numbers for starters, but it is for very unique and specific roles

What the future holds ? none of us know, but I am guessing it is not going to be anything other than a political decision, as to what may or may not happen to any of the JSF models. To me common sence would actually see the A model scrapped as this can be replaced by the C, although a bit more on paper that would come down due to numbers being made

 

[Sea Toby]

But if you change the requirement you change the force construct not just for that platform but everything else put into place across the force, the capability gap would be almost impossible to overcome. If they scrapped the B the role still needs to be filled from somewhere, and that would be either the Navy or Airforce, but it just isnt that easy to be realistic about it.

Yes the USAF is "looking" at the ST and other similar airframes, but you are talking very limited numbers for starters, but it is for very unique and specific roles

What the future holds ? none of us know, but I am guessing it is not going to be anything other than a political decision, as to what may or may not happen to any of the JSF models. To me common sence would actually see the A model scrapped as this can be replaced by the C, although a bit more on paper that would come down due to numbers being made

Since the USAF is buying twice as many, or there abouts, and the A model is significantly cheaper than the C, the A isn't going to get cut. While the C is required for the US Navy, there isn't going to be much savings cutting the A...

On the other hand the B model may be cut, as the USAF and the US Navy will be more than pleased with the A and C models. Of course the USMC would prefer the B model, but they will gladly take the C models instead... The USMC have to be careful, there are many Congressmen who wouldn't mind eliminating the Marines... The US has a land combat force, its call the US Army...

 

[aussienscale]

Since the USAF is buying twice as many, or there abouts, and the A model is significantly cheaper than the C, the A isn't going to get cut. While the C is required for the US Navy, there isn't going to be much savings cutting the A...

On the other hand the B model may be cut, as the USAF and the US Navy will be more than pleased with the A and C models. Of course the USMC would prefer the B model, but they will gladly take the C models instead... The USMC have to be careful, there are many Congressmen who wouldn't mind eliminating the Marines... The US has a land combat force, its call the US Army...

Like I said, Common sence would see the A model scrapped, didnt say that would be the one scrapped if it comes to that. The A is the only aircraft that can be replaced by either of the other 2 models, but if it is about dollars then scrap the C and tell the Navy to use the B ? Isnt it "significantly" cheaper ?

I am sure there are plenty of Congressmen & Woman who would love to see a lot of things scrapped in the US at the moment, but to publicly advocate and push for a concerted effort to get rid of the USMC would be, IMO, political suicide ! I could not see the people let that happen

 

[gf0012-aust]

I am sure there are plenty of Congressmen & Woman who would love to see a lot of things scrapped in the US at the moment, but to publicly advocate and push for a concerted effort to get rid of the USMC would be, IMO, political suicide ! I could not see the people let that happen

Seriously, that isn't going to happen, the USAF would be going green and back to the USAAF before the USG dumps the USMC.

 

[aussienscale]

Seriously, that isn't going to happen, the USAF would be going green and back to the USAAF before the USG dumps the USMC.

I know, the thread got the better of me. Thought you knew me better than that by now GF ?
To be honest I dont see what this is all about ? I dont think any of them will go, they are all needed, but crazy things happen.

P.S. I wasnt saying the USMC was going to go, Sea Toby was alluding to it in his previous post

 

[gf0012-aust]

I know, the thread got the better of me. Thought you knew me better than that by now GF ?
To be honest I dont see what this is all about ? I dont think any of them will go, they are all needed, but crazy things happen.

P.S. I wasnt saying the USMC was going to go, Sea Toby was alluding to it in his previous post

Mate I knew you weren't advocating, I just reply/quoted the last cab off the rank..

 

[Ananda]

To me common sence would actually see the A model scrapped as this can be replaced by the C, although a bit more on paper that would come down due to numbers being made

Isn't a bit similar if in the 70's USAF being told to scrap F-16 and use F-18, since F-18 can do whatever F-16 capable, while F-16 can't done all what F-18 can do. Sorry just wandering what 'a fit' will behold USAF brass if they're being told to have to use USN thingy.

Still they have used F-4 and loved those USN originate fighter.

 

[xhxi558]

As you say, it is almost inconcievable that the USG would eliminate the USMC, would they however look to roll back some of the capability creep that has occurred. ie marine air wings?

 

[gf0012-aust]

As you say, it is almost inconcievable that the USG would eliminate the USMC, would they however look to roll back some of the capability creep that has occurred. ie marine air wings?

If anything the USMC are pandas (ie a protected species)

they are the one service that is demonstrating good procurement governance and spending money wisely (compared to the 3 big sisters)

nobody is going to be lining them up for cuts as they're already demonstrating smart spending and systems development.

if I was one of the other services I'd be taking a long hard at how the USMC goes out and does rapid acquisition and gets the sustainment and value for money model right.

 

[riksavage]

If anything the USMC are pandas (ie a protected species)

they are the one service that is demonstrating good procurement governance and spending money wisely (compared to the 3 big sisters)

nobody is going to be lining them up for cuts as they're already demonstrating smart spending and systems development.

if I was one of the other services I'd be taking a long hard at how the USMC goes out and does rapid acquisition and gets the sustainment and value for money model right.

Congress looking to cut costs could argue that the USMC functioned pretty damned well without the luxury of STOVL AV8B in the past (Korea, Vietnam etc), so in these times of unprecedented pressure on all three services to cut costs couldn't the USMC theoretically make do with only F18/F35C sqns. Will the loss of F35B lead to a critical mission failure, or can they fall back on fixed wing marine fliers based on strike carriers? Is the need to operate from austere forward runways that vital to the success of their mission?

 

[gf0012-aust]

Congress looking to cut costs could argue that the USMC functioned pretty damned well without the luxury of STOVL AV8B in the past (Korea, Vietnam etc), so in these times of unprecedented pressure on all three services to cut costs couldn't the USMC theoretically make do with only F18/F35C sqns. Will the loss of F35B lead to a critical mission failure, or can they fall back on fixed wing marine fliers based on strike carriers? Is the need to operate from austere forward runways that vital to the success of their mission?

Seriously, I see so much written about what Congress will do, what the USMC will do, how they should operate etc... that it does my head in and has no actual bearing on what we know IS going to happen.

If I was dictator for a day I know what one of my pet projects would be for a significant cohort of journalists.

 

[Volkodav]

Congress looking to cut costs could argue that the USMC functioned pretty damned well without the luxury of STOVL AV8B in the past (Korea, Vietnam etc), so in these times of unprecedented pressure on all three services to cut costs couldn't the USMC theoretically make do with only F18/F35C sqns. Will the loss of F35B lead to a critical mission failure, or can they fall back on fixed wing marine fliers based on strike carriers? Is the need to operate from austere forward runways that vital to the success of their mission?

Well if the B is canned then the USN loses the ability to operate a 5th generation fighter from 9 platforms and NATO loses another 3 to 5. Pretty poor economy actually if you look at the reduction in potential capability to put half a dozen or more of one of the best strike fighters in the world off almost any coast you choose.

The F-35 is not an air superiority fighter so why not concentrate on the strike derivatives, kill the A and keep the more versatile B and C. The only issue would be the loss of the internal gun and a marginal increase in through life cost of ownership.

 

[jack412]

"The F-35 is not an air superiority fighter "

I wouldn't say that, outside of the US f-22 I don't see anything getting close to it and the systems within it works

 

[Volkodav]

"The F-35 is not an air superiority fighter "

I wouldn't say that, outside of the US f-22 I don't see anything getting close to it and the systems within it works

Not a critism just an observation that it is a true multi role type and that any slight edge the A may have over the B and C in terms of maneuverability etc, would offer no real world advantage due to the capability of the common systems. Half a dozen Bs on an LHA off a hostile coast would be more effective than a dozen As at an airbase several hundred NM away.

 

[jack412]

yeah, I can't see any real differences in the air. It's more how they take off/land and any advantage that brings to the table

 

[ADMk2]

Not a critism just an observation that it is a true multi role type and that any slight edge the A may have over the B and C in terms of maneuverability etc, would offer no real world advantage due to the capability of the common systems. Half a dozen Bs on an LHA off a hostile coast would be more effective than a dozen As at an airbase several hundred NM away.

Unless you need day 1 stealth AND have to strike hardened targets and bunkers through an extremely tight air defence network.

Then the -A model shows it's clear combat advantage over the -B...

 

[jack412]

With the higher bypass that brought the A's range back to 600 from 700, it probably has better IR sig than the b/c too, I don't know if these are game changers though

 

[swerve]

Well if the B is canned then the USN loses the ability to operate a 5th generation fighter from 9 platforms and NATO loses another 3 to 5.

3 to 5? What's the 5th? There are currently two or three (Cavour, Juan Carlos 1, maybe Principe de Asturias), one of which is part-time, only fitted out for jets when one PdA is hors de combat. Giuseppe Garibaldi, all being well, should be replaced by a STOVL-capable LHD - but again, it'll operate in carrier mode only as a backup for Cavour.

Illustrious will retire soon, to be replaced by a CTOL carrier, & like PdA, is a bit small for efficient operation of F-35B. GG is smaller still, will also retire before very long, & I doubt it'd be practical to fly F-35B off her.

Long-term, there should be two STOVL carriers over here, Cavour & a PdA replacement, with two LHDs able to cover when they're in repair or refit.

 

[Ananda]

Gent's if I may to ask opinions, If C being cancelled, then F-18 E/F Shornet will replace what USN need. However if B being the one that got canned, will further development of AV-8B (says AV-8 NG), still going to give what USMC need ?

Because in the end I think it can answered which's between B or C is the priority (if the situations has to come to that).

 

[south]

With the higher bypass that brought the A's range back to 600 from 700, it probably has better IR sig than the b/c too, I don't know if these are game changers though

Confirm a higher bypass engine is generally more efficient and thus generally increases range? Hence why Airliners have extremely high bypass engines....

Havent seen anything relating to a different donk, certainly from the A and C. Do you have a source for that because I would be interested to see that.

Would not surprise me to see that the C model has slightly better sustained turn performance than the A with its slightly larger wing. 9G isn't all that its cracked up to be vice 7.5 at any rate.