I think you are all missing the point.

1. F-35 detects Iran missile launch 200 miles out but is RTB.

2. The F-35 relays the data to other shooters in theater

3. A B-1 with jassm is in launch range. 100 miles out.

4. launcher dies

Sorry – the launcher is mobile. JASSM will miss.

The F-35B’s parts problems are likely to cause a program “rephasing.”

From AvWeek

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?topicName=Check6&id=news/awst/2010/09/13/AW_09_13_2010_p29-253051.xml&headline=Lockheed%20CEO:%20F-35B%20’Rephasing’%20Possible%20&channel=&from=topicalreports

Obviously no problems with heat/blast from the ‘Hot’ Nozzle,according to this video you can get at least two fag (cigarette) papers between the nozzle and the ramp/deck 🙂

http://www.air-attack.com/videos/getsinglevideoinfo/Xm7_PPE-8nk

That is the real issue with the engine exhaust nozzle. The velocity of the gases are faster and much closer to the deck / surface that with the Harrier. The fear is that it will cause spalling of the concrete, burn the sealant between concrete slab, deform and damage the non-skid coatings on flight decks. Can you imagine the FOD problems? How about when landing in austere locations? Kicking up rocks and dirt, browning yourself out and depositing debris in intricate mechanics.

… The sensors on the JSF will be able to detect and geolocate a Scud launch (day or night) from hundreds of miles away…

Are you sure about the geo-location of the launch from hundreds of miles away? How is that accomplished? I’ll buy the launch detect, a vector, and a range estimate, but geo-location implies precision.

Yes we all know that the F-35 isn’t a 747 we don’t need you to tell us that.

No need to be snide – try to keep it professional.

The E-2C/D is not in the 747 class – more like an ATR. Newer AWACS platforms are trending smaller, like Aussie 737 Wedgetail, and the Saab Erieye. The point is the aircraft perform different missions even though they share the ability to detect the some of the same types of targets.

There is no point in having huge 65,000 ton ships, with four acre flight decks, to operate helicopters, much smaller ships, like the current Invincible Class (roughtly 22,000 tons) can do that as effectively.

QE gets an, affordable, Fixed wing Air Group or risks being cancelled, and if that does happen, RAF will not get STOVL F35B or F35 at all.

It was a flippant comment, but the UK could conceivably sell the carriers under construction, build some amphibs, deck some Apaches, and remove themselves completely from fixed wing carrier aviation. From reading the earlier post about tomorrow’s Times article, it seems like an option that could be on the table. Not that I think that would be a wise move…

The F-35 is not, nor is not intended to be a AEW asset. AEW is a C4I function which is performed above the tactical level by aircraft like the E-2C/D that are equipped with the proper radar and other passive ESM. Perhaps the F-35 can become a sensor node, enhancing the commander’s picture of the battlespace. But the radar in the F-35 is not designed to function as a volume search radar, even when networked with other F-35’s.