maus92So the F-35B is on double secret probation? IF it is canceled, what will happen with Marine Air? It doent look like the Marines have any sort of plan for this eventualiy. The America’s whole design is built around operating these jets. So, agai, IF it goes the way of the Dodo, What will the Marines do?
For CAS? F/A-18’s (re-barreled C/D’s, new E,F) off of CV’s and airfields if they want fast jets; AH-1’s if not.
maus92More capable or not, it’s debatable at best at the moment. But, F-35 significantly cheaper than the Rafale? Since theres no fixed price for the F-35 at the moment, which is likely to go up once again, I think its safe to say the F-35 will cost more. But lets see what happens in the next few months.
Nope, I said that the F/A-18E/F is significantly cheaper, and equal if not better in the strike role than the Rafale.
maus92Surely if they are going to cancel anything they should the V-22 and use the money saved to fund the F-35B?
The F-35B is funded, but it doesn’t work atm.
maus92Sorry to be a pain and OT, but it’s not Grippen it’s Gripen; and the current Gripen is powered by RM12 which is a modified F404.
The F414 however will power the future Gripen NG.
🙂
It’s all good – just pointing out that the F414 is in no danger of cancellation.
Is Volvo still going to be involved with the F414 wrt the Gripen NG?
maus92Its a big misconception that F-35C are only replacing F/A-18C Hornets. As a matter of fact some Squadrons of Super Hornets are already planned to swap out their Super Hornets for F-35C’s. (VFA-14 for Example)
Really, at this stage we have no idea what the mix will end up as??? At first a mix of F-35C’s plus Super Hornets. Then maybe more F-35C’s and/or UCAV’s.
That is a purely organizational move, if it occurs as planned. The Navy will not be reducing numbers of -E/F’s in the fleet for decades to come – in fact, they will be increasing significantly over the next decade.
maus92Who so ever replaces gates (Either this year , the next or whenever he leaves) will still be bound by the “Realities of the program” , this is a top priority program for 3 services , and to see it being put in probation for 2 years is a SERIOUS THREAT to its existance. Basically what LMA and the USMC has been told is to thrash out the issues (which are “Significant” and “Under-reported”) , solve the problems in a timely and cost-councious manner and turn this particular version around in two years or else its Bye Bye the B and with it the USMC’s STOVL dreams for good. Meanwhile the other 2 versions which have had comparitivly less issues go on .. As far as i am concerned this is a GOOD MOVE , one cannot keep on throwing out seemingly infinite ammounts of money (which we dont have) on aircraft programs or rather aspects of aircraft programs that are not being well managed or have shortcommings. So USMC and LMA have one last chance..If the problems are merely superficial and limited to hinges and doors etc then they should not be alarmed as they willl come out with flying colors well ahead of the 2 year deadline..But if the problems are more severe and in line with Gate’s assesment then surely they better pull up their socks or loose the B version..As a taxpayer i dont mind this type of accountability at all !!
+1
maus92I stand corrected. Can anyone explain why an LHA does not have a ski jump like the RN CVS class have/had? I would have thought that with the weight problems of the F35B and help to get ordinance into the air would be welcome… Or would a ski jump take up too much space and hence degrade the performance of the LHA system?
Deck space for helicopters.
maus92Half tank for take off with mid air refuelling can help with weight problems
That scenario would require a CVN to provide the tankers (support) – something that F-35B proponents try to say is unnecessary…
maus92Yes, EFV cancelled and the F-35B is delayed by two year or even cut if issues can’t be worked out. Yet, the latter is doubtful and remember its not up to Gates to cancel anything. The US Congress will fund or not fund whatever it wants……….
Its worth noting that Gates will likely be gone before the year is out. Plus, he has tried to cancel the C-17 and the GE F414 for the last few years with no luck…..
So, for anybody to take Mr. Gates comments as “fact” doesn’t understand how the US Government works!
Gates wants to retire, maybe this year, maybe not. If Obama asks him to stay, he will. If not, Hillary Clinton may be tapped to take his place.
Point of fact, Gates has tried to cancel the F-35 alternate engine, the F136, not the GE F414, which powers the E/F/A-18E/F/G, and the Grippen.
maus92I thought of a joke about it when I just read that…Forgot it now? Ah well probably wasn’t a good one anyway. 😀
Anywho. Last time I checked there was talks of the UK ordering around 40 units? If the price goes up, which it most probably will now, fewer will be ordered for the UK there for not having sufficient numbers to be effective, IMO, they’re not worth paying the price for such little units.
Like I said before, just put an order in for Rafale and have a commonality with the French since we’re going to work with them more often, probably even more with than the US. Keep it simple. More of a commonality, less of a pain in the ****.
The Rhinos would be a significantly cheaper, more capable strike fighter option than the Rafales.
maus92He seems completely unaware that the F/A-18E/F is NOT “a bridge to the next generation of fighters”.
The F-35C is only replacing the USN’s older F/A-18A+/C/Ds.
The Super Hornet is NOT to be replaced by the F-35 in the USN, but will serve beside it (until a possible later replacement by UCAVs)!
Further, when the F-35C is in the fleet, the Super Hornet will be the “second-day” aircraft, only going in after F-35s have “cleared the way”.
If the USMC had bought F/A-18E/Fs, they would be getting no F-35s at all, as only the size of the USMC “all-F-35B” buy justified the cost of the development of the F-35B in the first place.
This would have eliminated their ability to operate fighters from the LHA/LHDs, and made the USMC even more reliant on the USN for combat support.
The LHA/LHD’s cannot operate in the “first day of war.”
maus92The Marines, their culture and the F-35B
From Wired/Axe:
“There was a time, a decade ago, when the Marines had a chance to avoid the current crisis. The Corps could have joined the Navy in purchasing Super Hornets as a bridge to the next generation of fighters.
The Supers have since evolved into impressive jets in their own right, especially with the addition of one of the world’s most advanced airborne radars. The Navy has happily continued buying Super Hornets even as the F-35 progresses. But the Marines wanted only the latest and best technology; no mere upgraded F-18 would do.
That unwavering obsession with high tech painted the Corps into the corner it now finds itself in, waiting around for a much-delayed, over-budget new fighter while its current jets waste away to nothing, deeply eroding the Marines’ famed self-reliance.”
maus92Gates: F-35B has additional problems
From ARES/Sweetman:
“Gates left no doubt that the problems that have repeatedly delayed the testing of the JSF STOVL version – which so far has performed fewer than a dozen vertical landings – have been underreported. The aircraft, he says, has experienced “significant testing problems. These issues may lead to a redesign of the aircraft’s structure and propulsion – changes that could add yet more weight and more cost to an aircraft that has little capacity to absorb more of either.” In that case, the aircraft will be canceled.”
This is serious. Problems that may require redesign of major systems and structures – and add weight. The Marines have 2 years to work it out.
maus92Nope, the Hornet radius is so small in this type of mission because it is hi/lo/hi profile (the plane flies most of the mission at low altitudes were the fuel consumption is 2/2.5 times more than when flying high, and that’s true for any plane). For exemple in a Hornet booklet (I can’t post it because it is 7 MB) the radius for missions with high altitude flight profiles (fighter escort and maritime attack) is over 800 Nmiles.
As for max. speed you should know that it is a thoretic value. It is true OTOH that the varaible geometry Tornado could fly faster than the rather draggy SH.
In terms of raw performance, the Tornado has more range and speed. But the Rhino has more modern avionics, and is probably cheaper to operate and maintain (by design, and because they would be new airframes.) If the UK was to purchase/lease the SH, they can leverage the Navys’ spiral development strategy for the SH.
maus92@WW et al
The pricing targets quoted earlier for LRIP IV F-35’s are without the F135 engine, so you have to add at least 19M – 25M (probably more) depending upon model, to the target price to get something close to real.
However, the costs for LRIP jets have come down significantly. That fact is unassailable.
Sign In
