F-35 Lightning II (aka JSF)

[Geoff_B]

F-35B going CAS
As i predicted it look like the F-35B is going to be a re-defined as a Close Air Support Aircraft. True this will be a suitable replacement for the Harrier and meet the needs of the USMC and USAF (who now want F-35B for the CAS role as well).

However while this might improve on the Harrier GR-9 it does not meet the requirements we envisioned for the FCBA. When selected the F-35B would have had nearly all the same operational capabilities as its CTOL brothers. The US can rely on its other air assets to gain Air supremacy over the Battlespace to allow CAS to operate. However the UK does not have these assets so we would be unable to execute an offensive campaign without US airpower using the F-35B Or reliant on France and her carriers using the Rafale !!!!.

The lower capability means we wouldn't be able to perform deep strikes to knock out C&C centres using Storm Shadow, we would need to concentrate on more on CAP duties reducing the numbers available for air strikes and close Air Support.

Either we need to go CTOL with the carriers to allow a mix of B & C aircraft to operate  (we would still get F-35B to replace the GR-9 ) or look again at the Rafale/F18E for Carrier based operations.

Still don't understand the RN's insistence on STOVL when they're building something the size of USS Midway.

In reality they didn't but needed to keep the RAF happy and the MP's as the STVOL aircraft mean a higher UK content. Part of it was due to a miss calculation that put the CV version 2 years behind the STVOL version now thats changed and the STVOL version is now a downgraded aircraft compared to its brothers. Some question surely need to be addressed.

As it happens with the delays in the CVF design procurement the actual decision on to go STVOL or CTOL hasn't been formally taken as yet and thats due in Spring 2005. So all hope is not yet lost. Origianlly it was thought that the STVOL would get rubber stamped, but now with updated information appearing on both the STVOL and CV variants its possible we could go with a mixed batch of JSF. B's to replace the GR-9 and C's to cover the Carrier fighter & strike roles.

The British should have bought the Tomcat when they had the chance....

Now there are a couple of US carriers that I am sure they could get cheap....and Tomcats are plentiful, since the last 2 squadrens have embarked on their last cruise.[/quote]

Way too expensive at the time and still too expensive, thats why the USN are dispossing of them so quickly they appear to be Hanger queens compared to the Hornets these days. Other wise you would have found the US govt trying to sell them on to favourable allies.

As to the carriers the non nuclear ones are all knackerd most are nearly 40 in service and the mothballed ones are rapidly degrading. Thats why they arn't going anywhere. The US carrier fleet has been hard pressed whilst in service and show thier age. THE USN is getting a bit nervious about the CVN-21 as they need them to be ordered soon to replace Enterprise & JFK. By the time the new class enter service the original Nimitz will be geeting on for 40-50 yrs old. Another factor with the USN CV's & CVN's is that they require a massive crew to keep them operational at sea. We just don't have that manpower. The New CVF will use lees crew than the Invincibles they replace desopite being twice the size.

Nice idea and the US have mentioned it more than once but way too impractical for the RN in this day & age. 1970's perhaps?  now - no way.
Cheers

Geoff 

[Jschmus]

There's a short piece in the new Popular Mechanics about CVN-21.  There's an illustration of a carrier based on the Nimitz hull, but different.  There's also mention that they're planning to massively reduce the crew complement through increased automation.  I don't have the magazine in front of me, but I believe they mention a crew figure of 1000, which is quite a bit less than current.

[elmayerle]

Not even going to comment on this one as it's got me so bloody mad!!! The only thing I will say is BOLLOCKS to F/A18-E's. All we#re likely to get form our 'estemed' allies is cast off old A&B models....

Actually, I've had more than one operational pilot tell me that the really "hot" F/A-18's to fly are the A+/B+ models that have had the airframe "zero-timed" with some major structural replacement (including some very creative manufacturing engineering by one Naval Aviation Depot that drastically cut costs while still producing a quality product) and have the latest avionics fitted where the new avionics fit is lighter than the old one.

[nev]

Eh?  Where in that article did it say about the F-35 going CAS?    

Unless I missed it  :dum:

And how hard can it be to slap a radar on the front and sling some AMRAAMs under the wings.  In an age of multi-role planes, going down a specialised route is a very backwards step - and would seriously harm LM's chances of other export sales.

[elmayerle]

Eh?  Where in that article did it say about the F-35 going CAS?    

Unless I missed it  :dum:

And how hard can it be to slap a radar on the front and sling some AMRAAMs under the wings.  In an age of multi-role planes, going down a specialised route is a very backwards step - and would seriously harm LM's chances of other export sales.

Unless someone's drastically changed the spec. on me in the last few days, all JSF variants will have radar as far as the guidance the design teams have.  That's about all I'd better say, there.

On a related note, if they have to retire the SHAR FA.2's, why can't the early Harrier GR.5's be "remanufactured", much as the USMC had all of it's early AV-8B's "remanufactured" into AV-8B+'s, into Harier FGR.11's with either the SHAR FA.2's radar or the radar from the Typhoon in a nose like that of the AV08B+?

[Geoff_B]

On a related note, if they have to retire the SHAR FA.2's, why can't the early Harrier GR.5's be "remanufactured", much as the USMC had all of it's early AV-8B's "remanufactured" into AV-8B+'s, into Harier FGR.11's with either the SHAR FA.2's radar or the radar from the Typhoon in a nose like that of the AV08B+?

Hi Evan

I did actually ask the MOD this when the SHAR retirement was announced and the GR-s were going to be updated to 9's. The reply had plenty of spin in it saying they felt the risks of NO AIR DEFENCE for the fleet was acceptable as the new Type 45's could do the mid range defence and the money to do the conversion wasn't deemed nessesary. As we know the Type 45 program has been cut back and the first ship won't see fleet service till 2009 As a result we are stuffed if we need to operate in hostile waters without the nice umbrealla of an Uncle Sam CAP.

As you can imagine wasn't impressed by the reply as the Money available was probably spent tarting up Whitehall instead. It could get interesting next year with the election as somebody could pick up on this and expose how the Govt is expossing our forcees to additional risk due to penny pinching.  

The obvious choice was refitting the Blue Vixen Radar to some of the GR-7's when they get reffited or to just order the US update kits. What will probably happen is we'll end up asking to borrow some AV-8B+ pay to get AMRAAM intergrated and do it in an emergencies budget in the nedd arises.

As for the F-35B and Radar i never said it wouldn't have radar as it can still carry AMRAAM all i was pointing out is that it will carry less and not as far as its CTOL brothers. In effect it won't be too much of a jump in capability over the Current SHAR and GR-7 operations as i imagine its Supersonic capability will be restricted in use to maintain fuel economy. CTOL would be so much easier as we could then get tankers as well as Hawkete AEW.

Cheers

Geoff B B)

[elmayerle]

Actually, I believe that, like the F-22, all F-35 variants will be capable of supercruise.  As to range, that remains to be seen as I'd rather trust actual flight-test data and final configuration data than rely solely on predictions.  *Chuckle* Give us a little breather, we're just swinging into the detail design phase for "B1" and there are still weight-reduction studies going on.  *smile* I will say that there is increased appreciation of the manufacturing skills our international partners bring that exceed ours.

Regarding my proposed Harrier FRG.11 - I imagine Whitehall was not too receptive to such a simple and obvious idea, the NIH factor as much as anything else.  Besides, such a simple approach would not employ near enough "civil servants" (a true misnomer, most aren't civil and act like masters, not servants - here as well as there) to make it worthwhile.

[Geoff_B]

Regarding my proposed Harrier FRG.11 - I imagine Whitehall was not too receptive to such a simple and obvious idea, the NIH factor as much as anything else. Besides, such a simple approach would not employ near enough "civil servants" (a true misnomer, most aren't civil and act like masters, not servants - here as well as there) to make it worthwhile.

More like a case of too easy an answer Defra/BAE could have sorted out swapping out Blue Vixen and fitting it to Harriers II as part of the GR-9 upgrade. Trouble is the FA-2 are being retired due to them not being able to afford a new engine for hot & high climates as the engine bay is too narrow (something i discovered was known in the early 70's when the AV-16 was propossed - Why did we build so many Sea Harriers when we could have rest production to make the larger example which offered more possibilities !!! ).

Oh well i did hear from some source that they may well try doing the mod  but hold it in reserve in case the need arises or the funds become available.

Evan - Good luck with the B as it should meet the needs of three of its main customers (as these already have other aircraft or the other variants to cover some of the Roles) You'll have to keep us updated when allowed and hopefully we'll be able to gat an accurate model done.

Speaking of the B has any mention been made of fitting Storm Shadow  or Meteor as well as ASRAAM & Brimstone as these would dictate the possible capability of the aircraft.

As to the F-35B i have just seen this from Richard Breedall on the Warships1 Forum :-

"The UK's F-35B selection decision has been "under review" since last summer when the serious weight problems (and potential impact on the JSF KPP's) became apparent. A final decision will now be [re-] made early 2005 prior to CVF Main Gate. However the impression I'm getting is that L-M have now done enough to keep the UK onboard for the F-35B, and there is no chance of the RN (very much the minor stakeholder in JCA) belatedly making a determined stand in favour of the F-35C because R-R and BAES would go ape and the cost impact is a show stopper. Adding over 100 crew members (steam cats!) and $200m of additional aviation equipment purchased from the USA to each carrier from build is the last thing that the CVF project needs at this critical "go/no-go" time, and also there simply isn't the funds to buy Advanced Hawkeye for MASC (or indeed anything it seems at the moment!) which would be the logical corollary. On the other hand the MOD and the RN are keeping an active interest in what the USN is doing as regards EMALS and UCAV's, and that's why the "adaptability" element has survived in the CVF design. "

So perhaps AEW & the deep strike might be in the form of UCAV rather than manned flight !!!!!.

Cheers

Geoff B B)  

[elmayerle]

Evan - why don't you and Thor stand for election ? Or is it that you are far to inteliigent and sensible ?

In my case, I suspect I can do more good where I am.  Besides, the Representative from where I live, here in Ft. Worth, is doing a good job as are the two US Senators from Texas (well, I think it's a good job, what some poilitically opposed organizations think is something else).

For those trying to do an accurate "B", there were some illustrations in Jane's Defense Weekly a few months back that had reasonably accurate depictions of the latest plan and profile views of the "B".  Interested parties can email me for the scans since the two servers I have FTP access to are having problems at the moment.

[P1127]

G9/FA-11 - Was looked at, but too expensive - they dropped ASRAAM from the Gr9 update as it was tooe xpensive. It would mean a fuselage remanufacture, as per the B+ . Podded Blue Vixen has been looked at as well. Anyone know if the sets are removed from scrapped/Museum FA2s?

CVF - one other reason for retaining the 'interchangeable' option of the design is they are waiting to see if the USN can get electromagnetic cats to work efficiently. Feeling was that including them now would be too early if the US has a lot of snagging problems, and we'd be left with a carrier that couldn't launch aircraft (which would be typical MOD!)

The proposed weapon load for the F-35B seems ridiculously small - the FA2 can acrry more!!

I still have in my possesion an MOD document for CVF from about 5 years ago that has a deck plan marked with parking boxes labelled 'F/A-18E/F'...........  

[Craig]

While the Blue Vixen into GR.9 idea is a good one (even those idiots in HMG should have realised it would be a good idea, they could also stick the 30mm ADEN gunpods on and actually give it a gun capability), the reason for not doing it is simple: If they do that, the FA.2s can't be sold to India for a fast buck (opinion attributable to an RN pilot I recently spoke to).

[Radish]

SHAR 2s are scrapped because they're crap.
The radar is brilliant, and the aircraft itself is fine in the North Atlantic and cold weather.
Put it one of the current "hotspots" where the actual temperature is high and it struggles with ONE ASRAAM......never mind the missing gun.
That's why the Seakings are limited as to where they operate. The Mk4s just haven't got the power/lifting capacity.
The designs and ideas are great, it's just that in the UKwe fit powder-puff engines to suit the North European climate, but out of that we're like a duck out of water.
If we want aircraft that can operate out of the UK environment, we need to build ones with bigger engines or buy American.
So.....F-18E anyone.
But no carriers? And about 5 aircraft that's all we can afford?

Whichever gov't is formed, Left or Right, the electorate expect lots to be paid into the Health/Social Security/Education/Transport services......Defence is a VERY poor relation.
The only decent hardware we'll ever see in British markings will be in plastic model form or in paintings!
                 

[elmayerle]

G9/FA-11 - Was looked at, but too expensive - they dropped ASRAAM from the Gr9 update as it was tooe xpensive. It would mean a fuselage remanufacture, as per the B+ . Podded Blue Vixen has been looked at as well. Anyone know if the sets are removed from scrapped/Museum FA2s?

CVF - one other reason for retaining the 'interchangeable' option of the design is they are waiting to see if the USN can get electromagnetic cats to work efficiently. Feeling was that including them now would be too early if the US has a lot of snagging problems, and we'd be left with a carrier that couldn't launch aircraft (which would be typical MOD!)

The proposed weapon load for the F-35B seems ridiculously small - the FA2 can acrry more!!

I still have in my possesion an MOD document for CVF from about 5 years ago that has a deck plan marked with parking boxes labelled 'F/A-18E/F'...........

What you're probably seeing is the weapons load that can be carried internally by a F-35B.  To the best of my knowledge, it still retains the three hardpoints under each wing for when you don't have to have full low-observables.  While I can't prove it, I can see designing a pylon to allow "stealthy" stores (JASSM, for example) to be carried and still maintain the requisite signature.

[elmayerle]

I've just spent three days in a rather good high-level familiarization course on the F-35.  Storm Shadow could never have been carried internally, it's too big even for the CTOL and CV weapons bays (maximum length they can accomodate is 160 inches, the Storm Shadow is something over 40 inches longer than that).  You can still carrry them under the wings, but you can't, and never could, carry them internally.

[Geoff_B]

Storm Shadow could never have been carried internally, it's too big even for the CTOL and CV weapons bays

Hi Evan

Yeah we knew that, it more a case of the weight concerns and the proposal for a CAS role which might have led to the Storm shadow not being qualified  or too heavy for the aircraft to carry on strike missions and safely return to the carrier (We don't want to see these babies being dumped prior to landing when not ired in anger !!!)

Sounds like they have sorted out the problems of weight due to redesign and increased performance.

Cheers

Geoff B B)