F-35 Lightning II (aka JSF)

[pyro-manic]

The damn thing's just ugly, no matter how you look at it. The -C version is probably the best of the bunch, because of the bigger wings, but the other two are just wrong proportionally. And yes, even the legs look bad.

[Thorvic]

Ironically just as the F-35C gets back into catapult testing it now appears the USN is being asked to review its F-35 program for the USN & USMC as part of the new cost cutting measures !!!

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/asd/2011/08/25/01.xml&headline=Navy Official Questions Need For JSF Variants

I would say the F-35A is a safe bet to continue as its needed the most, the F-35B is the most expensive and technically risky but has the unique STOVL capability the USMC say they need, whilst the capable F-35C is possibly the most at threat as a viable alternative is readily available in the Super Hornet and the naval UCAV together with the  next gen naval aircraft intended to replace the Super Hornet means the USN could make without a serious capability gap if it lost the F-35C.

[PR19_Kit]

So once again the UK's future defences are left in the hands of some decision makers in the USA.

And people wonder why I'm such a cynic...........

[andrewj]

So once again the UK's future defences are left in the hands of some decision makers in the USA.

And people wonder why I'm such a cynic...........

Perhap's we should be buying the naval version of the Sukhoi PAK FA instead ?

[Taiidantomcat]

So once again the UK's future defences are left in the hands of some decision makers in the USA.

whilst the capable F-35C is possibly the most at threat as a viable alternative is readily available in the Super Hornet and the naval UCAV together with the  next gen naval aircraft intended to replace the Super Hornet means the USN could make without a serious capability gap if it lost the F-35C.

Thats not true. The F-35 is vastly more capable and stealthy than the super hornet which is an interim solution from a 1970's design. The navy will never stand for having a superior fighter in the hands of the USMC who would operate it from light carriers, and leave everyone wondering why the USN pays so much money to operate less capable, older airframes, from vastly more expensive ships. it would leave the navy in a distant third-- and say bye bye battle groups. 

If the navy doesn't get a fifth generation fighter, it becomes second fiddle to the USAF for decades (the time it will take to develop the next gen naval aircraft is slated for 2020, if current trends are to continue it won't see service until 2035 assuming it isn't canceled somewhere down the line), if the navy has to wait for the USAF to arrive there is no purpose in having those big "first strike force projectors" floating around burning money.  An F-22 cruises as fast as super hornet going full throttle, and its invisible to radar. I know thats a bizarre fact to randomly throw in but is shows the capability gaps between the services. the USN needs to stay relevant and they know that comes with getting a more capable aircraft. the future of naval air is the F-35C, and they know it. The cancellation would mean the USMC has 1 stealth platform (F-35B), the USAF 3 (F-22, F-35A, B-2) and the navy ZERO (zip). 

I think that whole article is to ensure that they are checking alternatives before buying the JSF anyway (albeit in reduced numbers probably) so much ado about nothing in the end.  It wouldn't be without its irony that the top fighter on navy super carriers would be the 60 USMC operated F-35Cs  HA!

[PR19_Kit]

And the largest fixed wing assets the Royal Navy will have will be the two Swordfish in the FAA Historic Flight...............

[Taiidantomcat]

And the largest fixed wing assets the Royal Navy will have will be the two Swordfish in the FAA Historic Flight...............

Thats exactly that the USN will be trying to avoid themselves.  I am betting on bitter inter-service rivalry, combined with budget cuts, will ensure the F-35C survives. No one wants to be declared "the weakling/least relevant" when the cuts come.

[dy031101]

I thought that the F-35 emphasizes on "hitting hard" (stealth, net-centric sensors to kill the most dangerous targets; the "First-Day-Of-War" hitter) while F/A-18E/F emphasizes on "hitting a lot" (massive amount of payloads to kill targets more-or-less on its own term)...... totally different beasts.

[Taiidantomcat]

I thought that the F-35 emphasizes on "hitting hard" (stealth, net-centric sensors to kill the most dangerous targets; the "First-Day-Of-War" hitter) while F/A-18E/F emphasizes on "hitting a lot" (massive amount of payloads to kill targets more-or-less on its own term)...... totally different beasts.

indeed. but then you have the USAF saying things like "hey if you a need a plane that can just go in there with massive amounts of payloads, you don't need a carrier battle group-- we have B-52s. send the navy home, they are getting in our way" True or not thats the case they will make, and the navy knows it. What if you have a scenario where there is a carrier off shore ready to fight right now, but its too dangerous to get into the fight until its been pacified by other services. They become B-team, bench players for a group that claimed itself the instant on the scene power projection.

Conversely though if the USN/USMC has the latest and greatest fifth gen stealth aircraft they go in knock the enemy about so quickly that the USAF doesn't even have a chance to stage in nearby countries. That makes the Navy the top dog. With the F-35B you don't even need a super carrier. A smaller MAGTF in a light carrier knocks the enemy about without need of even a vaunted super carrier (thats a scenario that scares the navy a lot though too) The F-35B basically makes it so whatever on scene can go now, no matter the threat environment. One Riot, one Ranger. Whoever is there gets the call. That is truly unique.

[TsrJoe]

i disagree with the previous assessments re the F.35's magical capabilities (why would Australia need anything more capable than the F.18E for the foreseeable future anyway as any operation would be in conjunction with the US.! they could always purchase the new Sukhoi which i understand has been matched to the F.35 purchase price!) but perhaps in the current economic clime, an end to the USN.s fascination of 'supercarriers' replacing them with something more usable and equipped with F.35's might actually be a step in the right direction? just how useful is such a large target which requires air superiority, a constant cap and picket, sited out of harms way etc. when the air force can be in and out quickly, or more relevant the development of unmanned assets making such monstrosities irrelevant apart from showing the flag and power projection !

(hehe, just a thought, maybe they could always sell one or two to China to offset the cost of new vessels and help ensure that the Chinese dont develop large scale carrier shipbuilding programmes, it proving cheaper to 'buy american', thus brining about the decline in Chinese shipbuilding, and over a longer term ruining their economic development as it was found more cost effective to get most of their industries from overseas !) 

[Taiidantomcat]

i disagree with the previous assessments re the F.35's magical capabilities (why would Australia need anything more capable than the F.18E for the foreseeable future anyway as any operation would be in conjunction with the US.! they could always purchase the new Sukhoi which i understand has been matched to the F.35 purchase price!) but perhaps in the current economic clime, an end to the USN.s fascination of 'supercarriers' replacing them with something more usable and equipped with F.35's might actually be a step in the right direction? just how useful is such a large target which requires air superiority, a constant cap and picket, sited out of harms way etc. when the air force can be in and out quickly, or more relevant the development of unmanned assets making such monstrosities irrelevant apart from showing the flag and power projection !

(hehe, just a thought, maybe they could always sell one or two to China to offset the cost of new vessels and help ensure that the Chinese dont develop large scale carrier shipbuilding programmes, it proving cheaper to 'buy american', thus brining about the decline in Chinese shipbuilding, and over a longer term ruining their economic development as it was found more cost effective to get most of their industries from overseas !)  

I do believe in the F-35s magic obviously. But I couldn't agree more that the USN is overweight and it could stand to lose a few ships. Those Super carriers are like the USNs crown jewels, and they guard them as such. The pressure the USN is putting on killing the F-35B is pretty enormous behind closed doors. I don't think the USAF care at all about the B but the Navy is looking for any excuse to force the USMC into buying the C model and thus permanently chaining them to super carriers. What would be funny is if the B got cancelled and the USMC said "we want the A model!!" neither is going to happen though!

Neat!
http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=106228

[GTX]

[Taiidantomcat]

That is awe inspiring 

[Taiidantomcat]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7cAmCCmObw&feature=feedu

[Maverick]

Neat video to be sure.  I was hoping for actual sound rather than a techno soundtrack, but still nice vision.

Regards,

Mav