Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

IronDuke99 · #1 January 12th, 2017, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronDuke99

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

USMC will deploy a F-35B squadron to Japan. The first F-35B to be forward based.

“'The unique combination of stealth, cutting-edge radar and sensor technology and electronic warfare systems bring all of the access and lethality capabilities of a fifth-generation fighter, a modern bomber and an adverse-weather, all-threat environment air support platform,' said 3rd MAW in a statement."

Find the full article here: https://news.usni.org/2017/01/10/fir...n-leaves-japan.

=====

And yet, if you read the very long report in my last post, it clearly states that, as of now F-35's are, even when working, and they are not up to their availability expectations, they are not able to perform any mission as well as current aircraft.

I know the USMC, no doubt for their own reasons, are rushing these things into some sort of service, but it really does not look like this aircraft is going to be much use to anyone much more 2021 at the very best. They are strongly suggesting even the initial testing will not be done until 2019 As it stands at the moment the guns don't work due to sighting issues, the software is as yet nowhere close to what was promised and their are assorted other problems too (read the report if anyone is interested).

Myself I really hope they get it working, since the Royal Navy Carrier programme depends on the damn thing. But they look to be some way off having a useful aircraft, let alone a world beating one...

Even given the current shortcomings of the F-35 as a family, it is far above the Chinese and the Russian 5th Gen fighters as those jets are nowhere close to production. In the hands of an operational squadron the development should grow exponitionally. Right?

What is interesting is the MAW did not describe the F-35 as an air superiority fighter, which I suspect still is the domain of the Raptor.

The Brits may have bigger issues with the F-35 as the US president elect has called into question the cost and role of the plane. It may get killed. And, that maybe why the Marines have "rushed" this squadron as a device to show the F-35 is already a fabric of the it's air element.

=====

Yes I did wonder if that had something to do with the very early USMC deployment. In British service F-35B will have to do CAP for fleet defence. In the same way Sea Harrier did until it was scrapped.

I don't see Trump scrapping it, too much money already spent, including by UK who is the only tier 1 partner on the aircraft, and if you scrap it the US (and other western nations) are left with no aircraft at all to replace the F15's and F16's.

Have to say I was never a fan of the VSTOL F-35B, wish the Brits had gone cats and traps and Super Hornet myself. It never made real sense to me to go STOVL on 70,000 ton Aircraft Carriers, especially once there was going to be a significant gap in service between Harrier ending (thanks RAF) and F-35B starting (Aircraft the RAF is highly reluctant to allow the RN Fleet Air Arm much control of)

Of course the RAF were very against cats and traps because you have to train hard and often to do that, and they seem to think you will not have to to use F-35B (with a 'rolling landing') from a carrier at sea. We shall see...

shahadi · #2 January 12th, 2017, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronDuke99

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronDuke99

And yet, if you read the very long report in my last post, it clearly states that, as of now F-35's are, even when working, and they are not up to their availability expectations, they are not able to perform any mission as well as current aircraft.

I know the USMC, no doubt for their own reasons, are rushing these things into some sort of service, but it really does not look like this aircraft is going to be much use to anyone much more 2021 at the very best. They are strongly suggesting even the initial testing will not be done until 2019 As it stands at the moment the guns don't work due to sighting issues, the software is as yet nowhere close to what was promised and their are assorted other problems too (read the report if anyone is interested).

Myself I really hope they get it working, since the Royal Navy Carrier programme depends on the damn thing. But they look to be some way off having a useful aircraft, let alone a world beating one...

Even given the current shortcomings of the F-35 as a family, it is far above the Chinese and the Russian 5th Gen fighters as those jets are nowhere close to production. In the hands of an operational squadron the development should grow exponitionally. Right?

What is interesting is the MAW did not describe the F-35 as an air superiority fighter, which I suspect still is the domain of the Raptor.

The Brits may have bigger issues with the F-35 as the US president elect has called into question the cost and role of the plane. It may get killed. And, that maybe why the Marines have "rushed" this squadron as a device to show the F-35 is already a fabric of the it's air element.

=====

Yes I did wonder if that had something to do with the very early USMC deployment. In British service F-35B will have to do CAP for fleet defence. In the same way Sea Harrier did until it was scrapped.

I don't see Trump scrapping it, too much money already spent, including by UK who is the only tier 1 partner on the aircraft, and if you scrap it the US (and other western nations) are left with no aircraft at all to replace the F15's and F16's.

Have to say I was never a fan of the VSTOL F-35B, wish the Brits had gone cats and traps and Super Hornet myself. It never made real sense to me to go STOVL on 70,000 ton Aircraft Carriers, especially once there was going to be a significant gap in service between Harrier ending (thanks RAF) and F-35B starting (Aircraft the RAF is highly reluctant to allow the RN Fleet Air Arm much control of)

Of course the RAF were very against cats and traps because you have to train hard and often to do that, and they seem to think you will not have to to use F-35B (with a 'rolling landing') from a carrier at sea. We shall see...

The Royal Navy is in a very hard place if she intends to use the F-35B for fleet defence as the STOVL plane is not an air superiority fighter, as the F-35C could be loaded out to do so but the Royal Navy does not have cat and trap boats.

Trump won't or cannot kill the F-35 but as with the Raptor the F-35 could be dramatically reduced. His pledge for a 350 ship navy may stay the Navy until Boeing delivers on the FA/XX super super hornet.

The USAF still has the best air superiority fighter in the Raptor.

=====

IronDuke99 · #3 January 12th, 2017, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronDuke99

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

Even given the current shortcomings of the F-35 as a family, it is far above the Chinese and the Russian 5th Gen fighters as those jets are nowhere close to production. In the hands of an operational squadron the development should grow exponitionally. Right?

What is interesting is the MAW did not describe the F-35 as an air superiority fighter, which I suspect still is the domain of the Raptor.

The Brits may have bigger issues with the F-35 as the US president elect has called into question the cost and role of the plane. It may get killed. And, that maybe why the Marines have "rushed" this squadron as a device to show the F-35 is already a fabric of the it's air element.

=====

Yes I did wonder if that had something to do with the very early USMC deployment. In British service F-35B will have to do CAP for fleet defence. In the same way Sea Harrier did until it was scrapped.

I don't see Trump scrapping it, too much money already spent, including by UK who is the only tier 1 partner on the aircraft, and if you scrap it the US (and other western nations) are left with no aircraft at all to replace the F15's and F16's.

Have to say I was never a fan of the VSTOL F-35B, wish the Brits had gone cats and traps and Super Hornet myself. It never made real sense to me to go STOVL on 70,000 ton Aircraft Carriers, especially once there was going to be a significant gap in service between Harrier ending (thanks RAF) and F-35B starting (Aircraft the RAF is highly reluctant to allow the RN Fleet Air Arm much control of)

Of course the RAF were very against cats and traps because you have to train hard and often to do that, and they seem to think you will not have to to use F-35B (with a 'rolling landing') from a carrier at sea. We shall see...

The Royal Navy is in a very hard place if she intends to use the F-35B for fleet defence as the STOVL plane is not an air superiority fighter, as the F-35C could be loaded out to do so but the Royal Navy does not have cat and trap boats.

Trump won't or cannot kill the F-35 but as with the Raptor the F-35 could be dramatically reduced. His pledge for a 350 ship navy may stay the Navy until Boeing delivers on the FA/XX super super hornet.

The USAF still has the best air superiority fighter in the Raptor.

=====

If you think the RN is in a very hard place in that event I don't know what place you think she has been in for the past few and next few years, ie, no carriers, no fixed wing aircraft?

Some in the RAF might agree with you about F-35B, I have seen a former senior RAF officer argue that the Type 45 Air Defence destroyer is all that is needed (I kid you not). This from a Service that last shot down an enemy some time in the late 1940's. (Last RAF air to air kill was 1946 or 48 depending on who you believe, all later British Air to Air kills have been RN Fleet Air Arm). Nope I'm not a big fan of senior RAF officers, and never have been...

And like the USAF, the RAF has a better air superiority fighter in the Typhoon. Great when the fleet is in reach of land based air cover, but historically, Air Forces have not been at all successful in providing air cover for fleets, and, after all, the mobility of the aircraft carrier, and the lack of needing a, vulnerable, fixed, land base are a major reason for having them at all...

shahadi · #4 January 18th, 2017, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronDuke99

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronDuke99

And yet, if you read the very long report in my last post, it clearly states that, as of now F-35's are, even when working, and they are not up to their availability expectations, they are not able to perform any mission as well as current aircraft.

I know the USMC, no doubt for their own reasons, are rushing these things into some sort of service, but it really does not look like this aircraft is going to be much use to anyone much more 2021 at the very best. They are strongly suggesting even the initial testing will not be done until 2019 As it stands at the moment the guns don't work due to sighting issues, the software is as yet nowhere close to what was promised and their are assorted other problems too (read the report if anyone is interested).

Myself I really hope they get it working, since the Royal Navy Carrier programme depends on the damn thing. But they look to be some way off having a useful aircraft, let alone a world beating one...

Even given the current shortcomings of the F-35 as a family, it is far above the Chinese and the Russian 5th Gen fighters as those jets are nowhere close to production. In the hands of an operational squadron the development should grow exponitionally. Right?

What is interesting is the MAW did not describe the F-35 as an air superiority fighter, which I suspect still is the domain of the Raptor.

The Brits may have bigger issues with the F-35 as the US president elect has called into question the cost and role of the plane. It may get killed. And, that maybe why the Marines have "rushed" this squadron as a device to show the F-35 is already a fabric of the it's air element.

=====

Yes I did wonder if that had something to do with the very early USMC deployment. In British service F-35B will have to do CAP for fleet defence. In the same way Sea Harrier did until it was scrapped.

If the Marines were truly confident in the plane as the literature suggest, they should based that squafron of F-35Bs in Incirlik.

=====

Suhiir · #5 January 19th, 2017, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

If the Marines were truly confident in the plane as the literature suggest, they should based that squafron of F-35Bs in Incirlik.
=====

Why?
It's hardly WW III and the aircraft is still undergoing operational testing and upgrades. Also chances are the maintenance is still primarily supervised by contractors and spare parts are virtually nonexistent.

There's a difference between being confident a weapons system will fulfill the role it's intended for and being fully operational.

shahadi · #6 January 19th, 2017, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

If the Marines were truly confident in the plane as the literature suggest, they should based that squafron of F-35Bs in Incirlik.
=====

Why?
It's hardly WW III and the aircraft is still undergoing operational testing and upgrades. Also chances are the maintenance is still primarily supervised by contractors and spare parts are virtually nonexistent.

There's a difference between being confident a weapons system will fulfill the role it's intended for and being fully operational.

'Lt. Gen. Ronald Bailey, the Marine Corps’ deputy commandant for plans, policies and operations, told USNI News last month that “we intend to fully incorporate the F-35 into the [U.S. Pacific Command] area of operations.'” You may read the article here: https://news.usni.org/2017/01/10/fir...n-leaves-japan.

Sounds like Lt. Gen. Ronald Bailey, USMC is confident in the plane to perform it's operatinal role.

=====

IronDuke99 · #7 January 19th, 2017, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

If the Marines were truly confident in the plane as the literature suggest, they should based that squafron of F-35Bs in Incirlik.
=====

Why?
It's hardly WW III and the aircraft is still undergoing operational testing and upgrades. Also chances are the maintenance is still primarily supervised by contractors and spare parts are virtually nonexistent.

There's a difference between being confident a weapons system will fulfill the role it's intended for and being fully operational.

'Lt. Gen. Ronald Bailey, the Marine Corps’ deputy commandant for plans, policies and operations, told USNI News last month that “we intend to fully incorporate the F-35 into the [U.S. Pacific Command] area of operations.'” You may read the article here: https://news.usni.org/2017/01/10/fir...n-leaves-japan.

Sounds like Lt. Gen. Ronald Bailey, USMC is confident in the plane to perform it's operatinal role.

=====

Never under estimate the importance of 'politics' in military decisions. If the USMC are going to keep dedicated USMC air after Harrier they need F-35B. 'Seamlessly' running Harrier into F-35B makes the chances of having that kind of, important, air support cut far less likely.

shahadi · #8 January 19th, 2017, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronDuke99

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Why?
It's hardly WW III and the aircraft is still undergoing operational testing and upgrades. Also chances are the maintenance is still primarily supervised by contractors and spare parts are virtually nonexistent.

There's a difference between being confident a weapons system will fulfill the role it's intended for and being fully operational.

'Lt. Gen. Ronald Bailey, the Marine Corps’ deputy commandant for plans, policies and operations, told USNI News last month that “we intend to fully incorporate the F-35 into the [U.S. Pacific Command] area of operations.'” You may read the article here: https://news.usni.org/2017/01/10/fir...n-leaves-japan.

Sounds like Lt. Gen. Ronald Bailey, USMC is confident in the plane to perform it's operatinal role.

=====

Never under estimate the importance of 'politics' in military decisions. If the USMC are going to keep dedicated USMC air after Harrier they need F-35B. 'Seamlessly' running Harrier into F-35B makes the chances of having that kind of, important, air support cut far less likely.

Agreed.

=====

jp10 · #9 January 20th, 2017, 12:44 AM

You might want to wait to buy a ticket for an F-35 ride yet.

276 faults found in F-35 jets.

"THE MAIN ISSUES

Fixing the 25mm cannon which vibrates excessively
Way it is targeted by the aircraft’s ‘virtual reality’ helmet needs work
Overheating, premature wear of components in the vertical tails and vulnerability to fire also an issue
Aircraft’s ‘objectionable or unacceptable flying qualities’ while crossing the sound barrier – for which there are currently no plans for a fix."

http://dailywesterner.com/news/2017-...combat-system/

Suhiir · #10 January 20th, 2017, 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronDuke99

Never under estimate the importance of 'politics' in military decisions. If the USMC are going to keep dedicated USMC air after Harrier they need F-35B. 'Seamlessly' running Harrier into F-35B makes the chances of having that kind of, important, air support cut far less likely.

Yep, at those levels decisions are every bit as much influenced by political factors as military ones ... hopefully the military factors take priority but as we've seen far to often this isn't always the case.