Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by DRG

..already forgot we pushed the end dates to 2025 eh ? .......already done

Actually ... yes.
Guess alzheimer's is catching up with me.

[Suhiir]

Pat/FASTBOAT TOUGH,

I know on 31 July, 2015 the USMC declared the F-35B operational. But I can't find anything from NavAir about it. Have you seen anything?

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Pat/FASTBOAT TOUGH,

I know on 31 July, 2015 the USMC declared the F-35B operational. But I can't find anything from NavAir about it. Have you seen anything?

http://www.marines.mil/News/NewsDisp...erational.aspx

http://www.defensenews.com/story/def...hter/30937689/

http://aviationweek.com/defense/us-m...on-operational

"31 July, 2015 the USMC declared the F-35B operational." --About 106,000 results

and then there's this..........

http://www.duffelblog.com/2015/06/ai...trike-fighter/

"Air Force, Marines Cancel F-35 Joint Strike Fighter"

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by DRG

and then there's this..........

http://www.duffelblog.com/2015/06/ai...trike-fighter/

"Air Force, Marines Cancel F-35 Joint Strike Fighter"

So on 16 June, 2015 they cancel the program and on 31 July, 2105 the F-35B is declared operational.
And some people wonder why most people don't trust the press.
*just sighs*

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

That's why I never use blogs except for the following two Arm Chair General and Tank net AND that's only to track down additional sources I might not already have and again that's very rarely.

Concerning the F-35, I feel there's no need to change anything, especially if you read and fully understand who wrote this report in ref 2, that's why the ICO the F-35B all is quite from NAVAIR. If they had full confidence in the plane then since May when when tests were conducted on the WASP with a completely empty deck and since announcing IOC in July haven't they proved it can do the same onboard a ship that'll normally have 18-20 aircraft/helos on deck almost 8 months later? In ref 4 USMC continuing ahead with work arounds - there'll be no missions, NAVAIR won't allow it and these are ongoing still. I'm not sold. Ten planes don't make a strike force I would caution patience here, it's only a date change, let's get it as right as possible, after all how many have been done already?
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/15/politi...ion-readiness/
http://www.pogoarchives.org/straus/2...D-FOIA-ocr.pdf
http://www.janes.com/article/52097/p...engine-failure
http://www.janes.com/article/50173/f...are-challenges
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/stor...mbat/72332738/
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...program-07501/
http://www.pogo.org/our-work/straus-...alls-foul.html

And if nothing above has convinced you please read this and then note the very extensive list of refs at the bottom. Also as a reminder about DID as you read an article you'll sometimes note a light shaded blue over a couple of words-those are links to a source on the issue being discussed. The charts are highly useful especially in the weapons area, which by the way not even all the weapons these planes are designed to carry will be ready until 2017, barring any delays there as well.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...ersies-021922/

Funny how the USMC has been quite about this in the government reports it can't even carry weapons - KAMIKAZE missions most be the plan of attack!?!

I need some lunch before work, this had made me hungry, have a great day!!

Oh yeah-TRACKING!

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Have I mentioned how much I love India when it comes to making decisions on military equipment? That it took 30yrs (And at times it feels like I've been tracking it for that long myself.) to develop and field the ARJUN Mk 1 and now the almost, we just might've, can't do it, let' make a deal within deal, oops! time for a "timeout", ready to go again, corruption, back on again, "holy cow" (That's irony!?!) we've finally picked a fighter and there'll only be 36 and not the 108 fighters we thought we wanted or needed. Well they at least managed to pick one the RAFALE by some miracle. Over the years I had nothing better to do anyway!?! And the below will bring you up to date om India's MMRCA fighter program-maybe...
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...changes-01989/
http://www.janes.com/article/50591/m...ces-rafale-buy
http://www.janes.com/article/57495/i...-at-an-impasse

I've been tracking this for a very long time now this program was an early post to this thread also and when I scrolled down ref 1 and saw 2006/2007 that it started, my first thought was, when did I start out here? I'm not looking, but if someone else does, and I've been on this that long, please do me a favor, make it quick and put me outta my misery PLEASE!?! And here's your OPLAN (Sorry Don.) it outta work!?!

Some of these defense sites might feel the same as I do. You can click on each article or just look at the 4 or 5 pages of "tag lines" they reported on concerning the MMRCA program. This is why some of us take a wait and see attitude on equipment submissions.
http://defense-update.com/tag/mmrca

Anyway still tracking "until the cows, I mean jets come home!"

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

Yep, as you say one squadron of anything but EW type aircraft are pretty irrelevant. So I'll stick to my 2017 date. Actually, I've seen things about qualifications with various weapons taking place recently. As with any new system during peacetime it's one small step at a time and eventually you get a functional system.

I'd assumed NavAir had signed off but just couldn't find a solid reference, thanks.

I had a friend who was a mechanic back in 1977 when they were testing the LAV and tho not nearly as big a circus this whole thing brings back memories.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Don all I say is if your extending out to 2025, I strongly feel that you can extend the A-10 to that date. Thank you ISIS and Russia for keeping them around! The news that the A-10 will be around through fiscal 2017 is old news, it's already been decided that 2023 would probably be the time frame however, Congress told the USAF it's not going anyway without an effective replacement. All this is already posted in this thread.
http://www.airforce-technology.com/n...erbolt-4791828
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/21/politi...sis/index.html
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-to-combat-i/5
http://www.popularmechanics.com/mili...plans-stalled/

On the last ref. scroll down after reading the article, you'll see an interesting article on the F-22, as they say "where there's smoke, there's fire" I'll have figure something out with the F-22, they were put on a parallel program to upgrade them with an all new electronics suite very similar to the F-35 one but modified to fit the F-22, also already posted in this thread.

Have a great weekend-2 more to go!

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

The A-10's are in it for the duration. I won't pull them until they are officially decommissioned which I don't expect anytime soon. I've admired the A-10 for what it can do and how it looks since the very beginning

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

First thank you Don, been on the A-10 for a long time now, it truly is an outstanding platform. Secondly just pulled this from a DID article (ref within the story) which considering that the USAF hierarchy wants to get rid of the A-10, that they would turn around and publish the following article and data REALLY makes their plans counter intuitive. When you take away the transports and UAV's and allow for the fact the limited numbers of gunships they have available compared to the A-10, it makes the A-10 the most mission capable aircraft they fly. Though it might surprise some, but most members of Congress do know how to read in general and are really adept in interpreting charts. Makes you wonder if someone in the USAF got in trouble for disclosing this data!?!
http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/m...irds/78860920/

I wonder if I should forward this to my Congressman and Senator to keep them in the "loop"!?!

Regards,
Pat