F-35 news roundup

[Djack]

I'm starting to think this thread and these arguments will still be going on when the F-35's are being retired or used for drones...

[TaiidanTomcat]

So, my point to ponder (back when this started) is do the carriers NEED strike assets that reach out 1500+NM? My argument is that is not the strength they bring to the fight. If the target is that far away, the USAF could probably do it better.

I can't vouch for specific numbers, however a lot of people have advocated F-18E/Fs with extra gas and stand off munitions, At the very least it indicates to me that range is always going to be a factor. I think its in the navy's best interest to have good long range strikers in the fighter class, that can hit a target and as the area becomes more sanitized they can park closer and launch more sorties. Don't mind the additional loiter time either. The A-6 was retired then the F-14 (Praise be upon it) went away too and the Super Hornet took over without the range the Grumman birds were bringing. There is a gap there, and getting the F-35C is as much an "advancement" or "returning to the norm" in terms of range.

Afghanistan also seems to be a prime example of some very long range flights from the CVNs, but you have to justify your toys. and as many point out, its nice not to ask for basing rights.

[Litvyak]

F-14 (Praise be upon it)

I laughed /soooo/ hard at this!

[Tony Stark]

F-14 (Praise be upon it)

"Amen"

[Mumbles]

Well, obviously, and while I'm sure that would have paid off in certain areas (dispersal in Northern Germany during a possible NATO-Warsaw Pact confrontation, for instance), was it really the ability to take off and land vertically that gave it the edge in the Falklands? It relied on a carrier just as much as a CATOBAR aircraft. Wasn't it more a combination of better training, better weapons coupled with a good radar, the ability to choose when to engage (as opposed to the Argentinians, who had to be in and out sharpish, with little to no time to dogfight). Had the Phantoms and Buccs on carriers still been "there" (as in "operational at that time"), would they have fared worse than the Harrier?

Yes and no apparently, depending on who you ask. The SHAR was able to keep operating in weather conditions that would have (and did in fact for the Argentine Navy) kept conventional carrier aircraft on the deck, so that's a plus. It may not have been THE edge but it was certainly AN edge, as were the other factors you outlined. The idea of FG.1's laying on BVR kills east of East Falkland though is compelling too, although one point that has been made is that the FG.1 sortie rate may have been nothing like as high as the SHAR. Shrug :). The Invincible/Hermes vs Ark Royal air wing seems a simple choice at first hand, but rapidly gets complicated as these things tend to do :).

Edited August 20, 2013 by Mumbles

[TaiidanTomcat]

Top Gun-esque

http://breakingdefense.com/2013/08/21/marines-put-f-35b-flight-costs-17-percent-lower-than-osd/

PENTAGON: By combing through the assumptions — some of them deeply questionable — undergirding the Defense Department’s official cost estimates for the F-35B and refining them, the Marines say the plane should cost 16.6 percent less per flight hour than the current estimate. Since the F-35B is the most expensive plane to operate, lowering these cost estimates for the Joint Strike Fighter’s Marine version would have a substantial impact on the program’s overall costs.

“We believe we are going to achieve much greater savings than we are currently being credited for,” Marine Lt. Gen. Robert Schmidle, deputy commandant for aviation, told me in an interview here.

Among the questionable assumptions Schmidle highlighted is this whopper: the Office of Secretary Defense estimate developed by the Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation office (CAPE) predicted that the F-35B would be flown at full throttle in STOVL mode — which uses enormous amounts of fuel and utilizes the highly sophisticated lift fan system at much greater rates than the Marines project — about 80 percent of its time in the air.

Anyone who has watched the Harrier or the F-35B knows that Marines pilots rely sparingly on STOVL mode. It’s only used for a limited set of tactical moves and, usually, for taking off or landing the aircraft. The great majority of the plane’s flight time — could it be as much as 80 percent? — would be spent flying without using the lift fan and STOVL.

The current CAPE estimate assumes $41,000 an hour for the F-35B. a senior defense official said they will eventually bring the costs down to $30,000 per hour, with an interim figure of about $37,000. Schmidle also notes that the F-35B’s cost figures were extrapolated from the costs of the much older AV-8B Harrier.

Overall, once the F-35 replaces the three Marine aircraft — F-18, EA-6B, Harrier — it is designed to supplant the Marines will save an estimated $520 million a year in operations and maintenance costs in 2012 dollars, Schmidle says.

We understand Frank Kendall, undersecretary for aquisition, technology and logistics, and Sean Stackley, head of Navy procurement, have both been briefed on the new Marines estimates.

Why are the Marines so focused on these costs? “Probably the biggest threat to the airplane is the sustainment costs,” Schmidle told me.

In addition to the Marines lower cost estimates, the F-35 program office has lowered the program’s $1.1 trillion estimated costs over a half century to $857 billion, about 22 percent lower than the previous estimates. My colleague Tony Capaccio got ahold of the new information in written answers sent last month to the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, head of the Joint Program Office building the F-35, told the SASC that the new information is derived from new data gathered from 7,000 hours of actual flight.

Edited August 21, 2013 by TaiidanTomcat

[TaiidanTomcat]

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_08_26_2013_p18-609191.xml&p=1

Boeing's F-15SE Silent Eagle has been selected as the only qualified bidder in South Korea's F-X Phase 3 competition for 60 fighters—but the country's air force is lobbying to overturn the decision in favor of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.....

...“Some in the air force complain that the F-X Phase 3 is veering onto a wrong course, contrary to original aims,†the Yonhap news agency reported Aug. 20, a few days after DAPA's decision was disclosed. The “original aim,†as seen by the unnamed officers quoted by Yonhap, was evidently an F-35 order, and their attitude seems to be that the other two contenders were invited to bid just for the sake of creating competition.

hmm

[MarkW]

I hope it's true. LM needs a good pop in the nose to realize they aren't the default in every competition.

[Spongebob]

The SHAR was able to keep operating in weather conditions that would have (and did in fact for the Argentine Navy) kept conventional carrier aircraft on the deck, so that's a plus.

I dunno....I've broken out at 150' to see the top half of the screws out of the water (which explained why keeping on glideslope was such a beotch). It was so bad that taxiing on the deck was sketchy in it's own right.

My guess is the FAA was shut down due to lack of navigation capability while IFR.

Spongebob

[GreyGhost]

>>> Article <<<

-Gregg

[Kei Lau]

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_08_26_2013_p18-609191.xml&p=1

Boeing's F-15SE Silent Eagle has been selected as the only qualified bidder in South Korea's F-X Phase 3 competition for 60 fighters.

It is very poor wording because NO selection had been made. It was reported that Boeing is the only bidder that meets the budget and the single/2-seat mix requirements. Korea may or may not select the F-15SE as their F-X 3 winner next month.

There is no question that the KAF wants the F-35. If for nothing else, just to keep up with the Jones now that Japan had ordered it. But the political reality in Korea does not allow the budget increase to meet the much higher cost. It is just a matter of time that Korea will get the F-35. Even if they "select" the Silent Eagle this time around.

Sounds like the same story as in Canada.

SEOUL, Aug. 25 (Yonhap) -- All three contenders for South Korea's multibillion-dollar fighter jet project have submitted letters of intent to the country's arms procurement agency, a senior official said Sunday, despite earlier reports that two of them have effectively dropped out of the race.

The Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) completed a bidding process last week to pick one of the three competitors -- Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lightning II, Boeing's F-15 Silent Eagle and EADS' Eurofighter Typhoon -- for the 8.3 trillion won (US$7.2 billion) project to procure 60 fighter jets.

In a August 22 report, Yonhap quote some local expert saying that Korea can afford to have fewer F-35. The home brew FA-50 is sufficient to handle a North Korea attack.

"To counter North Korean combat aircraft and destroy artillery bases, FA-50 light attack jets are enough," Shin In-kyun, a military expert who runs the Korea Defense Network, said. "The next-generation fighter jet should be able to handle the potential future risks."

[TaiidanTomcat]

http://www.dvidshub.net/video/299827/kc-130j-refuels-f-35b-lightning-ii-joint-strike-fighters-mid-air#.Uh9uwZIe0sQ

[Tony Stark]

http://www.dvidshub.net/video/299827/kc-130j-refuels-f-35b-lightning-ii-joint-strike-fighters-mid-air#.Uh9uwZIe0sQ

Here's a nice still from that sortie.

[TaiidanTomcat]

Here's a nice still from that sortie.

Thank you

[Spongebob]

Cool vid...I wonder what the C-130 props look like with the jitter in the JSF helmet?

[Crazy Snap Captain]

Here's a nice still from that sortie.

Nice pic!

Is it me or do they look WAAAAAY better in flight? They may just be starting to grow on me.

[Mark M.]

http://www.dvidshub.net/video/299827/kc-130j-refuels-f-35b-lightning-ii-joint-strike-fighters-mid-air#.Uh9uwZIe0sQ

Out of curiousity, what's with all the trails on the inboard leading edges and the wingtips? They're clearly not that high, and clearly not going all that fast... They're clearly not pulling heavy Gs or anything. I am puzzled as to why they would show up at all.

[Spongebob]

Out of curiousity, what's with all the trails on the inboard leading edges and the wingtips? They're clearly not that high, and clearly not going all that fast... They're clearly not pulling heavy Gs or anything. I am puzzled as to why they would show up at all.

They're flying pretty slow judging by the apparent AOA on the jets, so the wing is working hard (i.e. big pressure differentials) which causes the condensation. You see it all the time on airliners when they are on approach.

HTH

Spongebob

[MarkW]

I'm quite sure Dr. Krapp of APA will use this as evidence of how unstealthy the F-35 is due to high wing loading producing visible and detectable vortex generated vapor trails... :rolleyes:/>

[TaiidanTomcat]

I'm quite sure Dr. Krapp of APA will use this as evidence of how unstealthy the F-35 is due to high wing loading producing visible and detectable vortex generated vapor trails... :rolleyes:/>/>/>

They already tried that. So did Bill Sweetman on another forum. (not that these guys are desperate or anything)

ZOMG!! Not ST3ALTH!

Edited August 31, 2013 by TaiidanTomcat

[11bee]

What a cool picture, looks surreal, like something out of a sci-fi comic book. I assume it is a real picture, correct?

[Berkut]

I'm quite sure Dr. Krapp of APA will use this as evidence of how unstealthy the F-35 is due to high wing loading producing visible and detectable vortex generated vapor trails... :rolleyes:/>/>

Russians meanwhile have invented new stealth technology; carrying a cloud on plane's back wherever it goes. :)

http://russianplanes.net/id117795

[spejic]

Lots of news the last month.

One example: British pilots and maintenance crew try out a F-35B on the USS Wasp.

[MarkW]

...and the endless Do loop of Korea continues....

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/24/us-korea-fighter-idUSBRE98N00R20130924

Our Western stereotype of Asian cultures has them very much keen to "save face", adverse to embarrassment. Korea has shattered this stereotype by flip-flopping on the FX3 competition at roughly 100 MHz. It is pretty hard to see Boeing recover from this one, since they ruling is now for a true stealth/5th gen fighter, not a developmental effort to slap crap on to a 4th gen fighter. They also have pretty much chucked any cost leverage they had with LM into the river too. But clearly Korea reserves the right to flip flop on any substantive decision.

[Spongebob]

"saving face" only applies after getting caught beating a couple hookers in Itaewon.