Forum: General F-35 Forum

The recent '...beloved APA...' thread banter reminded me of this recent article... Seems a reasonable proposition for the future as posited already in this thread on this forum. You know it makes sense. Very Happy

http://www.australiandefence.com.au/issue/february-2012
&/OR
http://data.axmag.com/data/VIP/U7668/F75614/index.html

Last paragraph of one page article:

Carrier Clairvoyance - Feb 2012 Australian Defence Magazine

"...The government and navy say there are no plans for flying JSF from our LHDs, and doing so would be neither simple or cheap. But once JSF is in RAAF service in a decade's time and maritme versions are mature, this might not seem such a big step."

F-16.net Sponsor

Well, Well, Well (Well Deck) Shiver me timbers.... (Best to read the whole thing and note the contributors) Smile

And what is it with the slow page responses on AvWeek. Weak I say. Smile

Navies Worldwide Invest In Sea-Based Airpower Apr 4, 2012
By Andy Nativi, Jay Menon, Bill Sweetman

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... ine=Navies Worldwide Invest In Sea-Based Airpower

"...Italy’s Cavour is a hybrid vessel. It does not have a well deck but is designed to support amphibious operations. It has a full load displacement of 27,000 tons and is 244 meters (800 ft.) long. Its hangar can accommodate up to 10 F-35Bs, with flight-deck parking for another six F-35Bs and two helicopters.

Cavour illustrates the fact that small carriers must be bigger than they used to be, to sustain real air operations. Compared with Italy’s “Harrier carrier,” the Garibaldi, Cavour is 64 meters longer and the flight deck has a total surface of 6,800 square meters (73,200 sq. ft.), with 4,450 square meters devoted to flight operations, versus 1,870 square meters on the Garibaldi.

The Italian navy plans to buy 22 F-35Bs to replace 16 remaining Harriers. Its long-term planning includes acquisition of two large JSF-capable LHDs and an LHA (similar but with no well deck) to replace the Garibaldi and three smaller LHDs. This will allow Italy to have at least one carrier operational at any time.

The Spanish navy is moving from its carrier Principe de Asturias to the large LHD Juan Carlos. It is currently operating 16 EAV-8B Plus aircraft, but would like to buy as many as 20 F-35Bs, budget permitting. The Juan Carlos is estimated to be able to operate no more than a dozen F-35Bs, because of its size and the fact that it has a well deck [Come on Aussie Come on Come on - Come on Aussie Come on].

Multiple nations are acquiring large LHDs that could carry F-35Bs. Australia is to commission the LHDs Canberra and Adelaide in 2014 and 2015 respectively, which are based on the Juan Carlos design, even including the ski-jump bow—which is valuable for Stovl operations, but a penalty the rest of the time, since the sloping deck space is unavailable for anything else...." [Oh that is so sad.]

As mentioned, best to read the whole 2 pages and be prepared for slow response times....

I know. Go to the PRINT version which will load ASAP I hope for ye:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/jsp_incl ... ine=Navies Worldwide Invest In Sea-Based Airpower&storyID=news/dti/2012/04/01/DT_04_01_2012_p33-440130.xml

Here's a question: can the F-35B take off vertically with any kind of useful load?
Being able to fly them off of the helo decks of cruisers, destroyers, frigates or even LCS would be something of a game-changer.

count_to_10 wrote:

Here's a question: can the F-35B take off vertically with any kind of useful load?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvdf5n-zI14

I flew an F-35 Sim a while back and I asked that question. They said yes it can take off with two 1K JDAMs and 2 AIM-120's, but it would need to refuel withing 15 minutes of take-off. In the Sim I tried it (dumped almost my entire fuel load, then took-off). I was able to take out the drone firing the AIM-120 at near max range, but I had to land a long way from base, so . . . 1st503rdsgt's nope would be correct.

I will say that doing a VL and VTO from the USS Fort Worth would be a cool PR stunt for LM.

Sufa Viper

Testing will be or has been carried out for Vertical Takeoffs for F-35B but there is no requirement to do so in KPPs which require a STO takeoff with maximum internal load in less than 600 feet with some wind in tropical conditions. Is that OK? Very Happy

I was under the impression that Singapore is also considering the STOVL jet.

sufaviper wrote:

I flew an F-35 Sim a while back and I asked that question. They said yes it can take off with two 1K JDAMs and 2 AIM-120's, but it would need to refuel withing 15 minutes of take-off. In the Sim I tried it (dumped almost my entire fuel load, then took-off). I was able to take out the drone firing the AIM-120 at near max range, but I had to land a long way from base, so . . . 1st503rdsgt's nope would be correct.

I will say that doing a VL and VTO from the USS Fort Worth would be a cool PR stunt for LM.

Sufa Viper

They did those PR stunts back in the 60s and 70s with the Harrier I. They found out they were basically of no military value. They'll do vertical takeoffs at airshow demos, but you don't see them done at see anymore.

count_to_10 wrote:

Here's a question: can the F-35B take off vertically with any kind of useful load?
Being able to fly them off of the helo decks of cruisers, destroyers, frigates or even LCS would be something of a game-changer.

Only if you can incorporate short takeoffs, otherwise jumpjets have next to no value. Maybe if they had an off deck EMAL-derived rail system down one or both sides of the deck.

'madrat' concedes that with STO jumpjets do have value ["Only if you can incorporate short takeoffs, otherwise jumpjets have next to no value."]. Not that the F-35B has ever been referred to as a 'jumpjet' except by those ignorant that it is a STOVL aircraft. STOVL=Short TakeOff Vertical Landing.

I believe the EMALS idea for any LHA/D has been discussed already on this thread. Probably not going to be retrofitted except if installed on a new build flat deck.

Not forgetting that an existing F-35B cannot be catapulted. If modified in a way similar to the F-35C - just for catapulting - then more complexity/weight will be added to the F-35B, reducing VLBB and other factors. Hardly an option to have EMALS on LHA/Ds; except for UAVs of some variation.

popcorn wrote:

I was under the impression that Singapore is also considering the STOVL jet.

Everyone with an eye toward sea-based TACAIR (but unable to afford CATOBAR/STOBAR) is considering it, or will have to consider it sooner or later. There is no other replacement for the Harrier.

And FWIW, I don't care if it's militarily useless; I still want to see a vertical takeoff.

1st503rdsgt wrote:

popcorn wrote:

I was under the impression that Singapore is also considering the STOVL jet.

Everyone with an eye toward sea-based TACAIR (but unable to afford CATOBAR/STOBAR) is considering it, or will have to consider it sooner or later. There is no other replacement for the Harrier.

And FWIW, I don't care if it's militarily useless; I still want to see a vertical takeoff.

True, but I was looking at it more,from the perspective of survivability and deployability from austere locations as Singapore has no strategic depth. The STOVL jet fits nicely into contingency plans,to operate from sections of roadway if needed.

popcorn wrote:

1st503rdsgt wrote:

popcorn wrote:

I was under the impression that Singapore is also considering the STOVL jet.

Everyone with an eye toward sea-based TACAIR (but unable to afford CATOBAR/STOBAR) is considering it, or will have to consider it sooner or later. There is no other replacement for the Harrier.

And FWIW, I don't care if it's militarily useless; I still want to see a vertical takeoff.

True, but I was looking at it more,from the perspective of survivability and deployability from austere locations as Singapore has no strategic depth. The STOVL jet fits nicely into contingency plans,to operate from sections of roadway if needed.

While I see the value of that capability, I'm still a little skeptical about how the whole austere-basing thing is going to work out. That's an awful lot of jet-wash to deal with for any surface that isn't carefully prepared and maintained.

Shirley the WASP/F-35B VL Videos give an indication of degree of difficulty for: "....That's an awful lot of jet-wash to deal with for any surface that isn't carefully prepared and maintained."?

spazsinbad wrote:

Shirley the WASP/F-35B VL Videos give an indication of degree of difficulty for: "....That's an awful lot of jet-wash to deal with for any surface that isn't carefully prepared and maintained."?

But that's just it. An LH(_) deck IS carefully prepared and maintained. By no means would I call the USS Wasp an "austere" operating environment.

Forum: General F-35 Forum

Possibility small STOVL carrier USN/USMC