Forum: F-35 Lightning II

The main issue with VSTOL aircraft is that they are still aircraft and require significant logistical support. They might operate from a forward facility but it's still a facility not simply an empty field that magically comes stocked with fuel and ground crew. In regards the F-35B it's well documented it runs very hot and creates challenges in terms of basing. You're not going to operate off a stretch of highway as it will seriously damage and eventually destroy that surface.

The USMC has indicated it's going to use a heat resistant mat to facilitate operations ashore (aboard ship one needs new deck surfaces). A surface that requires engineers to install it is a facility. There's not going to be enough mats and enough engineers to put this facility "virtually anywhere". One can build an airfield virtually anywhere given enough time and resources. Forward basing TACAIR is often very useful but the F-35B provides significant challenges over the AV-8B which in practice does not itself operate virtually anywhere.

The F-35 is a big fighter- heavier than an F-15C. It's going to have a significantly larger logistical tail than an AV-8B unit. Most of the flight test program hasn't been completed and we have zero data on issues regarding operational deployment. Frex, we don't know how many man hours go into each flight hour (NAVAIR says it's significantly greater than the AV-8B and F/A-1, we don't really know how various surfaces will deal with the F-35B, how well the aircraft deals with FOD, etc.

In any case Thompson works for LM and his statements read like a press release and are certainly not an objective analysis.

The main issue with VSTOL aircraft is that they are still aircraft and require significant logistical support. They might operate from a forward facility but it's still a facility not simply an empty field that magically comes stocked with fuel and ground crew. In regards the F-35B it's well documented it runs very hot and creates challenges in terms of basing. You're not going to operate off a stretch of highway as it will seriously damage and eventually destroy that surface.

The USMC has indicated it's going to use a heat resistant mat to facilitate operations ashore (aboard ship one needs new deck surfaces). A surface that requires engineers to install it is a facility. There's not going to be enough mats and enough engineers to put this facility "virtually anywhere". One can build an airfield virtually anywhere given enough time and resources. Forward basing TACAIR is often very useful but the F-35B provides significant challenges over the AV-8B which in practice does not itself operate virtually anywhere.

The F-35 is a big fighter- heavier than an F-15C. It's going to have a significantly larger logistical tail than an AV-8B unit. Most of the flight test program hasn't been completed and we have zero data on issues regarding operational deployment. Frex, we don't know how many man hours go into each flight hour (NAVAIR says it's significantly greater than the AV-8B and F/A-1, we don't really know how various surfaces will deal with the F-35B, how well the aircraft deals with FOD, etc.

In any case Thompson works for LM and his statements read like a press release and are certainly not an objective analysis.