Forum: F-35 Lightning II

JCS Chairman General Dempsey, appearing before the House Armed Services Committee: “I’m concerned about the three variants, whether we can afford all three.”

In the same article, Secretary Panetta "re-opens" the door to the engine competition.

Read more: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/10/13/new-w ... z1ahQrNuuC
DoDBuzz.com

F-16.net Sponsor

Last edited by alloycowboy on Oct 14, 2011 - 01:17 AM; edited 3 times in total

Sure the USA could cancel the F-35B but that would require mothballing the following carriers:

USS Wasp (LHD-1)
USS Essex (LHD-2)
USS Kearsarge (LHD-3)
USS Boxer (LHD-4)
USS Bataan (LHD-5)
USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6)
USS Iwo Jima (LHD-7)
USS Makin Island (LHD- Cool

But what would the United States of America use to defend its vital shipping lanes?

Dempsey must be the FNG - am I right? Wait until Amos has a woid! Very Happy

US defence chiefs raise alarm on cost of three F-35 variants By: Stephen Trimble Washington DC

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... ts-363414/

"The new chairman of the joint chiefs of staff has raised concerns about the cost of building three variants of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II.

"I am concerned about the three variants and whether we can go forward in this fiscal environment with all three, but I am eager to learn more about that," said General Martin Dempsey, speaking at a House Armed Services Committee hearing on 13 October.

"Three variants create some fiscal challenges for us," he added....

...In his testimony, Panetta emphasised the importance of flight tests for the F-35 programme's future.

"Give us a chance to test it," Panetta said. "If it performs well then obviously it will be able to make the grade."

ONLY a short article but worth clicking on the URL to see all the wonderful words. Very Happy

Shipping Lanes graphic from above: http://billjaquette.net/wp-content/uplo ... 66_F2.jpeg OOPS graphic is back as we type....

alloycowboy said: "But then what would the United States of America use to defend its shipping lanes?" I say let the USAF do it. Twisted Evil

Sorry I couldn't get that map to show up routinely! Thanks for the help!

Sometimes 'hot linking' will not work.

alloycowboy wrote:

Sure the USA could cancel the F-35B but that would require mothballing the following carriers:

USS Wasp (LHD-1)
USS Essex (LHD-2)
USS Kearsarge (LHD-3)
USS Boxer (LHD-4)
USS Bataan (LHD-5)
USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6)
USS Iwo Jima (LHD-7)
USS Makin Island (LHD- Cool

But what would the United States of America use to defend its vital shipping lanes?

Amphips don't generally defend shipping lanes - except for occasionally off the Horn of Africa. We could put plenty of -60's on those decks...

@maus92...... I don't think the 60's will cut it any more against the new generation Fast Attack Craft such as the China's Houbei class missile boat.

alloycowboy wrote:

Sure the USA could cancel the F-35B but that would require mothballing the following carriers:

USS Wasp (LHD-1)
USS Essex (LHD-2)
USS Kearsarge (LHD-3)
USS Boxer (LHD-4)
USS Bataan (LHD-5)
USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6)
USS Iwo Jima (LHD-7)
USS Makin Island (LHD- Cool

But what would the United States of America use to defend its vital shipping lanes?

None of those are carriers. And as someone else pointed out, you could put a whole bunch of helicopters on one.

Or... as someone else pointed out, you could put a whole bunch of Super Tucano with 6+ hr endurance on one. It depends on the policymaking, nothing more. If policy makers want to retire those LHD/LHA, then go for it, if it's in the best overall defense interests and if they know something we don't know.

maus92 wrote:

alloycowboy wrote:

Sure the USA could cancel the F-35B but that would require mothballing the following carriers:

USS Wasp (LHD-1)
USS Essex (LHD-2)
USS Kearsarge (LHD-3)
USS Boxer (LHD-4)
USS Bataan (LHD-5)
USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6)
USS Iwo Jima (LHD-7)
USS Makin Island (LHD- Cool

But what would the United States of America use to defend its vital shipping lanes?

Amphips don't generally defend shipping lanes - except for occasionally off the Horn of Africa. We could put plenty of -60's on those decks...

IMHO, better to design and deploy sea-lane 'observation' Airships in this role in the future.

geogen wrote:

Or... as someone else pointed out, you could put a whole bunch of Super Tucano with 6+ hr endurance on one.

And what happens when say an airliner whose transponder has gone down strays into the groups area, send a Tucano up to 40,000 feet to check it out or send up a missile to 'have a look'...?

And what happens if sh*t hits the fan big time somewhere and the Marines are called in with a deck full of Tucano's to a conventional conflict, say in the straights of Tawain? Do they just turn tail and head home thanks to the near useless air component onboard or do they send the Tucano's out never to be seen again?

geogen wrote:

IMHO, better to design and deploy sea-lane 'observation' Airships in this role in the future.

An airship would be lucky to make 5 knots into a headwind over the Atlantic or Pacific ocean.

What is cheaper? Buying the three variants of the F-35 or developing several different aircraft to replace the legacy aircraft and the buying them?

Last edited by quicksilver on Oct 15, 2011 - 04:05 PM; edited 1 time in total

geogen wrote:

Or... as someone else pointed out, you could put a whole bunch of Super Tucano with 6+ hr endurance on one. It depends on the policymaking, nothing more. If policy makers want to retire those LHD/LHA, then go for it, if it's in the best overall defense interests and if they know something we don't know.

Let's bring this line of thought back to some hard reality --

Just how would these "Super" aircraft (or any other similar non-VTOL, non-STOVL, aircraft sans tailhook) operate from these decks. Have you ever been aboard one of these ships? Have you ever been aboard during flight operations? Search flight deck dimensions and tell us how much space they have between the port scuppers and the foul line. Then explain to us which Navy in the world would (as a matter of routine operations) sign up to the risks inherent in the recovery of said aircraft with other valuable stuff (crew, aircraft, support equipment, oh...and the island) just on the other side of the foul line.

Forum: F-35 Lightning II

Can the DoD can afford all three flavors of the F-35?