Forum: General F-35 Forum

I want this idea pushed. Reason? The ability of the aircraft to do even more bare base options than the A-10. As you know one of the advantages to the A-10 is it can be used out of an airfield that might not be as friendly to other traditional jets.

Actual needed quantity of Jump JSFs? I don't know. No more than 2 Wings worth?

Opinions?

F-16.net Sponsor

Just to be generous, maybe 70% of the current A-10 force structure if the Hog is completely retired. I'm no planning expert or as plugged in as some of our other board buddies but I just don't see how the JSF is gonna be able to take the down-n-dirty pounding the Hog does. Are they planning to install a titanium tub into the JSFs? It's early yet but I haven't heard or read anything about how the JJSF would be "robust-ified" for a slow-speed loiter, in-the-weeds CAS or low-level mission.

One of the many reasons the Hog is built as realtively simple as possible is because of the bare-base criteria. The new jet has all this cosmic stuff on it (especially that funky articulated tailpipe) that would seem to me anyways to be a maintenance nightmare at an austere airfield. I'm sure our A-1 maintenance troops could do it but it's a headache I wouldn't wish on anyone.

Last edited by elp on Mar 03, 2004 - 06:31 PM; edited 1 time in total

Well, the way I see it is: What would you want at a bare base? A CAS jet that can only do Mark one eyeball weaponeering? Or a jet that can support a G-FAC in any weather dropping LGBs, WCMD CBU-105, JDAM, SDB etc. Pretty hard for the A-10 to do something with pure garbage weather in support of lets say a long range patrol or what ever. Just like preplanned artillery fire, before a patrol beds down or is in a static position, they can plug in the cords around them of various terrain fetures. If there is trouble all they have to do is send those cords with their request or send new ones. Lousy weather over the GFAC? So what. A JDAM, SDB, WCMD doesn't care much. It's going to hit pretty darn close to where the G-FAC wants it. Sometimes you have to use more crude methods like strafing, but it is not the answer to all solutions. Not by a long shot. Also with the advent of UAVs, more and more ambush type setups are becoming known before the friendly ground guy even makes contact.

One CAS stat they are trying to improve is response time. The A-10 is slow. Every minute counts when a G-FAC puts in a call. The A-10 is a great aircraft but consider the following....

Would you rather have a CAS jet thats star feature is that it is an excellent strafe jet and not much else? ( when I say ... "not much else" in order for it to do strafing or drop dumb iron, it has to get in range of guns and get shot up + air crew risk. Since it is a fair weather only airframe, many times it can be seen. OR

A jet that can do "OK" strafing when needed... but.... can drop PGMs in support of the G-FAC in ANY target weather AND drop these weapons with an almost contempt of small SAMS and AAA. The ability to drop a weapon from 30,000 + feet and hit a target with one digit CEP in any weather. Add to that response time.

Just some thoughts. The A-10 is not dead, just very limited by the standard of today and the future. Adding the laser pod ( LITENING ( proof of concept OIF ) and later SNIPER is a smart move. Still a lot of life left in this jet. When this thing can do all weather weps, that will be a great day. An A-10 laced with SDBs, a few WCMD and a few GBU-12s, would be a good thing.

Great A-10 site:
http://www.warthogpen.com/

Your noted examples are why you're the expert and I'm not. Wink

I HATE being out of the military sphere for so long (going on 5 years). I've gotten so far behind the curve it's embarassing! Embarassed

The point is the A-10 had to be the most sturdy attack jet in the world because it had to fly LOW to achieve its mission. Now a modern and reasonably costly technology enables to strike small targets while flying at medium altitude, far from the risk of being shot down by AAA or a lucky rifleman.
Even A-10s are now flying more at medium altitude, where their armour is worthless.

Now the real matter is: will it be easy to deploy very advanced fighters from forward bases? Logistics could be a nightmare. However, I think that the US can afford to do it.

They run Apaches out of some odd bases and those aren't exactly the -kick the tires and drive it- kind of ride Very Happy

IMO the 'hog is a great jet that has been near-obsoleted by the advances in PGMs as others have noted. But I wouldn't retire them just yet. If I were looking for an address on Pennsylvania Ave I'd give all those Hogs to the Border Patrol and put an end to the drug trafficing problems that have been coming in from points south..... Mr. Green

Mmm, A-10s against 172s: I guess you can call it "dominance"! Laughing

Starting to wonder about this concept of basing STOVL versions of JSF in the wild.

Some excellent comments from a friend of mine summed up mixed with some of my thoughts:

-This will just be yet another resorce that has to be battlefield / airlift or convoy supplied, when in fact that volume of suppy moving capacity could be used supporting other war fighters on the ground etc.

- This thing will be interesting to see the turbine life after a few days of kicking up dust. ..... Ok, of course it will take off on matting ..... OK so that is matting that has to be brought in... or an existing prepared roadway is available.... anyway lots of support logistics just to get 1 meter CEP all weather PGMs on target that could be better brought in via a long rang UCAV overhead, A B-1 or B-52 or something else when fighting these primative wars. A long range UCAV being over head would be interesting. Especailly since the number one thing with CAS the grunts worry about is..... RESPONSE TIME.

More: Look at the new Navy contract to replace the P3 maritme mission. Basically taking a Boeing BBJ ( Boeing Business Jet ) ( 737 ) and mil spec'ing it with weapons and sensors. OOOPS that cat is out of the bag now isnt it? A 767-xxx ER has a lot of staying power and ... reliability. Make it so it can sip gas off of a boom style tanker, put sensors, small PGMS ( off course it is netcentric ) and it would be great for long range SPECFOR support bug hunts like Afcrapistan. And...... it would have commonality with other 767 platforms the military wants ( E-10 JSTARS replacement and the tanker thing. ).

Why then in a war on terror environ where we would hunt primatives with no high altitude ability to drop jets....... is taking an airliner... making it mil spec NETCENTRIC, putting sensors and small PGMS like SDB etc ....... a bad thing? Gee that would shoot the pork barrel politican-military industrial complex right bad wouldn't it? I have already shown in other threads how JSF is not needed to fight conventional forces a la a U.S. style full force beat down. Well...... I certainly don't need JSF to support SPECFORS on bug hunts do I? A 767 bug hunter and if you are going to base anything on the dirt, you still have Apache, all this working hand in hand with other forces... for bug hunts, is good enough.

Again. Lets cancel JSF and use that money to really transform the military. The pork which is JSF will not help us in the long run.

Isn't the A-10 getting an avionics upgrade? Dual MFDS, new HUD, new FCS, new FLCS, etc?

habu2 wrote:

Isn't the A-10 getting an avionics upgrade? Dual MFDS, new HUD, new FCS, new FLCS, etc?

It's being called "Precision Engagement Upgrade" Check out this link. It mentions something of which you speak but not much detail.

....And lo and behold...Aviation Leak is reporting this week the USAFs potential order for "several hundred" VSTOL F-35s for CAS use in addition to the upgraded A-10s. SecUSAF is holding off on an exact number until the Army finishes some kind of force structure assessment type thingy.

habu2 wrote:

If I were looking for an address on Pennsylvania Ave I'd give all those Hogs to the Border Patrol and put an end to the drug trafficing problems that have been coming in from points south..... Mr. Green

The OV-10 would have worked better for that mission. To bad nobody had the forsight to think of that when we retired them after the first Gulf War.

Ive always loved jets more then props, but you gotta give it up for the Bronco.

Thanks for starting this debate. I was too upset about the JSF stuff to discuss. This plane is becoming another pathetic goldplated product like the F/A-18E/F. What is going on with fighter plane designers in the US. The only thing this big corporation could come up with to reduce weight is was to reduce the size of the bomb bay of the STOVL version from 2 x2000 lb bombs to 2 x 1000 lb bombs.
read this:

World News & Analysis
JSF Team Shifts Course on First Stovl Version
Aviation Week & Space Technology
09/06/2004, page 38

During an informal review last month, the Pentagon gave the green light to the strategy.

The "optimized" B1 will feature a smaller bay for the Stovl version. It has been shrunk about 14 in. and will limit that version of JSF to carrying two 1,000-lb. bombs--the other models will still carry 2,000-lb. bombs. British military officials indicated some unease about the move, but Burbage says the design change was put to a vote. All Stovl customers--the U.S., the U.K. and Italy--approved the decision. B1 will also feature a redesigned top inlet used during hover and a smaller diameter lift nozzle. Both changes make the engine more efficient and help mitigate weight.

Of course LM will try to get away with whatever they can, like any other company would. The way I see it is good engineering solutions seem to be disapperaing from the vocabulary of aerospace companies. This is from my confortable position as an spectator of ,military aviation issues. I believe that LM just inflated the capabilities of the plane and now, they are paying the consequence of their actions, since it is evident they cannot control the weight of the plane without forcing the warfighters to accept big sacrifices.

And why am I upset about it?. Because the Royal Australian Air Force will purchase the damm plane and possibly also the STOVL version.

And another CAS debate seems to start appearing in the horizon again!

While everyone's throwing in there two cents, I think we should scrap the JSF and use the money to upgrade the "Hog" and buy Block 60 Vipers.

Forum: General F-35 Forum

Jump JSF for USAF