F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 06 Sep 2018, 18:50
by zerion
Marine F-35Bs with the 13th MEU enter Middle East for first time

35Bs embarked with the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit, or MEU, have recently just entered the U.S. Central Command area of operations for the first time.

According to a photo uploaded by the Marine Corps showing the F-35B, the Wasp-class amphibious assault ship Essex entered the 5th fleet area of operations. The U.S. 5th Fleet is responsible for the Red Sea, Persian Gulf and parts of the Indian Ocean, and is a component command of CENTCOM.

The 13th MEU’s entrance into the CENTCOM arena heralds the first time the F-35B has entered the volatile Middle East arena and puts the high-tech aircraft closer to the fight against possible ISIS targets in Iraq and Syria, or as a counter to sophisticated Russian and Syrian air defense systems in Syria.

But the 13th MEU’s F-35s are not going to be dropping ordnance on targets in the Middle East just yet.

The 13th MEU is slated to kick of a two-week Theater Amphibious Combat Rehearsal, or TACR, off the coast of Djibouti on Sept. 8, according to a command release.

About 4,500 Marines and sailors will participate in the maritime exercise that will include simulated air defense training, mine countermeasure training, quick-reaction force drills, deck landing qualifications, and at-sea ship interdictions, according to a command release.

“TACR allows us to demonstrate the enhanced capabilities and tactical lethality that embarked F-35Bs on an ARG bring to the region,” Col. Chandler Nelms, the 13th MEU commander, said in a commander release...

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/y ... irst-time/

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 08:55
by charlielima223
The thought of F-22 and F-35 flying in the same airspace somewhere in the middle east gives me warm fuzzies

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 10:48
by aasm
They would drop their Luneberg lenses for the first time?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 11:02
by hythelday
aasm wrote:They would drop their Luneberg lenses for the first time?


Seems like Israel holds that achievement, too. Training off the coast of Djibouti hardly warrants complete stealthiness.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2018, 01:37
by spazsinbad
Marines Deploy First F-35Bs to the Middle East; 13th MEU, Essex ARG Test Battle Readiness
10 Sep 2018 Gidget Fuentes

"...For two weeks, the F-35B and the rest of the 13th MEU’s combat firepower will train at military ranges in Djibouti and in the international waters off the coast. About 4,500 Marines and sailors with the 13th MEU and Essex ARG – Essex, amphibious transport dock USS Anchorage (LPD-23) and dock landing ship USS Rushmore (LSD-47) – are participating in the TACR exercise, which kicked off Saturday, for Naval Amphibious Force, Task Force 51/5th Marine Expeditionary Brigade....

...The addition of the F-35 to the ARG, Olin said, “is a very significant enabler for me and for my team. It increases battlespace awareness with data fusion and the ability to share information with the ships and the ships’ combat control system. So it’s really an extension of our sensors, and it also brings to the table a greater increased lethality than what we had with previous generation aircraft.

“It’s really a game-changer for us, and we are really excited to be a part of bringing this new tool to the ARG and learning how to use it. I don’t think we really know exactly… we’re kind of at the leading edge of discovering that,” Olin said....

...During the TACR training, Nelms said, assault support forces from Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 166 (Reinforced)’s complement of CH-53E Super Stallion heavy-lift helicopters, MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft, UH-1 Huey utility helicopters and AH-1 Cobra attack helicopters, “will get a great rep in the environment here and practice landing in austere environment. We’ll be incorporating the F-35Bs into the play of the problem throughout the exercise, primarily focused on supporting the Marines on the ground.”

Commanders said the F-35B is a key part of providing the amphibious force with advanced intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities that it can use most anywhere it’s needed. “What makes our ARG/MEU team such a unique capability in the theater is its mobility, its access from the sea,” Nelms said. “It makes them a flexible choice for the commander. And that would be the same for the aircraft that are embarked. While the F-35B is an incredibly capable aircraft, the ability to put it on amphibious shipping and have the option to place it anywhere you want in the 5th Fleet region buys the commander an incredible amount of flexibility.”...

...Lt. Col. Kyle Shoop, who commands VMFA 211, a Yuma, Ariz.-based squadron, said the squadron was racking up more time deployed at sea than any other squadron and is “continually working with the ship to define best practices during this first deployment.” “It’s been a good while since we had done any close-air support… getting our skills refined again, get everybody to shoot the guns, dropping the bombs and supporting the Marines on the ground,” Shoop said.

After leaving San Diego on Essex for Hawaii, the F-35B squadron flew some blue-water operations, including handling scenarios safely if there’s no divert field. In Hawaii, a detachment trained and flew with the F-22 Raptor, the Air Force’s newest, fifth-generation fighter.

Continuing westward, he said, the squadron got clearances to use its AIM-9 Sidewinder missile for basic firing maneuvering training, conducted close are support missions in Malaysia and conducted forward refueling operations at smaller islands in the western Pacific along with the CH-53E and MV-22
. “So we stayed pretty busy doing some new stuff and breaking some ground,” he said.

Earlier this year during a briefing during the WEST 2018 conference in San Diego, Shoop said he was concerned about whether the squadron would get spare parts and other logistics support it needs for the new jet once they left San Diego. “So far, it’s worked out great. Lockheed has been fully committed,” he told USNI News. “We’ve got some support onboard, via (Marine Aviation Logistics Squadron 13),” and Marines from Combat Logistics Battalion 13 are supporting them at each logistics location ashore. “No major hiccups thus far,” he said."

Source: https://news.usni.org/2018/09/10/marine ... -readiness

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2018, 06:52
by popcorn
CAS training in Malaysia? What's the likelihood they did some friendly DACT with Malaysian Flankers?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2018, 07:59
by weasel1962
popcorn wrote:CAS training in Malaysia? What's the likelihood they did some friendly DACT with Malaysian Flankers?


The Malaysian fighters stationed near and participated were Hawks (which the Malaysians use for CAS). The exercise focussed more on CAS at the Kota Belud training area.

http://www.c7f.navy.mil/Media/News/Disp ... -malaysia/

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2018, 22:26
by spazsinbad
ESSEX in ADEN GULF photo via E-mail.

The Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II B Roll Footage 9:50 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sNlDgnRzm8


Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2018, 03:05
by beepa
At 3:16 EOTS is doing it's thing, never really noticed it before, thanx Spaz.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2018, 03:20
by spazsinbad
Approx. 3:16 screenshot

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2018, 06:42
by hornetfinn
beepa wrote:At 3:16 EOTS is doing it's thing, never really noticed it before, thanx Spaz.


Good catch, very interesting. It definitely has rather high scanning speed.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2018, 14:27
by aasm
hornetfinn wrote:
beepa wrote:At 3:16 EOTS is doing it's thing, never really noticed it before, thanx Spaz.


Good catch, very interesting. It definitely has rather high scanning speed.


Working with a mirror scanning?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2018, 21:19
by tjh8402
Theoretically, what weapons would these Bs be ready and able to employ? I assume they are 3F? If I’m reading correctly, that means AMRAAM, sidewinder, gun pod, 500 lb paveway, and 1k lb JDAM, correct? None of those are great options for anti-shipping, if they can even be used at all?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2018, 21:54
by krieger22
Being hit by any one of the latter 2 has a pretty good chance of mission killing any surface combatant. In any case, the Gator Navy's role is to support landings, not naval dominance.

http://www.malaysiandefence.com/rmaf-ia ... -exercise/

Sadly, DACT against Malaysian Su-30s was never on the cards - an exercise against the Indian Su-30s that took part in Pitch Black was prioritized instead.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2018, 22:10
by ricnunes
tjh8402 wrote:Theoretically, what weapons would these Bs be ready and able to employ? I assume they are 3F? If I’m reading correctly, that means AMRAAM, sidewinder, gun pod, 500 lb paveway, and 1k lb JDAM, correct? None of those are great options for anti-shipping, if they can even be used at all?


The GBU-12 (500lb Paveway) seems to be a very good weapon against ships (even larger ones). IMO, the only disadvantage of using/employing GBU-12 against ships would be the need to employ the weapon closer to the target compared to some other "more dedicated" anti-ship weapons (such as the JSOWs on F-35Cs or Harpoons/SLAMs and JSOWs on SH's, etc...) but then again the F-35 stealth would somehow offset this disadvantage.

Moreover, if the F-35 (-B in this case) can "constantly" send the updated target/ship location to a released JDAM (which is something that I'm not sure of, perhaps others could say something about this?) than the 1,000lb JDAM would be an even better weapons against ships (even against moving ones).

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2018, 22:34
by tjh8402
Thank you for the info guys. I know this is really outside what the gator Navy’s purpose is. However, between Iran’s threats to the straits of Hormuz and the Russian Navy off Syria, there would seem to be a need for some sort of US naval force projection in the Middle East, and since there’s no CVN CBG in the theater, Essex and her F-35s would appear to be the most potent surface assets we currently have there, and I was curious how potent they are. Otherwise, I assume any DDGs or CGs operating would have to depend on the USAF for air cover.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2018, 22:37
by SpudmanWP
tjh8402 wrote:Theoretically, what weapons would these Bs be ready and able to employ?


A 500lb Paveway will fk up a moving ship and a 2k JDAM will lay waste to a stationary one.

Image

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 00:46
by ricnunes
SpudmanWP wrote:A 500lb Paveway will fk up a moving ship and a 2k JDAM will lay waste to a stationary one.


I believe that you meant a 1k JDAM since we're talking about the F-35B, no?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 01:17
by popcorn
ricnunes wrote:
Moreover, if the F-35 (-B in this case) can "constantly" send the updated target/ship location to a released JDAM (which is something that I'm not sure of, perhaps others could say something about this?) than the 1,000lb JDAM would be an even better weapons against ships (even against moving ones).

JDAM doesn't work that way ie. not network-enabled. A LJDAM would have a better chance of hitting a moving ship.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 01:33
by SpudmanWP
ricnunes wrote:
A 500lb Paveway will fk up a moving ship and a 2k JDAM will lay waste to a stationary one.


I believe that you meant a 1k JDAM since we're talking about the , no?


You're right, I was getting ahead of myself on what was cleared in SDD for external carry.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 05:50
by spazsinbad
Marines Prepared to Use F-35Bs in Middle East Combat If Needed; No Other Naval Aviation Nearby
12 Sep 2018 Megan Eckstein

"The Marine Corps’ F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters are the only ship-based fixed-wing aircraft in the Middle East right now, and service leaders say the new jets are ready to handle any fight in Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan they may be tasked with. Though the F-35Bs have never seen combat before, they are now the only available fighters from the Navy or Marine Corps in the region, and service leaders say they are not going to ease the F-35 into operations. Whatever 5th Fleet and U.S. Central Command leadership asks of naval aviation, the F-35Bs deployed with the Essex Amphibious Ready Group and 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit will be ready to handle, they say.

“The deployment of the F-35B into U.S. Central Command is a major milestone for the program and validates the aircraft is in the fight right now, conducting real-world operations; it is actively supporting combatant commanders. We look forward to demonstrating the capability of our newest, advanced stealth aircraft during this deployment,” Capt. Christopher Harrison, a spokesman at Headquarters Marine Corps at the Pentagon, told USNI News.

“The F-35Bs on the 13th MEU are able to execute any mission that may arise in U.S. Central Command while simultaneously providing a high-end deterrent to any near-peer threat that may emerge. These aircraft feature Block 3F software which provides ‘full warfighting capability’ from its fully-enabled data link to increased weapons delivery capacity. The F-35’s ability to operate in contested areas, including anti-access/area-denial environments that legacy fighters cannot penetrate, provides more lethality and flexibility to the combatant commander than any other fighter platform.”

USNI News previously reported the Block 3F software allows the plane to load up with more ordnance than the F/A-18C Hornet can carry through external pylons, or it can clear the wings and rely only on internal weapons carriage to preserve its fifth-generation stealth capability....

...Lt. Christina Gibson, a spokeswoman for U.S. Naval Forces Central Command, told USNI News that, rather than ease the new F-35Bs into operations, leaders would leverage the advanced capabilities the jets bring to this complex airspace....

...During this amphibious force’s time in 5th Fleet, the Essex ARG and 13th MEU will do what most other ARG/MEUs do during their deployments: they will train with partners’ militaries, they will conduct sustainment training, and they will be ready to respond to crises that arise, as well as support the named operations in the Middle East if called upon. The presence of the F-35s doesn’t change any of that, Gibson said, but she added that leaders were excited to show off the new capability and approach each task with a more sophisticated weapon.

“The ARG/MEU team will participate in exercises and, as tasked, combat operations during their deployment in the U.S. 5th Fleet area of operations. From these exercises and operations, the Navy/Marine Corps team will demonstrate the capabilities that the F-35B brings to the ARG/MEU and how to best employ those capabilities,” she said.

“The Essex Amphibious Ready Group and the 13th Marine Corps Expeditionary Unit are conducting a Theater Amphibious Combat Rehearsal to demonstrate the ability to secure littoral environments, as part of the Theater Counter Mine and Maritime Security Exercise. Commencing September 8th, the U.S. 5th Fleet is leading four exercises across the theater with regional and global partners which demonstrate our capability, intent, and resolve to ensure freedom of movement and navigation through all three critical choke points across the theater simultaneously. The F-35B allows the ARG/MEU to demonstrate resolve to provide air and maritime superiority to ensure security at sea and on land with the introduction of the world’s most advanced fighter aircraft. The F-35B allows us to approach our mission from a position of strength in the Central Region and to ensure freedom of movement and navigation through all three critical choke points across the theater simultaneously.”

Photo: "An F-35B Lightning II, attached to the “Avengers” of Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA) 211, launches from the flight deck of Wasp-class amphibious assault ship USS Essex (LHD 2) on Sept. 2, 2018, during a regularly scheduled deployment of Essex Amphibious Ready Group (ARG) and 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU). US Navy photo."
https://news.usni.org/wp-content/upload ... 701657.jpg


Source: https://news.usni.org/2018/09/12/marine ... ion-nearby

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 06:45
by hythelday
tjh8402 wrote:Theoretically, what weapons would these Bs be ready and able to employ? I assume they are 3F? If I’m reading correctly, that means AMRAAM, sidewinder, gun pod, 500 lb paveway, and 1k lb JDAM, correct? None of those are great options for anti-shipping, if they can even be used at all?


SM-6 from any Mk-48 afloat.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 11:55
by weasel1962
Don't think the current aircraft in the field are 3F yet but even with 2B, that's JDAM, AMRAAM + PW2. Also seen pics of external AIM-9s on the Bs on the essex which per the list is a 3F capability though I think its probably 3i.

Are there any pics of the B with the gun pod?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 12:01
by spazsinbad
IIRC all the SIX F-35Bs aboard USS Essex are 3F. Early F-35Bs were not - later squadron F-35Bs are so enabled specifically.

"...USNI News previously reported the Block 3F software..." so you or I can search USNI News for these facts. Likely on this forum also nestpas. Go Here: viewtopic.php?f=58&t=13143&p=392677&hilit=Winter#p392677
"...The Marine Corps F-35B deployed with a detachment of Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA) 121 on board the USS Wasp last month, and the USS Essex will take on board a detachment from VMFA-211 this summer for deployment. VMFA-211’s F-35Bs will mark the first deployment of the 3F software. The USS America and the USS Makin Island will be the next amphibious assault ships to operate the F-35B...." 11 Apr 2018 http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/20180411-F35.html

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 12:29
by ricnunes
popcorn wrote:
ricnunes wrote:
Moreover, if the F-35 (-B in this case) can "constantly" send the updated target/ship location to a released JDAM (which is something that I'm not sure of, perhaps others could say something about this?) than the 1,000lb JDAM would be an even better weapons against ships (even against moving ones).

JDAM doesn't work that way ie. not network-enabled. A LJDAM would have a better chance of hitting a moving ship.


Actually such capability (for the JDAM to hit moving targets by constant target update/link) have been successfully tested and this circa 2000-2006. Here:
http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2005-07-25- ... -with-JDAM

Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet Engages Moving Targets with JDAM

Boeing [NYSE: BA] successfully demonstrated the capability of a single F/A-18E/F Super Hornet to engage moving land targets during a test at Naval Air Warfare Center, Weapons Division, China Lake, Calif.

"This is just another step in our efforts to develop an all-weather multiple moving target engagement capability for the Super Hornet," said Chris Chadwick, Boeing vice president for F/A-18 programs. "We plan to expand on this effort, to meet the goals of precision multiple moving target engagement envisioned in Sea Power 21."

Real-time targeting updates were accomplished using the aircraft's existing Digital Communications System (DCS) to communicate over a standard military link to a 2,000-lb. Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) equipped with a UHF weapon data link module. The weapon data link module included a miniature radio transceiver that transmitted link status back to the aircraft during weapon free-fall.

In the guided release demonstration, the position of the moving target, a radio-controlled panel-side truck, was continuously tracked by the Advanced Targeting Forward-Looking Infrared (ATFLIR) sensor onboard the Super Hornet. Periodic target updates were provided to the JDAM throughout the weapon's flight to the target. As a result, the F/A-18 weapon system successfully guided the inert bomb to within two meters of the moving target -- close enough to destroy most moving targets. During a previous flight, two-way UHF link connectivity was verified to 40 miles between a ground-mounted JDAM and aircraft in flight. The UHF weapon data link exceeded expectations in maintaining communications between the F/A-18 aircraft and the JDAM during weapon deployment.

Further demonstrations of the Super Hornet's future precision engagement capabilities are planned for later this year and 2006.


As you can see, it even had a rather good precision (2 meters).

Now my point was: Is something like this integrated within the F-35 and JDAM? Honestly I also don't think it is but the fact is that I'm not 100% sure.
If this isn't implemented/integrated than maybe the reason is like you said, because of newer weapons which are probably more effective in dealing with moving targets like the LJDAM that you mentioned or the EGBU-12/GBU-49, the later of which is being integrated on the F-35, right?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 14:30
by popcorn
They may have tested a data link for JDAM but apparently it never made it past the proof of concept, the Navy likely scuttled the idea. I think a swarm of SDB-2s would be interesting.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 14:48
by marsavian
The Paveway II (500lb GBU-49) can be used for moving targets at 3F and 400 have been ordered. Doubt any are on board though as they should just be receiving this order about now.

https://www.janes.com/article/78599/us- ... n-for-f-35
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2017/03 ... t-problem/

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 16:27
by markithere
I did not find where a destroyer was with the MEU. From that point would not 2 be good to have in the MEU? This would give them a known platform for the SM-6 against stationary or moving targets as fast as a fighter jet. Then the magazine well of 1 F-35 would be however many SM-6s they chose to fire up to capacity. What other stovl jet can match this load out?

With the lack of F-35 communications with the ship commander could he not just go jump in one F-35 on the deck and get his picture? Need others to see it? Use the ship’s wifi and a smart phone with FaceTime. Need more ships in the MEU to see it too? Pump the data stream through the ship to ship connection then into an iPad and join the call or just view. You simply make due with what you have. Don’t have WiFi? Get a wireless router. Don’t want to use WiFi at all? Get a network cable out to the plane and use an Apple laptop at the ends of the FaceTime calls to each participating ship. If FaceTime requires connections to Apple servers use Skype or some program designed for network video calls/monitoring like ipwebcam. Can the ship already do ship to ship video calls? Use that setup pumped to and from the plane.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 17:18
by spazsinbad
AFAIK there has only been a proof of concept for an F-35B directing fire for an SM-6 and that was from the 'desert ship'. Provide a reference that this capacity is operational please. The USN were going to do the same from a ship at sea however I do not recall that this test has been carried out or reported so far. IF so please provide a reference. Thanks.

BTW 'make due' is not a thing. MAKE DO would be the term. Make DEW is also altogether something else not relevant.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 17:33
by markithere
spazsinbad wrote:BTW 'make due' is not a thing. MAKE DO would be the term. Make DEW is also altogether something else not relevant.


Thank you for the correction. I appreciate it and hope to make do.

I served as a unit armor in the Army. For us operational ment “you can do it? Go do it now.” Maybe I served at a time that is different than today’s environment.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 18:35
by spazsinbad
No worries. You had spelt 'do' incorrectly. It is not 'due'. However I acknowledge that 'merican engrish is really not ENGLISH at all - so whatever. :D You see me raving about LIGHTENING and OTHER MISS SPELT STUFF but I know it is a losing (NOT LOOSING) proposition. I'm not KING CANUCK (yes I know CANUTE) fighting the tide of internet mobile fone thumbing spel.

What about SM6?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2018, 06:12
by usnvo
marsavian wrote:The Paveway II (500lb GBU-49) can be used for moving targets at 3F and 400 have been ordered. Doubt any are on board though as they should just be receiving this order about now.


Even with 2B software, the GBU-12 is fine for targets moving slower than 40mph so just about any ship is within its engagement envelope without pilot intervention. For faster targets, a GBU-12 can still be used to engage it, but requires the pilot to manually lead the target which increases the workload for the pilot as well as the possibility of a miss. A GBU-49 just adds GPS/INS and proportional guidance that allows targets travelling faster than 40mph to be engaged by tracking the target directly instead of leading it.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2018, 17:58
by ricnunes
usnvo wrote:Even with 2B software, the GBU-12 is fine for targets moving slower than 40mph so just about any ship is within its engagement envelope without pilot intervention. For faster targets, a GBU-12 can still be used to engage it, but requires the pilot to manually lead the target which increases the workload for the pilot as well as the possibility of a miss. A GBU-49 just adds GPS/INS and proportional guidance that allows targets travelling faster than 40mph to be engaged by tracking the target directly instead of leading it.


Indeed.
And moreover, the GBU-49 allows the engagement of targets in any weather conditions, such as bad weather and/or any other conditions which may obscure the targets (due to the help of GPS guidance).

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2018, 16:33
by aasm
Appaarently as aretaliation, Russia will deliver two S-300 systems to Syria within next 15 days. Dunno which version (300 is a family), neither operational capabilities of staff.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2018, 16:36
by sferrin
aasm wrote:Appaarently as aretaliation, Russia will deliver two S-300 systems to Syria within next 15 days. Dunno which version (300 is a family), neither operational capabilities of staff.


S-400 has been there for over a year. I think the S-300s are to replace the Syrian S-200s so they don't shoot their own guys down again more than any retaliation.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2018, 16:48
by hythelday
aasm wrote:Appaarently as aretaliation, Russia will deliver two S-300 systems to Syria within next 15 days. Dunno which version (300 is a family), neither operational capabilities of staff.


The more radio waves Syrians and Russians blast into airspace over Syria, the better for SIGINT and F-35's... what the correct term was... mission file database?

Russians themselves have S-400 protecting Hmeimim AB and Tartous, which are superior both in technical and HR department. This delivery (if it happens) amounts almost to no change in overall balance of power in the region, and certainly does not affect F-35 operations. Israel already said they will continue to strike Iran and their proxy targets in Syria; no doubt on my part that they will.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 09:23
by element1loop
hythelday wrote:
aasm wrote:Appaarently as aretaliation, Russia will deliver two S-300 systems to Syria within next 15 days. Dunno which version (300 is a family), neither operational capabilities of staff.


The more radio waves Syrians and Russians blast into airspace over Syria, the better for SIGINT and F-35's... what the correct term was... mission file database? Russians themselves have S-400 protecting Hmeimim AB and Tartous, which are superior both in technical and HR department. This delivery (if it happens) amounts almost to no change in overall balance of power in the region, and certainly does not affect F-35 operations. Israel already said they will continue to strike Iran and their proxy targets in Syria; no doubt on my part that they will.


Israel's now calling it 'preemption'.

Assad supported Iran to arm proxies for decades which proxies are Assad's brothers-in-arms and which Assad backed to attack Israeli forces in 2006. They even zapped an IDF corvette with Iranian supplied ASM. So it's not like any one involved in backing Assad now or supporting Assad with S300 and S400 can claim to be just an innocent bystander. If they had any brains they'd ask Iran to remove its forces from Syria by the end of October, at the latest.

It may be wise to get those shiny new SAMs insured.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 10:34
by aasm
Things are slightly more complex. Russian also threatened to jam communications over Syria in case of a new attack. If you are IDF planner you will therefore have to deal with a very different tactical situation than before. (And not like it as you were previously extremely sccessful). The point is not to know if F-35 can defeat S-300 (which type, PMU-2 or else? nertworked with what and to ahwt extnd etc;?), but if you can be sure of a mission success without significant lost. Until the Syrian S-300 capabiliies are better know,, it will be a nightmare for mission planners and therefore very probably will lead israel to rethink its mission tempo and tactics (using long range weapons for example)

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 11:21
by hythelday
aasm wrote:Things are slightly more complex. Russian also threatened to jam communications over Syria in case of a new attack. If you are IDF planner you will therefore have to deal with a very different tactical situation than before. (And not like it as you were previously extremely sccessful). The point is not to know if F-35 can defeat S-300 (which type, PMU-2 or else? nertworked with what and to ahwt extnd etc;?), but if you can be sure of a mission success without significant lost. Until the Syrian S-300 capabiliies are better know,, it will be a nightmare for mission planners and therefore very probably will lead israel to rethink its mission tempo and tactics (using long range weapons for example)



Russians threaten to do a lot of things. They have the right to do so.

Your arguments work both ways - EW can be both offensive and defensive - let the Russians jam, or think they jam comms, or what they think comm channels are. At this point it is also not known whether or not a S-300 can defeat a F-35 either.

I also strongly disagree with your asessment of Israel not being extremely successful - hundreds of airstrikes for one F-16 crashing over Israely territory is an extremely favorable exchange rate IMO. IAF mission planners have cracked tougher nuts before, and so far giving wunderwaffe gear to SAA hasn't produced drastic changes - there's a nice video of SA-21seen through PGM's IR sight from the last round of this dick measurement competition.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 16:10
by aasm
At this point it is also not known whether or not a S-300 can defeat a F-35 either.

I also strongly disagree with your asessment of Israel not being extremely successful - hundreds of airstrikes for one F-16


Somehow lost in translation. I meant will not like any change in tactical situation DUE to previous success (one do not change a winnin combo...)

*I do agree about the uncertainty of a S300 being able to defeat a F-35. However, if i was a mission planner, i would not bet my pilots life on it (even with favourable odds) before extensive testing of the supposed area denial zone. These things take a bunch of time.
About jamming, ground assets have access to a virtually unlimited power. This is definitely an advantage to perform a white (or pink) noise.

I didn't mean anymore.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 16:24
by SpudmanWP
They have been doing that level of testing for over a decade (Red Flag, Northern Edge, dedicated RCS ranges, etc).

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 19:35
by wrightwing
S-300s add new levels of difficulty for Israeli F-15s and F-16s, however the F-35s can provide targeting data and EW/EA support, for long range stand off. They can also conduct attacks unilaterally, outside the S-300 MEZ.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 19:47
by ricnunes
wrightwing wrote:S-300s add new levels of difficulty for Israeli F-15s and F-16s, however the F-35s can provide targeting data and EW/EA support, for long range stand off. They can also conduct attacks unilaterally, outside the S-300 MEZ.


Indeed!
In a best case scenario the level of threat that the S-300s could pose to the F-35s should be similar to the threat that the S-200s currently pose to the F-15s and F-16s.
So not really a change of threat when it comes to the F-35's "perspective".

Moreover the S-300 is definitely NOT an unknown weapon to NATO (e.g., Slovakia using their S-300 systems in NATO exercises, S-300s purchased by Greece, although which variant or variants of these S-300 that I'm talking about can be disputed) and I bet that if NATO knows about the S-300, so does Israel.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 20:21
by hythelday
Israelis already described F-35 as a great electromagnetic "sponge" that can, once in the air, sense what's going on in the "entire region".

Russians have had their version of S-3/400 in the rea for more than a year, so unless they were sitting dormant Adirs "sniffed" a lot of their emissions, at least the volume search radar, more *if* Russians used these systems during last missile strike (probably didn't).

For Isreal it would be quite easy to bait Syrians to use S-300 against decoys/drones to validate any intel they already have.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 20:47
by wrightwing
hythelday wrote:Israelis already described F-35 as a great electromagnetic "sponge" that can, once in the air, sense what's going on in the "entire region".

Russians have had their version of S-3/400 in the rea for more than a year, so unless they were sitting dormant Adirs "sniffed" a lot of their emissions, at least the volume search radar, more *if* Russians used these systems during last missile strike (probably didn't).

For Isreal it would be quite easy to bait Syrians to use S-300 against decoys/drones to validate any intel they already have.

You can rest assured that F-22s have been doing a lot of EOB mapping, developing MDFs for all of the various SAMs, as well as Su-30/35, etc... I know Israel hasn't been sitting on their hands, either.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 21:03
by steve2267
In the face of the nascent and rapidly evolving VLO air vehicles and systems-of-systems tactics being developed by the US, modern IADS are the 21st century equivalent of fixed fortifications:

"Fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man" -- Gen Patton

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 21:09
by zerion
US F-35 fighter jet poised for combat debut
Posted 2:54 p.m. today

By Barbara Starr and Zachary Cohen, CNN

(CNN) — The US Marine Corps' stealth F-35B Lightening fighter jet could fly its first combat mission within days, according to several US defense officials, who told CNN that the fifth-generation aircraft are currently aboard the USS Essex amphibious assault ship and should soon be in a position to conduct airstrikes over Afghanistan.

The USS Essex has already sailed from the Gulf of Aden into the North Arabian Sea and is expected to move into the Persian Gulf in coming days, one official said.

F-35 pilots have been conducting intelligence and surveillance missions in Somalia while on standby to conduct air support for US troops on the ground there if needed.

While available for support, the advanced fighter jet was not used in an airstrike over Somalia on Saturday that killed 18 militants after US and local forces came under attack...

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/25/politics ... index.html

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 22:14
by steve2267
Was not aware we had boots on the ground in Somalia... interesting...

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 23:31
by spazsinbad
:devil: Aaahhh - another Enlightening Story... for the players. :doh:

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2018, 01:12
by zerion
steve2267 wrote:Was not aware we had boots on the ground in Somalia... interesting...


You weren’t the only one

https://www.businessinsider.com/senator ... on-2017-10

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2018, 01:18
by spazsinbad
That report is 11 months old. There has been a lot of news since then and before about US Forces in Africa - where ever.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2018, 16:31
by zerion
spazsinbad wrote:That report is 11 months old. There has been a lot of news since then and before about US Forces in Africa - where ever.


And...

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2018, 16:35
by spazsinbad
What?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2018, 19:59
by quicksilver
CJTF-HOA has been in existence for 15-16 years. US Forces 'doing things' in that part of the world shouldnt be a surprise to anyone.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 16:53
by SpudmanWP
USMC Draws First Blood

(CNN)The US military's F-35B joint strike fighter conducted its first-ever airstrike in the last 24 hours, according to three US defense officials.

The strike took place in Afghanistan against a fixed Taliban target. The aircraft involved were the US Marine Corps' variant of the aircraft flying from the USS Essex amphibious assault ship.


(not much) More at the Jump
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/27/politics ... 1538063463

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 18:03
by bayernfan
It's always the range that interest me. What regions are common targets for strikes in Afghanistan? Since ESSEX is in "east Arabian sea", a very big part of Afghanistan is not within the range of F-35B.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 18:08
by steve2267
bayernfan wrote:It's always the range that interest me. What regions are common targets for strikes in Afghanistan? Since ESSEX is in "east Arabian sea", a very big part of Afghanistan is not within the range of F-35B.


Two words: Inflight Refueling

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 19:05
by spazsinbad
Marines’ F-35B Joint Strike Fighter Conducts First-Ever Combat Mission over Afghanistan
27 Sep 2018 Megan Eckstein

"The Marine Corps’ F-35B Joint Strike Fighter has conducted its first-ever combat strike, completing a mission in Afghanistan today in support of Operation Freedom’s Sentinel.

The jet “conducted an air strike in support of ground clearance operations, and the strike was deemed successful by the ground force commander,” according to a U.S. Marine Corps news release...."

Photo: "U.S. Marines with Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 211, 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU), stage ordnance before loading it into an F-35B Lightning II aboard the Wasp-class amphibious assault ship USS Essex (LHD 2) in preparation for the F-35B’s first combat strike, Sept. 27, 2018. US Marine Corps photo." https://news.usni.org/wp-content/upload ... 778817.jpg


Source: https://news.usni.org/2018/09/27/36885

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 19:28
by spazsinbad
Oh AIR FORCE SPEKE is funni.
US Uses F-35 in Combat for First Time in Afghanistan Airstrike
27 Sep 2018 Jennifer-Leigh Oprihory

"​A Marine Corps official speaking on background has officially confirmed to Air Force Magazine that one of its F-35B fighters traveling with the Navy amphibious assault ship USS Essex launched an airstrike in Afghanistan "in the past 24 hours," marking the first known combat strike for any US F-35 strike fighter...."

VIDEO "US Marines and sailors with the Essex Amphibious Ready Group and the 13th MEU aboard the Wasp-class amphibious assault ship USS Essex (LHD 2) conduct flight deck operations in support of the Sept. 27 airstrike. Marine Corps video by Cpl. Francisco Diaz and Lance Cpl. A.J. Fredenberg." https://cdn.dvidshub.net/media/video/18 ... 8-442k.mp4 (16Mb)


Source: http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pag ... trike.aspx

F-35Bs ESSEX 1st Strike 27 Sep 2018 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2o6xl4nQy8


Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 19:28
by SpudmanWP
Take note that the RCS enhancers are still mounted.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 19:48
by steve2267
And they're rocking the gunpod...

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 20:05
by spazsinbad
U.S. Marine Corps F-35B Lightning II Aerial Refuel
15 Sep 2018 QATAR Video by Staff Sgt. Rion Ehrman U.S. Air Forces Central Command Public Affairs

"A U.S. Air Force KC-135 Stratotanker assigned to the 28th Expeditionary Air Refueling Squadron departs on an aerial refuel mission from Al Udeid Air Base, Qatar. The KC-135 refuels U.S. Marine Corps F-35B Lightning IIs assigned to Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 211, 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit. The F-35B has deployed to the Middle East for the first time as part of the Essex Amphibious Ready Group (ARG). The 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) is the first combat-deployed MEU to utilize the F-35B, replacing its predecessor the AV-8B Harrier...."

Source: https://www.dvidshub.net/video/628134/u ... ial-refuel

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 20:08
by sprstdlyscottsmn
SpudmanWP wrote:Take note that the RCS enhancers are still mounted.

I find that very odd

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 20:12
by spazsinbad
Afghanistan Air Defences by Taliban don't require stealth. Why not keep Loony Lenz? No need to give anything away eh.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 20:20
by steve2267
If the looney parts that make the Looney Lenz reflect 'dar waves are removable... then WHY NOT rock the Looney Lenz covering, without the magic bitz inside, all the time and keep everyone guessin'?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 20:24
by steve2267
OR... if the Looney Lenz part does have to be removed in its entirety to make the bird invisible... but you want a certain nation to the west to see the Killer Bees a comin' and a goin' to and fro the Astan... just to remind them you are there... OR to NOT get nervous that they have done gone and disappeared and are marauding somewhere unseen over parts that would get the persians nervous...

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 20:28
by sprstdlyscottsmn
Good points. "See? we are here, and look at how far we can go."

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 20:30
by spazsinbad
There is an issue for crossing other countries for Air Traffic Control also - it is just not stealthy - same as any other JETS.

F-35Bs VMFA-211 from USS Essex ARF KC-135 15 Sep 2018 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVcjnJflMFk


Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 21:10
by steve2267
Hookup looked easy, peasy -- no iron maiden flailing around -- nice and smooth. I don't think I even noticed the basket moving as the probe inserted.

Were they contending with some sort of leak, though? What was all the vapor blowing back? Was that fuel? Is that normal?

Whatever color it is, the gunpod is NOT the same gray as the plane.

In the earlier video, I found it "interesting" that they included footage of someone loading 25mm cannon rounds. It was almost like they wanted everyone to know they were definitely flying the gun. I know Crews has stated the AV-8B always flew with guns when on operational missions. I wonder if they found a reason for the Killer Bees to get some strafe in on this mission?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 21:23
by SpudmanWP
Why did they not load the pod prior to mounting it on the F-35?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 21:24
by spazsinbad
steve2267 wrote:Hookup looked easy, peasy -- no iron maiden flailing around -- nice and smooth. I don't think I even noticed the basket moving as the probe inserted. Were they contending with some sort of leak, though? What was all the vapor blowing back? Was that fuel? Is that normal? Whatever color it is, the gunpod is NOT the same gray as the plane."...

Perhaps the still photo of an IRON MAIDEN makes it clear what it is - ALL FREAKIN' IRON not the SHUTTLECOCK variety. Perhaps the video resolution does not make it clearly apparent about the ALL METAL BASKET hence you miss irony. :roll:

Turbulent Tanking https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-RcBAZ5bx4


Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 21:28
by steve2267
spazsinbad wrote:Perhaps the still photo of an IRON MAIDEN makes it clear what it is - ALL FREAKIN' IRON not the SHUTTLECOCK variety.


Hmm... I chalked it up to excellent piloting skills, particularly the nice steady approach and the angle or flightpath from which he approached?

Question: are ALL KC-135 baskets of the IRON MAIDEN variety? Or do they also fly the shuttlecock variety?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 21:29
by outlaw162
It is easy....day VMC, smooth air....

It's interesting to me that they play the hose laterally (the bend) rather than vertically....and the example shown has a 90 degree bend at the knuckle laterally. That's the condition that is most conducive to a 'basket slap' on the fuselage. :shock: That is also the area where the tension on the hose (like a spring) can cause the hose to whip around while hooked up. Not that this applies to the F-35, but after the contact we would ride slightly high and back off until there was just a slight bend in the hose, not a big angle on the knuckle, and hold it there.....

But that was then, this is now. :D

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 21:31
by spazsinbad
It is just too difficult to keep up with all the questions but others with experience of the maiden may answer - otherwise:

viewtopic.php?f=59&t=54401&p=401182&hilit=Maiden+iron#p401182

Apologies - in the video shown above the basket does look all metal so it is the IRON MAIDEN.... There are comments elsewhere about positioning on the maiden but I have no experience of it myself just buddy tanking with shuttlecock.

This is the blurb for the SATISFACTION iron maiden video above:
"Turbulent Tanking Published on Jul 19, 2009 Spencer Abbot

"This is a video of a Navy F/A-18 Hornet tanking from Air Force KC-10's and KC-135's (the KC-135 is particularly challenging-- pilots call it the "Iron Maiden"). In turbulent weather, especially at night, tanking can be even tougher than landing on the ship. The basket is heavy, and it can damage the plane if it strikes it, to include shattering the canopy. One can only imagine the amusement of the tanker crews (to whom we're very grateful) as they watch us flail around on a bumpy day."


There is a story in the link above to elsewhere 'bout tanker crews 'trying to help' by moving BOOM with iron maiden around as receiver aircraft approaches - which is NOT helpful. By radio the receiver usually asks them to STOP it NOW! :shock:

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2018, 21:49
by steve2267
I never quite get used to the high angle of attack she flies at when she is just lollygagging along in an easy cruise.

While I am not holding my breath, I am curious to read of any gun employments they may make, specifically as to how they may use the round limiter to place precise number of rounds on target and/or increase the number of gun runs they can make. I recall 30 round bursts being mentioned in testing. That would give a pilot upwards of 7 gunruns with the Bee. Comments by an LM engineering manager suggested 10-20 round bursts are possible, but I have never read that definitively.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 00:27
by SpudmanWP
The Marine Corps’ F-35 combat debut was flown in honor of a fallen hero

In the dead of night in September 2012, a U.S. Marine Corps outpost in Afghanistan awoke to the sound of gunfire and explosions. Taliban fighters had infiltrated Camp Bastion and were destroying high-value AV-8B Harrier Jump Jets sitting on the tarmac. The squadron commander of Marine Attack Squadron 211, deployed to Bastion in support of ground operations in Afghanistan, ran towards the sounds of chaos with only a pistol, organizing Marines to repel the attack before he was fatally wounded.

Six years later, that commander's legacy was honored when a Marine Corps F-35B Lightning II from VFMA-211 carried out the first U.S. F-35 combat strike ever against a fixed Taliban target in Afghanistasn with his name inscribed on the fuselage.


More at the jump
https://www.businessinsider.com/marine- ... ?r=UK&IR=T

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 00:57
by weasel1962
Looks like a combat sortie of more than 300nm combat radius.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 01:39
by squirrelshoes
Yep, AV-8B isn't flying a combat mission from amphib to Afghanistan without coordinating a refuel via USAF or assets from larger carrier.

F-35B puts a significant southern part of the country within sortie distance.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 08:19
by spazsinbad
BrakeDaFence - I luv 'em dearly but I don't think they should write about aviation - sometimes one just has to ROFL a lot.
F-35’s First Combat Strike Won’t End Debate
27 Sep 2018 Sydney J. Freedberg Jr.

"...the F-35B used today appears to have had some kind of pod or extra fuel tank hanging from its belly, breaking its clean radar-deflecting lines and compromising stealth...."

Graphic: https://breakingdefense.com/wp-content/ ... 0aed22.png

Source: https://breakingdefense.com/2018/09/f-3 ... nd-debate/

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 09:38
by marsavian
The Israelis are using them against SAM protected sites as intended so they are just wrongly repeating the same decades old tripe even linking to Sprey. Who cares what these idiots think, the proof is in the pudding of new overwhelming air superiority being established far and wide with its introduction.

Image

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 09:57
by weasel1962
Syria and Afghanistan aren't exactly the kinds of test that would confirm "air superiority". There are other earlier gen aircraft operating in those theaters in the same effect. imho, the current F-35 use is merely exactly what the original design was intended to do. Deliver munitions on designated targets.

What may differentiate this mission is that its from an LHD in the Indian Ocean. The question is whether AV-8s used to do this? I always thought AV-8s would have to be deployed to land base due to range constraints.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 11:43
by sferrin
weasel1962 wrote:Syria and Afghanistan aren't exactly the kinds of test that would confirm "air superiority".


Syria has Su-35s and S-400s. They might be operated by Russians but they're there.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 12:00
by hythelday
sferrin wrote:
weasel1962 wrote:Syria and Afghanistan aren't exactly the kinds of test that would confirm "air superiority".


Syria has Su-35s and S-400s. They might be operated by Russians but they're there.


Russian SAMs and aircraft in Syria aren't actively opposing coalition aircraft there, let alone Afghanistan - the only real challenge is sticking to EMCON plan so as not give away too much. I believe weasel meant that only after F-35s conduct OCA/DEAD against at least some sort of credible ADS we can throw around words like "test" and "combat proven".

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 13:14
by sferrin
hythelday wrote:
sferrin wrote:
weasel1962 wrote:Syria and Afghanistan aren't exactly the kinds of test that would confirm "air superiority".


Syria has Su-35s and S-400s. They might be operated by Russians but they're there.


Russian SAMs and aircraft in Syria aren't actively opposing coalition aircraft there, let alone Afghanistan - the only real challenge is sticking to EMCON plan so as not give away too much. I believe weasel meant that only after F-35s conduct OCA/DEAD against at least some sort of credible ADS we can throw around words like "test" and "combat proven".


Dassault trotted out "combat proven" the first time a Rafale dropped a bomb on a camel in Afghanistan.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 13:17
by marsavian
The Syrians have S-200 and soon S-300. It's a non permissive environment.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 13:41
by hythelday
sferrin wrote:
Dassault trotted out "combat proven" the first time a Rafale dropped a bomb on a camel in Afghanistan.


And everyone on this forum made fun of them, much like Gripen's recce flights over Lybia.

marsavian wrote:The Syrians have S-200 and soon S-300. It's a non permissive environment.


Syrians aren't shooting at American jets either (also see weasel's original post about 4th gens doing the same). Israelis probably flew over Syria already, maybe even expended some ordnance, but they aren't keen on telling about it.

I am not trying to incite a argument or detract anything from Marines who made this all happen, but I prefer to be "technically correct" in details. So far US F-35 did not fly a high-end mission that it was designed to outperform 4th gens in. Yet.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 13:46
by sferrin
hythelday wrote:
sferrin wrote:
Dassault trotted out "combat proven" the first time a Rafale dropped a bomb on a camel in Afghanistan.


And everyone on this forum made fun of them, much like Gripen's recce flights over Lybia.


Myself included. IMO it's more PR than anything. That said, the S-400s and Su-35s in Syria can't be ignored.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 14:18
by ricnunes
hythelday wrote:
sferrin wrote:
Dassault trotted out "combat proven" the first time a Rafale dropped a bomb on a camel in Afghanistan.


And everyone on this forum made fun of them, much like Gripen's recce flights over Lybia.


Believe me that "everyone on this forum" are the "vast minority" regarding the (civilian) people discussing these matters over the web (and not only).

This being said, here I agree with sferrin's posts namely that's a bit of a "ridiculous double standards" that when a Rafale bombed "a camel" for the first time in Afghanistan and when it attacked conventional targets over Libya over a friendly/permissive territory (remember Benghazi was the bastion and occupied by Anti-Gaddafi forces at that time) "everyone" on the vast majority of other sites/forums claimed to the four winds that the Rafale was fully proven in combat while at the same time the F-35B performed a raid/attack in Afghanistan from a LHD stationed on the Indian Sea (something that apparently the AV-8B isn't capable of) and Israeli forces used their F-35A against a force (Syrians) much, much better equipped than the Libyans but at the same time this "doesn't prove" that the F-35 is combat proven.
Again double standards IMO...

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 14:44
by quicksilver
I’m a little slow on the uptake this morning. Who, specifically, in the USG is claiming F-35 now “combat proven.”

The only remarks I’ve seen from the USG are that the jet was used on a combat strike in support of ground activity in Afghanistan.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 16:10
by steve2267
[quote="hythelday"
I am not trying to incite a argument or detract anything from Marines who made this all happen, but I prefer to be "technically correct" in details. So far US F-35 did not fly a high-end mission that it was designed to outperform 4th gens in. Yet.[/quote]

Red Flag 17-1, and other flags?

Being "technically correct", these exercises were NOT combat. On the other hand, all the quotes I have ever read from combat pilots who had flown in a Red Flag and also actual combat has, to a man, stated that the "combat was easier than Red Flag."

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 16:47
by mixelflick
This was a logical combat debut for the F-35, not unlike the F-117's debut in Panama...

While it didn't demonstrate it could survive in an anti-access/area denial environment, it did show some of its merits..

1.) Flew a greater distance than the AV-8B could, striking targets the Harrier couldn't
2.) Showed STOVL/navigation and primary air to ground weapons capability
3.) Demonstrated the ability to carry (if not use) the gun. We don't really know, but it's doubtful

In any case, I'm betting if you asked the Taliban who got bombed, they'd tell you it was a pretty effective weapon. I predict that in much the same way the F-117 was successful in Iraq, so too will the F-35 be in a future war. In fact, you could make the case it's already done that in Syria. Israeli F-35's aren't exactly welcomed over Syria, and we know they've been used to bomb targets there.

Much respect for the Marines who pulled this off. It was a terrific accomplishment IMO...

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 21:55
by quicksilver
"1.) Flew a greater distance than the AV-8B could, striking targets the Harrier couldn't"

Interesting. Do you have a source for this claim?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2018, 23:39
by SpudmanWP
Well, the distance part is easy as the F-35B's combat radius is far beyond a Harrier's.

As far as the "striking targets the Harrier couldn't" part goes, it's easy to see that the F-35 will be able to see far more targets and in greater detail than the Harrier could. Can the Harrier carry a 2k smart bomb? Certainly not SDBs.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2018, 02:00
by awsome
In any case, I'm betting if you asked the Taliban who got bombed, they'd tell you it was a pretty effective weapon. I predict that in much the same way the F-117 was successful in Iraq, so too will the F-35 be in a future war. In fact, you could make the case it's already done that in Syria. Israeli F-35's aren't exactly welcomed over Syria, and we know they've been used to bomb targets there.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2018, 03:56
by quicksilver
SpudmanWP wrote:Well, the distance part is easy as the F-35B's combat radius is far beyond a Harrier's.

As far as the "striking targets the Harrier couldn't" part goes, it's easy to see that the F-35 will be able to see far more targets and in greater detail than the Harrier could. Can the Harrier carry a 2k smart bomb? Certainly not SDBs.


Oh c'mon. Do you think I just fell off the turnip truck? We're talking about what F-35B DID do on these sorties, not what the jets CAN do, or WILL do sometime in the future. In 2001, Harriers flew 4-6 hour night sorties into Afghanistan from ships in the Arabian Sea -- in 2001. The Litening T-Pod on Harrier is a phenomenal piece of kit that years ago exceeded what EOTS does today; it's as good as any T-pod in the world right now. Harrier carries the same GBUs F-35B is carrying. Did the F-35B carry a 2K weapon on these sorties? (No.) Is it cleared for such weapons at this point. (No.) And why bring up SDB? F-35B does not carry that either.

Is the Harrier an F-35? Not hardly, but these sorties didnt prove anything relative to what a Harrier might or might not have done (as the poster suggested).

:roll:

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2018, 12:24
by mixelflick
quicksilver wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:Well, the distance part is easy as the F-35B's combat radius is far beyond a Harrier's.

As far as the "striking targets the Harrier couldn't" part goes, it's easy to see that the F-35 will be able to see far more targets and in greater detail than the Harrier could. Can the Harrier carry a 2k smart bomb? Certainly not SDBs.


Oh c'mon. Do you think I just fell off the turnip truck? We're talking about what F-35B DID do on these sorties, not what the jets CAN do, or WILL do sometime in the future. In 2001, Harriers flew 4-6 hour night sorties into Afghanistan from ships in the Arabian Sea -- in 2001. The Litening T-Pod on Harrier is a phenomenal piece of kit that years ago exceeded what EOTS does today; it's as good as any T-pod in the world right now. Harrier carries the same GBUs F-35B is carrying. Did the F-35B carry a 2K weapon on these sorties? (No.) Is it cleared for such weapons at this point. (No.) And why bring up SDB? F-35B does not carry that either.

Is the Harrier an F-35? Not hardly, but these sorties didnt prove anything relative to what a Harrier might or might not have done (as the poster suggested).

:roll:


You know, you're right - I assumed the range thing.

Having said that, it's obvious based on internal fuel/weapons load the F-35 can operate at ranges the Harrier can't. I suppose we can wait around for a combat sortie that makes it "official", but then again people will try and poke holes in anything the F-35 accomplishes. Fact of the matter is the US now has a combat capable 5th gen aircraft flying from the land and sea. It's capabilities are immense vs. prior generation aircraft, and we're producing nearly 100 a year right now, with more on the way AND the price is dropping toward its $80 million/aircraft target.

Russia can't do this. China may be able to but the J-31 is a LONG way off, and the whole world is finding out fielding 5th gen aircraft isn't easy (nor inexpensive). This isn't the debacle that was the Admiral Kustenov/Syria deployment. Far from it, and it was a steppingstone to bigger and better things for the F-35B. Speaking of which, F-35B's will be flying soon from the QE2, along with F-35's from many partner nations. No other country has 5th gens proliferating around the world, along with the price dropping and ever more capability as new blocks are released.

There is every reason to believe that the aircraft will get even better, at which point F-35 haters will have to think of something new to bash..

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2018, 13:26
by hythelday
I have not read any news that said F-35B flights are suspended due to Beaufort crash - surely if some technical malfunction was to be suspected this would have been done?

What I am trying to get at is that VMFA-211 deployment proceeds as scheduled?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2018, 14:07
by weasel1962
My guess is those Harrier ops in 2001 are likely to be done lugging 300 gal tanks. That would validate the whole point of the F-35B. If the F-35B can't do what the Harrier does (and more), what would have been the point of buying the Bs?

All planes crash. That's the whole purpose of attrition reserves. Its easy to forget that the plane has been flying around for more than a decade already. 501 would have been flying the Bs from older lots which would probably have more issues than those going to the combat sqns.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2018, 17:11
by ricnunes
awsome wrote: This is what I love about you guys... so many feelings that get hurt if the home team is not the best. I guess troll is better than the usual accusation of spying.


Really, I'm still struggling to understand your points here. Honestly I didn't understand a bit of what you mean with any of your posts, apart from them being some sort of a weird and pointless criticism to the F-35.
At least many of others who criticized the F-35 here in the past came up with concrete points, despite the vast majority of them being wrong but at least they criticized something in concrete. But you on the contrary, only make some unsubstantial criticism and that I'm afraid puts you in the "Troll" realm.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2018, 17:14
by SpudmanWP
quicksilver wrote:Oh c'mon. Do you think I just fell off the turnip truck? We're talking about what F-35B DID do on these sorties, not what the jets CAN do, or WILL do sometime in the future.:

"Sensors" is not just EOTS, but also SAR, EODAS, ESM, and datalinked info from other F-35s. Combine that with much better target ID techniques, HMDS, and better cockpit displays gives the F-35 the clear advantage.

Besides, I was just surmising as the mission details on range and target prosecution are classified.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2018, 17:17
by marsavian
I think the fact it's the first ever crash in all these years of development is making more news than the actual crash. It was probably a not well known fact before.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2018, 17:58
by awsome
ricnunes wrote:
awsome wrote: This is what I love about you guys... so many feelings that get hurt if the home team is not the best. I guess troll is better than the usual accusation of spying.


Really, I'm still struggling to understand your points here. Honestly I didn't understand a bit of what you mean with any of your posts, apart from them being some sort of a weird and pointless criticism to the F-35.
At least many of others who criticized the F-35 here in the past came up with concrete points, despite the vast majority of them being wrong but at least they criticized something in concrete. But you on the contrary, only make some unsubstantial criticism and that I'm afraid puts you in the "Troll" realm.


I am not pro F-35 and I am not anti F-35. It does however greatly amuse me how the community here is completely unwilling to admit the F-22 and F-35 may just possibly not be invincible. Could it be possible that after hundreds of strikes in Syria the Syrian air defenses got in a lucky shot and damaged the "bird strike" F-35?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2018, 18:54
by element1loop
awsome wrote: ... It does however greatly amuse me how the community here is completely unwilling to admit the F-22 and F-35 may just possibly not be invincible. Could it be possible that after hundreds of strikes in Syria the Syrian air defenses got in a lucky shot and damaged the "bird strike" F-35?


Why on Earth would we need to ADMIT to anyone that the F-22A and F-35 are not invincible? :doh: :mrgreen: The F-15 was rather invincible for decades. So given what these jets are, it's not at all unreasonable to regard them as superior in every way to anything else, because they actually are. :doh: :mrgreen:

You aren't here for 'balance', who do you think you're kidding? You're here to gloat about a lost jet, and to muck-rake about 'exceptionalism', and other petty nonsense, while avoiding a conversation where facts and logic are involved, because if you got into one of those you'd get smashed.

So run along like a good little troll and come back when you have something else to get all petty and pointless about.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2018, 18:57
by hythelday
Hey awesome, why don't you admit that RuAF Su-30SM that ate a bird and crashed into the Med recently was actually shot down by F-35 during one of those "dogfights" the Russians keep having with USAF over Syria? Check-mate haters, Flanker suxx and F-35 is invincible :doh:

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2018, 20:29
by XanderCrews
awsome wrote:
mixelflick wrote:
awsome wrote:In any case, I'm betting if you asked the Taliban who got bombed, they'd tell you it was a pretty effective weapon. I predict that in much the same way the F-117 was successful in Iraq, so too will the F-35 be in a future war. In fact, you could make the case it's already done that in Syria. Israeli F-35's aren't exactly welcomed over Syria, and we know they've been used to bomb targets there.

Yes the same F-35 that was put out of action by an old S-20.... er I mean bird strike...


Troll...

Nothing more, nothing less. You'll be ignored here. That is all..



This is what I love about you guys... so many feelings that get hurt if the home team is not the best. I guess troll is better than the usual accusation of spying.



But you are trolling. Youre presenting things without evidence specifically to provoke, and then when people are provoked using it to call them out on based on the forum in use.

youre not even being subtle about it.

Youre welcome to post alternative views, and I welcome them in fact. But thats not what youre doing and you know that as well.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2018, 20:31
by XanderCrews
hythelday wrote:I have not read any news that said F-35B flights are suspended due to Beaufort crash - surely if some technical malfunction was to be suspected this would have been done?

What I am trying to get at is that VMFA-211 deployment proceeds as scheduled?



it depends.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2018, 21:01
by hythelday
Dealing with trolls 101: report & ignore

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 30 Sep 2018, 00:44
by wrightwing
awsome wrote:In any case, I'm betting if you asked the Taliban who got bombed, they'd tell you it was a pretty effective weapon. I predict that in much the same way the F-117 was successful in Iraq, so too will the F-35 be in a future war. In fact, you could make the case it's already done that in Syria. Israeli F-35's aren't exactly welcomed over Syria, and we know they've been used to bomb targets there.

Yes the same F-35 that was put out of action by an old S-20.... er I mean bird strike...

No F-35s have been put out of action by SAMs. The damage from the birdstrike was repaired, and the plane is back in service.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 30 Sep 2018, 14:16
by mixelflick
awsome wrote:
ricnunes wrote:
awsome wrote: This is what I love about you guys... so many feelings that get hurt if the home team is not the best. I guess troll is better than the usual accusation of spying.


Really, I'm still struggling to understand your points here. Honestly I didn't understand a bit of what you mean with any of your posts, apart from them being some sort of a weird and pointless criticism to the F-35.
At least many of others who criticized the F-35 here in the past came up with concrete points, despite the vast majority of them being wrong but at least they criticized something in concrete. But you on the contrary, only make some unsubstantial criticism and that I'm afraid puts you in the "Troll" realm.



I am not pro F-35 and I am not anti F-35. It does however greatly amuse me how the community here is completely unwilling to admit the F-22 and F-35 may just possibly not be invincible. Could it be possible that after hundreds of strikes in Syria the Syrian air defenses got in a lucky shot and damaged the "bird strike" F-35? Not to the F-16.net crowd...


Curious. Do you have a source for your claim the F-35 was hit by a "lucky shot" SAM?

You may not be trolling, but it sure comes off that way. Nobody here thinks the F-22 or 35 are "invincible". The thing is, our aircraft have historically performed so well that well, that's the benchmark. Take the F-15 for example; 104-0 air to air combat record. So you see, we have exceptionally high expectations.

That applies to the other side too though. For whenever we do have an aircraft shot down (I.e. F-117 over Serbia), people start screaming stealth doesn't work. The fact is it does, and the loss of ONE aircraft in how many combat sorties (thousands)? is a testament to this. So you see, we have ridiculously high expectations of our aircraft (and by extension, their pilots).

Otherwise we use objective measures of our aircraft's capabilities to measure them vs. adversaries. It's not enough to come on here and scream the SU-57 is superior to its westerns counterparts (F-22 and 35). You need hard data, and a little common sense. Does it make sense to you that the Russian's first stab at stealth (on a shoestring budget) is going to be comparable to those aircraft? Of course not.

Why then would anyone believe less capable aircraft (the SU-30SM/35) are superior to the F-22 and 35? It just doesn't add up, and the combat record of Russian birds vs. their western equivalents speaks volumes. Post Vietnam, you hold one air to air victory over an American aircraft. One. Iraqi Mig-25 shot down Speicher's F/A-18C first night of DS.

Otherwise Mig-21's, 23's, 25's and 29's have all fallen to F-14's, 15's, 16's and 18's. And given the F-22 and 35 are far more capable aircraft than their teen series counterparts, the likelihood of this trend continuing is shall we say, likely.

BACK ON POINT: The fact the F-35 is flying combat missions in the ME (Israel), combat missions in Afghanistan (USMC) and USAF F-35's deployed in Asia is quite telling. We have not one, but two 5th gen birds in service - with precisely none in Russia and a few J-20's in China. Every day that ticks by is another day the F-35 matures, and another rolls off the assembly line. While it may not be invincible, it's real. It's flying combat missions today and there are more on the way.

Not too shabby for a program that was put on probation back in 2010...

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 30 Sep 2018, 17:20
by mk82
awsome wrote:
Curious. Do you have a source for your claim the F-35 was hit by a "lucky shot" SAM?

You may not be trolling, but it sure comes off that way. Nobody here thinks the F-22 or 35 are "invincible". The thing is, our aircraft have historically performed so well that well, that's the benchmark. Take the F-15 for example; 104-0 air to air combat record. So you see, we have exceptionally high expectations


/www.veteranstoday.com/2017/10/18/is-israel-hiding-that-its-f-35-warplane-was-hit-by-syrian-s-200-missile/
At the time there was some noise about an incident covered mostly by outlets like debkafile, RT and south front. Of course the Israelis denied it but you expect they would. Is it speculation? Yes, but is it possible? Not according to the F-16.net community.
No one should argue that Americas stealth platforms are not good and they definitely have a head start and better funding. But somehow the atmosphere here is that somehow they are invincible. Since this alleged incident reports always seem to be of Israels strikes being carried out by teen series fighters. Maybe something did happen and no one wants to risk losing an F-35 in Syrian airspace.
As far as my own attitudes I find myself wishing for America to get a bloody nose. Why? Because I am a Ruusian? No my heritage is English and I have until recently always been very pro US and pro Israel. But absolute power corrupts absolutely and Americas conduct since the fall of the Soviet Union has been shameful and at times laughable. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQKhLEzKxNU and now this http://www.rt.com/usa/439967-us-navy-bl ... ia-energy/


Lol! Seriously.....that is your source!!?? May as well be pro Russki propaganda toilet paper trolololol.

The Israelis have not hidden anything!! They have clearly stated that the damaged F35I was repaired and put back into operational service BLACK AND WHITE. Hell, if you want to, you could check the serial numbers of all F35Is or count the numbers of operational F35Is operating from Nevatim Air Base through some mind numbing detective work from OSINT sources. Be my guest. And guess what...it will show that all F35Is in the Israeli Air Force are operational.

Funny that the Israeli Air Force did actually use their F35Is earlier this year to strike targets in Syria despite the S200 “boogie man” :roll: (didn’t you get Major General Amikam Norkin’s memo....obviously not). Funny that a S200....a freaking huge missile.......only damaged the F35....damn!!!! That is actually high praise.....the F35 is pretty tough!!!! Good job (not so)Awsome. High five!!

Oh wait!! Perhaps that Syrian S200 isn’t all that great either. It is good at blasting friendly Russian Coot out of the sky I give you that!

Thanks for revealing your political bias. Your Canadian is as convincing as a Stolichnaya factory in Chelyabinsk.

As many posters pointed out before....troll harder. Don’t let facts get in the way.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 30 Sep 2018, 20:40
by quicksilver
SpudmanWP wrote:
quicksilver wrote:Oh c'mon. Do you think I just fell off the turnip truck? We're talking about what F-35B DID do on these sorties, not what the jets CAN do, or WILL do sometime in the future.:

"Sensors" is not just EOTS, but also SAR, EODAS, ESM, and datalinked info from other F-35s. Combine that with much better target ID techniques, HMDS, and better cockpit displays gives the F-35 the clear advantage.

Besides, I was just surmising as the mission details on range and target prosecution are classified.


"Surmising..." Rectal extrapolation; got it.

The poster claimed F-35 hit targets that Harrier could neither range nor discern. From what experience or reference did he derive that claim? He has remained silent. You seem to have picked up the ball, but similarly ignore the fundamental question. What did F-35 do that a Harrier could not have similarly performed. Tell us. We wait with bated breath...

Of course, the real issue is that some/many continue to reference Harrier as some kind of comparative baseline for F-35B performance or capability, which is dreadful and completely ignorant of 1) how good Harrier is at the stuff that US forces have been doing for the last 15+ years; and, 2) how intergalactically better F-35B is at so many other things.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 30 Sep 2018, 21:46
by sferrin
quicksilver wrote:some/many continue to reference Harrier as some kind of comparative baseline for F-35B performance or capability,


Why wouldn't it be? The F-35B is replacing the Harrier, it's only natural to compare the two. Nobody is saying the Harrier is a piece of $hit.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 30 Sep 2018, 23:52
by knowan
mk82 wrote:Lol! Seriously.....that is your source!!?? May as well be pro Russki propaganda toilet paper trolololol.


veteranstoday is literally a pro-Russian propaganda outlet. Zero credibility.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 00:44
by XanderCrews
awsome wrote:Curious. Do you have a source for your claim the F-35 was hit by a "lucky shot" SAM?

You may not be trolling, but it sure comes off that way. Nobody here thinks the F-22 or 35 are "invincible". The thing is, our aircraft have historically performed so well that well, that's the benchmark. Take the F-15 for example; 104-0 air to air combat record. So you see, we have exceptionally high expectations



/www.veteranstoday.com/2017/10/18/is-israel-hiding-that-its-f-35-warplane-was-hit-by-syrian-s-200-missile/
At the time there was some noise about an incident covered mostly by outlets like debkafile, RT and south front. Of course the Israelis denied it but you expect they would. Is it speculation? Yes, but is it possible? Not according to the F-16.net community.
No one should argue that Americas stealth platforms are not good and they definitely have a head start and better funding. But somehow the atmosphere here is that somehow they are invincible. Since this alleged incident reports always seem to be of Israels strikes being carried out by teen series fighters. Maybe something did happen and no one wants to risk losing an F-35 in Syrian airspace.
As far as my own attitudes I find myself wishing for America to get a bloody nose. Why? Because I am a Ruusian? No my heritage is English and I have until recently always been very pro US and pro Israel. But absolute power corrupts absolutely and Americas conduct since the fall of the Soviet Union has been shameful and at times laughable. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQKhLEzKxNU and now this http://www.rt.com/usa/439967-us-navy-bl ... ia-energy/[/quote]

its not the "F-16.net" community that dismisses whole sale a lot of claims from that region as obvious propaganda. Typical F-16.net denial of a flat earth I tell ya!

I have no problem with no being "invincible" Its war, crap happens.Its the lack of evidence outside of reported rumors and then those rumors parroted by more reports.

one lousy source is as good as 5 or 6.

So we are right back to where we started. He said, She said. and frankly Ive had enough of that this week here in the states.

I want verifiable proof. No is more interested to see some real world F-35 battle damage than myself, and to hear the circumstances surrounding it, especially as I assume a direct targeted hit would be a bit harder to pass off as a "bird strike"



We get it bro, you think F-16.net takes it too far. Thanks. What else do you have other thank playing the man and not the ball?? and if you got nothing else, your message is received, Maybe find something more constructive with your time until something "real" pops up??

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 04:10
by krieger22
To be honest I was expecting the Southfront garbage to be posted, but Veterans Today? Ahahahahahahahaha

(Also, humanity deserves that +7C for still buying that garbage)

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 10:46
by squirrelshoes
quicksilver wrote:"1.) Flew a greater distance than the AV-8B could, striking targets the Harrier couldn't"

Interesting. Do you have a source for this claim?

Well we could go from this via wiki:

The aircraft's internal fuel capacity is 7,500 lb (3,400 kg), up 50 percent compared to its predecessor. Fuel capacity can be carried in hardpoint-compatible external drop tanks, which give the aircraft a maximum ferry range of 2,100 mi (3,300 km) and a combat radius of 300 mi (556 km).[50][67]


If you go on Google Maps and use the "measure distance" feature to examine the crow's flight route from international waters just south of Pakistan to Kandahar Province Afghanistan where this strike took place you come up with about 320 miles, which is outside the stated combat radius of an AV8-B. That's true even if assuming the targeted weapons cache was literally on the southern border and the USS Essex was right on the edge of intl waters at the absolute best position to minimize flight range to the border with Afghanistan.

Could they have refueled Harriers to pull it off? Sure! However I think it's a fair statement that this strike was something an F-35B could pull off, that an AV8-B could not.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 10:51
by weasel1962
That's why the AV-8s would likely have to lug 2 x 300 gal tanks which would add ~4000lbs of fuel.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 11:58
by kimjongnumbaun
awsome wrote:

/www.veteranstoday.com/2017/10/18/is-israel-hiding-that-its-f-35-warplane-was-hit-by-syrian-s-200-missile/
At the time there was some noise about an incident covered mostly by outlets like debkafile, RT and south front. Of course the Israelis denied it but you expect they would. Is it speculation? Yes, but is it possible? Not according to the F-16.net community.
No one should argue that Americas stealth platforms are not good and they definitely have a head start and better funding. But somehow the atmosphere here is that somehow they are invincible. Since this alleged incident reports always seem to be of Israels strikes being carried out by teen series fighters. Maybe something did happen and no one wants to risk losing an F-35 in Syrian airspace.
As far as my own attitudes I find myself wishing for America to get a bloody nose. Why? Because I am a Ruusian? No my heritage is English and I have until recently always been very pro US and pro Israel. But absolute power corrupts absolutely and Americas conduct since the fall of the Soviet Union has been shameful and at times laughable. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQKhLEzKxNU and now this http://www.rt.com/usa/439967-us-navy-bl ... ia-energy/


The S-200 fires missiles that travel at mach 8 and carry a 478lb warhead. If you honestly believe that the F-35 was hit by this and survived to land back in Israel, then it can take a hit better than an M1 Abrams.

So we can believe it was a bird strike, or we can believe that the F-35 is so well armored that no Russian aircraft carries a missile large enough to shoot it down...

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 15:38
by element1loop
'Veteranstoday' and 'RT' are not instruments for raising the standard of a debate, or the quality of 'info'. There's 10, and then there's 11, then there's RT and VT setting, which are like incomprehensible screaming noises about nothing of value. :)

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 16:32
by quicksilver
sferrin wrote:
quicksilver wrote:some/many continue to reference Harrier as some kind of comparative baseline for F-35B performance or capability,


Why wouldn't it be? The F-35B is replacing the Harrier, it's only natural to compare the two. Nobody is saying the Harrier is a piece of $hit.


It is also replacing the F/A-18... So, before we all start waxing rhapsodic about what this "first" represents, we might want to understand it in the context of stuff that has been going on in the skies over Afghanistan (by many aircraft) for roughly 17 years.

The poster claimed that the F-35B -- by flying a strike sortie into Afghanistan -- did something that Harrier could not, i.e. range the target from a ship in the Arabian Sea and discern its location with sufficiency to deliver a PGM with the desired effect. He is demonstrably incorrect.

(https://www.marines.mil/Portals/59/US%2 ... hology.pdf) See page 17.

I dont care if he or anyone else thinks the Harrier is a pos; there might be plenty of reasons for such an opinion. However, one might at least want to inform said opinion with reality.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 16:47
by spazsinbad
What a terrific USMC documented history (haven't read all yet but will) - thanks. USN/USAF can take notes for themselves.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2018, 01:55
by squirrelshoes
weasel1962 wrote:That's why the AV-8s would likely have to lug 2 x 300 gal tanks which would add ~4000lbs of fuel.

The context of the stated 300 mile combat radius for AV-8B was including the fuel tanks.


kimjongnumbaun wrote:The S-200 fires missiles that travel at mach 8 and carry a 478lb warhead. If you honestly believe that the F-35 was hit by this and survived to land back in Israel, then it can take a hit better than an M1 Abrams.

I don't believe an Israeli F-35 was hit by an S-200, but it is entirely possible for an aircraft to be damaged by an S-200 and return to base since we're not talking about a kinetic strike. It's a proximity fuse blast frag so not quite so black and white as did the missile hit or not hit the aircraft more like how close was it when it exploded, which direction were they flying relative to each other, etc. It could explode at a distance such that some fragments hit the target but the majority did not.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2018, 02:53
by weasel1962
squirrelshoes wrote:The context of the stated 300 mile combat radius for AV-8B was including the fuel tanks.


imho, probably can eke out a bit more than that (hi alt, 300kts) but no arguments... add "aerial refuel" somewhere in the context of the Arabian sea-Afghanistan AV-8B ops for good measure which is not required for F-35B ops.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2018, 08:23
by knowan
squirrelshoes wrote:I don't believe an Israeli F-35 was hit by an S-200, but it is entirely possible for an aircraft to be damaged by an S-200 and return to base since we're not talking about a kinetic strike. It's a proximity fuse blast frag so not quite so black and white as did the missile hit or not hit the aircraft more like how close was it when it exploded, which direction were they flying relative to each other, etc. It could explode at a distance such that some fragments hit the target but the majority did not.


S-200 proximity fuse is semi-active in nature, working off illumination reflections produced by the ground based guidance radar.

Against a LO aircraft like the F-35, the problems with such a fuse are obvious.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2018, 09:51
by weasel1962
Took the trouble to read the link provided by quicksilver. Noted that the harrier ops from the Arabian sea were generally 1 way, with time on station before landing at Bagram. Otherwise as mentioned were deployed from bagram.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2018, 10:59
by quicksilver
omg...

It wasn’t one-way with a ground turn. There wasn’t anyone on the ground in-country (apart from the spec ops guys) until the MEU took their stuff and established the FOB. Kandahar, which they started using in December after they established ops there, is not Bagram. The range quote is to give the reader a reference for how far inland they were operating. Look at the map. How did they do it? External tanks and tankers; everybody (except the B-52s) used/uses tanking assets for both range and TOS.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2018, 13:13
by sferrin
quicksilver wrote:
sferrin wrote:
quicksilver wrote:some/many continue to reference Harrier as some kind of comparative baseline for F-35B performance or capability,


Why wouldn't it be? The F-35B is replacing the Harrier, it's only natural to compare the two. Nobody is saying the Harrier is a piece of $hit.


It is also replacing the F/A-18...


In the USMC. The USN is replacing it with the F-35C. In the former case the F/A-18 can't operate from gators like the Harrier and F-35B so it's not really an apples-to-apple comparison.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2018, 13:24
by ricnunes
sferrin wrote:In the USMC. The USN is replacing it with the F-35C. In the former case the F/A-18 can't operate from gators like the Harrier and F-35B so it's not really an apples-to-apple comparison.


And the USMC is also buying the F-35C, right?

Here:
https://www.aviation.marines.mil/Portal ... 20PLAN.pdf

So even the USMC's "direct replacement" for their F/A-18s should be the F-35C (more than the F-35B), no?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2018, 14:03
by sferrin
ricnunes wrote:
sferrin wrote:In the USMC. The USN is replacing it with the F-35C. In the former case the F/A-18 can't operate from gators like the Harrier and F-35B so it's not really an apples-to-apple comparison.


And the USMC is also buying the F-35C, right?

Here:
https://www.aviation.marines.mil/Portal ... 20PLAN.pdf

So even the USMC's "direct replacement" for their F/A-18s should be the F-35C (more than the F-35B), no?


I wasn't sure about the USMC buying F-35Cs and didn't feel like looking it up. :P

https://news.usni.org/2015/01/28/marine ... irst-f-35c

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2018, 14:44
by quicksilver
“...so it's not really an apples-to-apple comparison.”

Which is really the larger point.

First, the F-35 didn’t do anything that a vastly inferior aircraft did 17 years ago. Second, I sure bleeping hope that after the time and effort spent developing and testing it, the F-35B is something more than a Harrier. It is, and so much so that it isn’t a worthy comparison. Therefore, imnsho, people should stop making it.

As it currently stands, the preponderance of the USMC tacair force structure will be replaced by F-35B. F-35C buy numbers currently stand around 65-70ish (am sure someone has a reference but I’m in a coffee shop and don’t want my coffee to cool looking for it).

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2018, 23:58
by firebase99
https://www.f35.com/news/detail/marines ... irst-f-35c

https://news.usni.org/2015/01/28/marine ... irst-f-35c

U.S. Marine Lt. Col. J.T. “Tank” Ryan, Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 501 detachment commander and F-35 pilot, delivered the new F-35C to Strike Fighter Squadron 101, the Navy’s only F-35 fleet replacement squadron. This aircraft is the first of five Marine Corps F-35Cs that will be delivered to VFA-101 on Eglin. ......

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 00:19
by SpudmanWP
s on the ground in AStan

The Aviationist
@TheAviationist
Here's an interesting detail about the first U.S. Marine Corps air strike in Afghanistan last week. The two aircraft involved in the combat mission made a stop at Kandahar AF before returning to USS Essex. In this shot you can see 00 and 01 about to take off from KAF.


Image

https://twitter.com/TheAviationist/stat ... 6238648321

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 03:09
by spazsinbad
firebase99 wrote:https://www.f35.com/news/detail/marines-receive-first-f-35c

https://news.usni.org/2015/01/28/marine ... irst-f-35c

U.S. Marine Lt. Col. J.T. “Tank” Ryan, Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 501 detachment commander and F-35 pilot, delivered the new F-35C to Strike Fighter Squadron 101, the Navy’s only F-35 fleet replacement squadron. This aircraft is the first of five Marine Corps F-35Cs that will be delivered to VFA-101 on Eglin. ......

NOT VERY OLD NEWS eh. :devil: :doh: WHO WANTS TO KNOW HOW MANY F-35Cs will be mangled by GYRENIES? 67

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 03:54
by firebase99
spazsinbad wrote:
firebase99 wrote:https://www.f35.com/news/detail/marines-receive-first-f-35c

https://news.usni.org/2015/01/28/marine ... irst-f-35c

U.S. Marine Lt. Col. J.T. “Tank” Ryan, Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 501 detachment commander and F-35 pilot, delivered the new F-35C to Strike Fighter Squadron 101, the Navy’s only F-35 fleet replacement squadron. This aircraft is the first of five Marine Corps F-35Cs that will be delivered to VFA-101 on Eglin. ......

NOT VERY OLD NEWS eh. :devil: :doh: WHO WANTS TO KNOW HOW MANY F-35Cs will be mangled by GYRENIES? 67


I didnt even know the Marines were getting any C's!! lol.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 04:54
by weasel1962
Back in 2010 when the B was in doubt, the USMC may have had to go only C. As a result an inter-services MOU was agreed for a split of 260 - 80 in terms of the F-35C. Thereafter USMC still went ahead with its original plan of 353-67 split for the B-C buy which created the 13 shortage on the C column. Now that that's been reverted, is it still 67?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 05:57
by spazsinbad
Please. The number is 67. There have been several discussions about this number recently by sundries. Which source do you believe? USMC Aviation Plan would be a good one - at least for me anyways. For you I don't know. It seems this forum is stuck in a time warp for 'dogfighting' and minutiae of every aircraft EXCEPT the F-35. This forum is about the F-35. RAVE. OVER :roll: The 2018 USMC AvPlan on quick viewing does not seem to have F-35B/C numbers however earlier PLANs do have them so I'll have to refer to those. Meanwhile (and it will be reposted to a more appropriate thread later):

https://www.aviation.marines.mil/Portal ... 0FINAL.pdf (11.6Mb) [quote below on page 20 this pdf]

Pardon me - here it is already: viewtopic.php?f=61&t=53762
"F‐35B AND F‐35C LIGHTNING II PLAN ORGANIZATION
The F‐35B and F‐35C will replace F/A‐18, AV‐8B, and EA‐6B. The Marine Corps will procure a total of 420 F‐35s (353 F‐35Bs and 67 F‐35Cs) in the following squadron configurations:

1) 9 Squadrons x 16 F‐35B
2) 5 Squadrons x 10 F‐35B
3) 4 Squadrons x 10 F‐35C
4) 2 Squadrons x 10 F‐35B reserve
5) 2 Squadrons x 25 F‐35B Fleet Readiness Squadron (FRS)…"

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 14:44
by mixelflick
quicksilver wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:
quicksilver wrote:Oh c'mon. Do you think I just fell off the turnip truck? We're talking about what F-35B DID do on these sorties, not what the jets CAN do, or WILL do sometime in the future.:

"Sensors" is not just EOTS, but also SAR, EODAS, ESM, and datalinked info from other F-35s. Combine that with much better target ID techniques, HMDS, and better cockpit displays gives the F-35 the clear advantage.

Besides, I was just surmising as the mission details on range and target prosecution are classified.


"Surmising..." Rectal extrapolation; got it.

The poster claimed F-35 hit targets that Harrier could neither range nor discern. From what experience or reference did he derive that claim? He has remained silent. You seem to have picked up the ball, but similarly ignore the fundamental question. What did F-35 do that a Harrier could not have similarly performed. Tell us. We wait with bated breath...

Of course, the real issue is that some/many continue to reference Harrier as some kind of comparative baseline for F-35B performance or capability, which is dreadful and completely ignorant of 1) how good Harrier is at the stuff that US forces have been doing for the last 15+ years; and, 2) how intergalactically better F-35B is at so many other things.


I didn't remain silent, I acknowledged your point. Your clear agenda of "wishing the US gets a bloody nose" is showing. You're not Russian? So what. Nobody cares. It must really suck watching your hero's field 4th gen jets while our 5th gens roll off the assembly line.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 15:03
by quicksilver
“I didn't remain silent, I acknowledged your point.”

You did. I see that I just missed it the first time around. Gomenasai.

“Your clear agenda of "wishing the US gets a bloody nose" is showing.”

Thank-you; I needed some comic relief this morning. But really, based on what? That’s certainly not what my DD-214 might suggest.

:cool:

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 15:24
by SpudmanWP
weasel1962 wrote:Back in 2010 when the B was in doubt, the USMC may have had to go only C.

That was not how it happened. The USMC only wanted to go with the F-35B and the USN forced them to take some Cs as the USN refused to let the USMC use the F-35B on CVNs.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 15:24
by quicksilver
SpudmanWP wrote:s on the ground in AStan

The Aviationist
@TheAviationist
Here's an interesting detail about the first U.S. Marine Corps air strike in Afghanistan last week. The two aircraft involved in the combat mission made a stop at Kandahar AF before returning to USS Essex. In this shot you can see 00 and 01 about to take off from KAF.


Image

https://twitter.com/TheAviationist/stat ... 6238648321


Excellent find...virtually unreported.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 18:48
by mixelflick
quicksilver wrote:“I didn't remain silent, I acknowledged your point.”

You did. I see that I just missed it the first time around. Gomenasai.

“Your clear agenda of "wishing the US gets a bloody nose" is showing.”

Thank-you; I needed some comic relief this morning. But really, based on what? That’s certainly not what my DD-214 might suggest.

:cool:


You're right, it was "awesome", not you. I apologize..

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 18:58
by sferrin
quicksilver wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:s on the ground in AStan

The Aviationist
@TheAviationist
Here's an interesting detail about the first U.S. Marine Corps air strike in Afghanistan last week. The two aircraft involved in the combat mission made a stop at Kandahar AF before returning to USS Essex. In this shot you can see 00 and 01 about to take off from KAF.


Image

https://twitter.com/TheAviationist/stat ... 6238648321


Excellent find...virtually unreported.


The aerostat in the background is interesting as well. JLENS or related? :?:

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 20:02
by ricnunes
quicksilver wrote:As it currently stands, the preponderance of the USMC tacair force structure will be replaced by F-35B. F-35C buy numbers currently stand around 65-70ish (am sure someone has a reference but I’m in a coffee shop and don’t want my coffee to cool looking for it).


I would dare to say that the 67 F-35Cs that the USMC is acquiring (courtesy from spazsinbad) will do way more than the 270-ish F/A-18s that (if I'm not mistaken) the USMC currently operates.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 20:11
by marsavian
So how will that work, do the Marines have to rent a CVN or something ? ;)

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 20:22
by SpudmanWP
IIRC, per Congressional mandate, the USMC has to maintain a fighter wing aboard each CVN.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 21:27
by spazsinbad
SpudmanWP wrote:IIRC, per Congressional mandate, the USMC has to maintain a fighter wing aboard each CVN.

Tru Dat.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 21:47
by spazsinbad
ricnunes wrote:
quicksilver wrote:As it currently stands, the preponderance of the USMC tacair force structure will be replaced by F-35B. F-35C buy numbers currently stand around 65-70ish (am sure someone has a reference but I’m in a coffee shop and don’t want my coffee to cool looking for it).


I would dare to say that the 67 F-35Cs that the USMC is acquiring (courtesy from spazsinbad) will do way more than the 270-ish F/A-18s that (if I'm not mistaken) the USMC currently operates.

TEH Gyrenes say (which may be out of date this day): [from 2018 USMC Aviation Plan page 28]
"...The USMC fleet will have 10 active squadrons and one reserve squadron in 2018."

TEHN on page 32 is a table reproduced below where Hornet Totals in FY 2018 = 179

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 22:03
by quicksilver
The Congress didnt have much to do with it -- the CNO, CMC and SECNAV more so in response to the DPG of the day (also IIRC). There is a substantial history on the matter since roughly 2001 that one can search using "Navy/Marine Corps TACAIR Integration" or just "TACAIR Integration."

When Gordon England was SECNAV, he used the idea (TAI) to reduce DON F-35 procurement objectives from ~1000ish Bs and Cs to the ~680ish DON total that they're at now. It has varied a few +/- from time to time as the services tweaked their procurement outlook.

Here's a fair link -- http://congressionalresearch.com/RS2148 ... r+Congress

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2018, 14:21
by mixelflick
SpudmanWP wrote:IIRC, per Congressional mandate, the USMC has to maintain a fighter wing aboard each CVN.


That seems sort of silly, doesn't it?

If I'm not missing anything, they could have just bought more B's and deployed from smaller helicopter type carriers/forward air strips. Yes, I realize the B costs more than the C but wouldn't buying all B's be cheaper (due to the volume increase) than buying C's as well?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2018, 14:49
by quicksilver
Here's a fair paper on the background dating from 2001.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a420633.pdf

Gordon England memo circa 2004 (iirc) is mostly behind firewalls.

TAI agreement later revised in 2011. Link here -- https://www.navy.mil/Submit/display.asp?story_id=59083

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 05 Oct 2018, 20:41
by ricnunes
spazsinbad wrote:TEHN on page 32 is a table reproduced below where Hornet Totals in FY 2018 = 179


Thanks spaz :thumb:

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 06 Oct 2018, 03:37
by weasel1962
spazsinbad wrote:Please. The number is 67.


No need to get twitchy. There's a very simple reason why I raised this. Pre FY 2018 SAR plan was USAF to procure 1763 As, DoN to procure 680 B+C. The DoN plan was USN 260 C, USMC 340 B, 80 C.

In FY 2018 SAR, the DoN got raised to 693 because of the USMC plan to buy 353 B. If the C remained at 67 C for USMC and 260 C for USN, that means the total should have remained at 680. The 693 figure reflects only 2 possibilities:

(a) Either the USMC C buy goes up by 13 Cs (80+260=340); or
(b) The USN buy goes up by 13 Cs (67+273 =340)

its simple maths. I note your stand that the USMC current plans reflect 67 Cs. That's not what I'm highlighting. The issue I have is that I haven't seen a USN plan that states 273 Cs yet so is it really conclusive that the USMC plan will stick to 67 or revert back to the original 80 (as per the inter-service MOU I mentioned).

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 06 Oct 2018, 04:10
by spazsinbad
Over time this exact number has been queried again & again. Until clarified one may speculate - yet USMC number is 67.

USN don't seem to have published new numbers - does that mean old numbers stand? Personally I don't care but whatever.

BTW USMC 67 F-35Cs has been in their YEARLY AVIATION PLANS since the change was made with no USN objection AFAIK.

This 2013 USMC pub says 63 on numbered page 179 (or physical page 188) :
"...The Marine Corps will acquire 357 STOVL aircraft and 63 CV aircraft for a total of 420 JSFs...." http://www.hqmc.marines.mil/Portals/142 ... 0Final.pdf (11.5Mb)

Then USMC Aviation Plan 2015 has the change to 67 (there are news stories about this change on the net):
“...The Marine Corps will procure a total of 353 F-35Bs & 67 F-35Cs...” [with every plan since being the same]
https://marinecorpsconceptsandprograms. ... 20Plan.pdf (16.1Mb)

Most recent news story found quickly says this:
DOD reveals F-35 multiyear procurement strategy to start in 2021
18 Apr 2018 Garrett Reim

"... In total, the DOD plans to purchase 2,456 F-35s: 1,763 F-35As for the USAF; 353 F-35Bs and 67 F-35Cs for the Marine Corps; and 273 F-35Cs for the USN." [total 340 F-35Cs for USN/USMC combined & 353 Bs + 340 Cs = 693 B/Cs for DoD]

Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... -s-447785/

GOTTA LUV LM PR (must be kindergarten creche for English comprehension as a non-Native Language over there]
"...The Marine Corps currently flies the F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) variant, with plans to purchase 353 STOVL jets and 67 F-35C carrier variant aircraft. The U.S. Marine Corps declared F-35B IOC in July 2015. Together with the Marines, the U.S. Navy will bring 5th Generation capability to the sea with 260 F-35C jets. [they may have meant 280 but anyway number is wrong for USN - NO?] The U.S. Navy plans to declare F-35C IOC in 2018...." https://www.f35.com/global/participation/united-states

Further note that at btm Latest LM F-35 Fast Facts (wot I had not noticed until now) says this:
"...DoN 693 F-35B/Cs [total]…" [WUT!? that total number aligns with the FightGlobular story above 693 total DoD B/Cs] https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a6 ... s10-18.pdf (1.1Mb)

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Program CRS Congressional Research Service
23 Apr 2018 Jeremiah Gertler

"...Marine Corps STOVL Version (F-35B)
The Marine Corps plans to procure 353 F-35Bs, a short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) version of the aircraft....”

...Navy Carrier-Suitable Version (F-35C)
The Navy plans to procure 273 F-35Cs, a carrier-suitable CTOL version of the aircraft, and the Marines will also procure 67 F-35Cs [total 340 F-35Cs for USN/USMC]....” [TOTAL DoD B/Cs = 693]

Source: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL30563.pdf (1.4Mb)

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 06 Oct 2018, 06:49
by weasel1962
The best part about LM fast facts is if you click on the 693 B/C link, it points to here:
https://www.f35.com/global/participation/united-states

which basically is still states 67 for USMC, 260 for USN in terms of Cs.

The CRS is a good spot which would generally have been convincing enough for me if it weren't published a few days after the journos like Janes reported the 273 figures, which came shortly after the SAR. That made me wonder as to the source of the 273 number even though personally I don't think it really material whether the 13 C ends up with USN or USMC.

P.s. the LM fast facts also threw up this ? on numbers. LRIP 1-9 was 266. LRIP 1-10 was 358 and LRIP 1-11 was 499. Most reports indicate lot 10 was 90 F-35s but it appears to be 92.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 06 Oct 2018, 07:29
by spazsinbad
If you read the previous post you will see the LM fast fact link is included in the quotes. I think no matter what is said you will believe what you will believe. The DoN USN seems to keep MuM about what numbers they intend to buy perhaps because it is tied up in some ongoing report about comparing Shornets with F-35Cs. Nice of you to include links to claims.

PDF page from which GIF was made also attached below.

The 04 Apr 2018 F-35 SAR Selected Acquistion Report with the page no. 28 dated btm left as 19 Mar 2018 says this:
"...Quantity Notes
The current estimate for F-35 total procurement quantity increase from 2443 to 2456 has not changed from SAR 2016 to
SAR 2017. This increase was the result of two changes: a USMC variant mixture change between the F-35B and F-35C (13
additional F-35Bs and 13 less F-35Cs), and the Department of Navy (DoN) decision to continue to procure a total of 340 F-
35C aircraft. This results in a net increase of 13 F-35B aircraft. The increase is reflected in both the aircraft and engine subprogram and results in a change from 680 to 693 in the DoN Aircraft Procurement accounts. The USMC validated their requirement through the Marine Corps Requirements Oversight Council (MROC)…." download/file.php?id=27020 (PDF 0.7Mb)

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 06 Oct 2018, 18:23
by SpudmanWP
weasel1962 wrote:Most reports indicate lot 10 was 90 F-35s but it appears to be 92.

This contract announcement from 2017 seems to indicate that two were added.

April 10, 2017 - Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is being awarded $372,918,148 for modification P00019 to the previously awarded low-rate initial production Lot 10 F-35 Lightning II advance acquisition contract (N00019-15-C-0003). This modification provides the procurement of F-35A and F-35B variant aircrafts including deficiency corrections for non-U.S. Department of Defense (non-U.S. DoD) participants. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, Texas (30 percent); El Segundo, California (25 percent); Warton, United Kingdom (20 percent); Orlando, Florida (10 percent); Nashua, New Hampshire (5 percent); Nagoya, Japan (5 percent); and Baltimore, Maryland (5 percent), and is expected to be completed in March 2020. Non-DoD participant funding in the amount of $105,000,000 is being obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity.


https://dod.defense.gov/News/Contracts/ ... e/1147046/

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 08 Oct 2018, 14:49
by spazsinbad
ricnunes wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:TEHN on page 32 is a table reproduced below where Hornet Totals in FY 2018 = 179

Thanks spaz :thumb:

This article quote included here because: numbers of Hornets in use by USN/USMC today.
Hornets need outer-wing 'changes' to support life-extension
08 Oct 2018 Gareth Jennings

"...The USN and USMC currently field 95 F/A-18A, 21 F/A-18B, 370 F/A-18C, and 131 F/A-18D aircraft. Having been upgraded several times since they were introduced in the early 1980s, these legacy Hornets are now being extended beyond their 6,000 flight-hour airframe lives to 10,000 hours to help mitigate delays to the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).

Of these 617 platforms, about 150 Hornets of differing designations have been earmarked for the SLEP with the aim of keeping them in operational service until 2035."

Source: https://www.janes.com/article/83617/hor ... -extension

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2018, 03:35
by Corsair1963
Honestly, odds are good that the USN/USMC will acquire more than todays planned 340 F-35C's. As the NGAD Fighter won't be ready for a good 20 years at least. Yet, the Super Hornet Fleet (even with SELP) will start to run out of flight hours starting around 2030+.

So, my guess is the USN will just continue to purchase additional F-35C's after the orders for the 340 have been filled. This is hardly surprising or even new. As it happens all of the time.....(with the Super Hornet itself being a good example)

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2018, 05:07
by wrightwing
Corsair1963 wrote:Honestly, odds are good that the USN/USMC will acquire more than todays planned 340 F-35C's. As the NGAD Fighter won't be ready for a good 20 years at least. Yet, the Super Hornet Fleet (even with SELP) will start to run out of flight hours starting around 2030+.

So, my guess is the USN will just continue to purchase additional F-35C's after the orders for the 340 have been filled. This is hardly surprising or even new. As it happens all of the time.....(with the Super Hornet itself being a good example)

Super Hornets aren't going to wear out by 2030. They're 9000 hour airframes. The oldest Block 1s didn't enter service till 1999, and Block 2s are about the same age as Raptors (10 or less years old.) F-15s built in the 1980s will be retiring then barring any significant changes in USAF plans. The oldest Super Hornets are still ~10 to 20 years newer than F-15Cs.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2018, 06:13
by blindpilot
wrightwing wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:Honestly, odds are good that the USN/USMC will acquire more than todays planned 340 F-35C's. As the NGAD Fighter won't be ready for a good 20 years at least. Yet, the Super Hornet Fleet (even with SELP) will start to run out of flight hours starting around 2030+.

So, my guess is the USN will just continue to purchase additional F-35C's after the orders for the 340 have been filled. This is hardly surprising or even new. As it happens all of the time.....(with the Super Hornet itself being a good example)

Super Hornets aren't going to wear out by 2030. ....


http://navalaviationnews.navylive.dodli ... er-hornet/
etc. etc. other references ...

Let's start by noting, as forecast, in the second qtr of this year Super Hornets already began to wear out (reached 6000hrs) at 15 years instead of 20 years anticipated. So much for the "aren't going to ..." they already did .... This is due to non-stop combat usage and overuse as "tankers." It was (and still might be again) worsened by constant budgetary sequestration/management.

In the best (rosy predictions by Boeing) case they can cycle 50 a year STARTING IN 2022, with at 18 months 75 aircraft in the inventory constantly offline for the SLAP. Short of major war, that best case will probably only happen in Boeing's dreams. The budget help for this year and next is not guaranteed in the future by Congress or in any USN plans, other than an option to remedy the crisis they have with inventory right now in the current Wings. That crisis is the Super Hornets ARE wearing out even as we discuss it now.

Assuming the current budget trajectory continues, in a couple years ... not much after 2022, if not sooner ... there will still be an ongoing choice of cost benefit for 3000 more hours, plus Blk III upgrade of Super Hornets vs just buying F-35Cs. At some point likely before 2030 that balance will shift to the F-35Cs.

Keep in mind that while we ponder such things, another Super Hornet just "wore out" (reached 6,000 hours). So I'm not sure where you got "they won't until 2030" from.

Just Saying,
BP

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2018, 09:14
by weasel1962
1st 4 super hornet SLEP already started in April 2018 with the first contract to be completed in April 2020.

https://dod.defense.gov/News/Contracts/ ... e/1454026/

Boeing is saying that the initial SH will take ~18 months to complete the SLEP but they are working to cut this down to 12.

Year 2022 is when SLEP will incorporate upgrade from blk II to blk III

https://news.usni.org/2018/04/06/first- ... on-program

USN only needs to equip 40 strike fighter squadrons (@12 SH each) and over 550 super hornets have been ordered. As many have mentioned, only maybe 24 needs to equip 6 CVNs that can deploy. And F-35Cs are starting to equip a significant proportion of those strike fighter squadrons.

I think they have this covered. Hope this helps.

P.s. forgot to mention MQ-25s that will reduce SH flight hours as well.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2018, 16:49
by blindpilot
weasel1962 wrote:1st 4 super hornet SLEP already started in April 2018 with the first contract to be completed in April 2020.
...
I think they have this covered. Hope this helps.


I agree, as per MQ-25, SLEP and BLK II/III SLAP the USN is developing an option to deal with the fighter shortage issues that are very real right now (even the 10,000 hr legacy Hornet SLEP). But your rosy picture covers a whole bunch of warts.

1. That they even discuss 6 vs 10 Wings clearly shows what the problem is. They are struggling (right now) trying to muster the squadrons for the Carriers deployed/available. They (right now) steal aircraft from other squadrons to get the 40-48 ac to deploy.

2. It never ceases to amaze me that folks can't understand that you actually need to have reserve/training squadrons flying significant hours. That's where they are stealing aircraft. You can't do it with just 24*12 300 aircraft just on the carriers. The pilots will not get flying time for currency when you steal their good aircraft and leave them all the hangar queens (broken and salvaged airframes) back at home.

3. Congress has directed (even when they don't provide the money for it) that the USN WILL have 9/10 wings [edit]. The ten is not a "we don't have to do it/worry". It's mandated. AND ... you have to have training squadrons AND reserve squadrons for "borrowing" (not stealing) aircraft.

4. Whatever Trump and Congress have done this year and next, the spectre of sequestration that created the mess has not gone away. Before we hit the "it'll be okay" 2022 window, we may well be in a cut 10% off the top budget situation again. Planes will not get parts/maintenance. SLEPs will not get paid for, and new orders will get cut. Hopefully that can be avoided, but if you don't think the monster is lurking at the door, you don't know how politics/budgets work in the US.

That's why we ended up with one type (SH) trying to do everythings (refueling, ASuW etc.) We had to maximize the few purchase dollars available. Keeping 2-4 types required more dollars. If that happens again, buying as many F-35Cs as the dollars allow will quickly be the answer just as it was with SH over legacy SLEP. And without a SLEP/SLAP, buying C's will be the continually more attractive option heading to 2030.

MHO FWIW,
BP

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2018, 20:35
by quicksilver
blindpilot wrote:
I agree, as per MQ-25, SLEP and BLK II/III SLAP the USN is developing an option to deal with the fighter shortage issues that are very real right now (even the 10,000 hr legacy Hornet SLEP). But your rosy picture covers a whole bunch of warts.

1. That they even discuss 6 vs 10 Wings clearly shows what the problem is. They are struggling (right now) trying to muster the squadrons for the Carriers deployed/available. They (right now) steal aircraft from other squadrons to get the 40-48 ac to deploy.

2. It never ceases to amaze me that folks can't understand that you actually need to have reserve/training squadrons flying significant hours. That's where they are stealing aircraft. You can't do it with just 24*12 300 aircraft just on the carriers. The pilots will not get flying time for currency when you steal their good aircraft and leave them all the hangar queens (broken and salvaged airframes) back at home.

3. Congress has directed (even when they don't provide the money for it) that the USN WILL have 9/10 squadrons. The ten is not a "we don't have to do it/worry". It's mandated. AND ... you have to have training squadrons AND reserve squadrons for "borrowing" (not stealing) aircraft.

4. Whatever Trump and Congress have done this year and next, the spectre of sequestration that created the mess has not gone away. Before we hit the "it'll be okay" 2022 window, we may well be in a cut 10% off the top budget situation again. Planes will not get parts/maintenance. SLEPs will not get paid for, and new orders will get cut. Hopefully that can be avoided, but if you don't think the monster is lurking at the door, you don't know how politics/budgets work in the US.

That's why we ended up with one type (SH) trying to do everythings (refueling, ASuW etc.) We had to maximize the few purchase dollars available. Keeping 2-4 types required more dollars. If that happens again, buying as many F-35Cs as the dollars allow will quickly be the answer just as it was with SH over legacy SLEP. And without a SLEP/SLAP, buying C's will be the continually more attractive option heading to 2030.

MHO FWIW,
BP


x2

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 01:03
by weasel1962
SH MC rates was under 50%. SH started out 2018 with 246 (out of 546) not even enough for 24 sqns. Now at least, its 270. Its a bunch of warts, no doubt. Airframe life is just 1 of the issues but they are doing something about it. DLA did a 5 year $427m spares contract in May just to start bringing the down fleet back up.

Now Mattis is looking to get USAF MC rates up to 80%.
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/10 ... -one-year/

That's a clear sign of where the extra $ being pumped into defense is going. Not just new builds.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 01:43
by Corsair1963
wrightwing wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:Honestly, odds are good that the USN/USMC will acquire more than todays planned 340 F-35C's. As the NGAD Fighter won't be ready for a good 20 years at least. Yet, the Super Hornet Fleet (even with SELP) will start to run out of flight hours starting around 2030+.

So, my guess is the USN will just continue to purchase additional F-35C's after the orders for the 340 have been filled. This is hardly surprising or even new. As it happens all of the time.....(with the Super Hornet itself being a good example)

Super Hornets aren't going to wear out by 2030. They're 9000 hour airframes. The oldest Block 1s didn't enter service till 1999, and Block 2s are about the same age as Raptors (10 or less years old.) F-15s built in the 1980s will be retiring then barring any significant changes in USAF plans. The oldest Super Hornets are still ~10 to 20 years newer than F-15Cs.


HOW MANY YEARS DID IT TAKE TO GET TO 6,000 HRS???

Quote: The US Navy plans to modify 45 more Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets in the next two years to increase the aircraft’s service life and capabilities, the US Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) announced on 27 March.

The potential contract will cover modifications to up to 15 aircraft in fiscal year 2019 and a maximum of 30 aircraft in FY2020, NAVAIR says. The modifications are designed to extend the fighter’s airframe life from 6,000-9,000h, adding up to 10 years of service.

Boeing will also convert existing Block II Super Hornets to a new Block III configuration starting in the early 2020s. This conversion will include adding an enhanced network capability, a longer range thanks to internal conformal fuel tanks, an advanced cockpit system, reduced radar signature and an enhanced communication system. Such updates are designed to keep the type effective in combat until at least into the early 2030s.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ts-447133/

Also, the USN has no plans to give the 135 or so Super Hornet Blk I's a SLEP. So, they will just be retired....

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 05:40
by quicksilver
Most of the Blk Is had service life limited structure(s) and have been parked against a fence somewhere for a long time.

I believe one estimate placed the cost of SH SLEP at $2-5M per 300 hours of extension; that’s an additional 20-50M per 3k per aircraft. A downright bargain... But oh, that doesn’t include the cost of any capability enhancements. :shock:

And I wonder how the durability testing is going for carriage of the conformals? Of course, there won’t be any discovery in that testing will there... :roll:

Anyone seen or heard of any of those new Boeing tankers in service? :whistle:

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 06:17
by Corsair1963
Point here is the Super Hornets will "start" to run out of flight hours in the early 2030's. Right as productions of the two F-35C Squadrons per CVW is ending. So, I hardly think it's a stretch to predict that F-35C production will just continue. As modest numbers of the SLEP Super Hornet retire each year......

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 06:23
by SpudmanWP
One thing that I recently found and had to chuckle at was how Boeing howls at the concurrency model that was forced onto LM and how "you have to fly (& test) before you buy". What made me laugh was that Boeing started Full Rate Production on the SH BEFORE it even started the ground stress testing of the SH. It took them until 2007 to finish the 3xLifetime stress testing.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 06:34
by Corsair1963
As the F-35C matures it's capabilities will far surpass that of the Super Hornet. Even the so-called block III.....This will be just one more incentive to retire the F/A-18E/F post 2030. (of course not all at once)



"IMHO"

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 06:43
by weasel1962
quicksilver wrote:And I wonder how the durability testing is going for carriage of the conformals? Of course, there won’t be any discovery in that testing will there... :roll:


Not sure what's the issue. Boeing's contract is to complete CFT integration by 2022. If they don't, they don't get upgrade contracts, period.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 07:22
by wrightwing
Corsair1963 wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:Honestly, odds are good that the USN/USMC will acquire more than todays planned 340 F-35C's. As the NGAD Fighter won't be ready for a good 20 years at least. Yet, the Super Hornet Fleet (even with SELP) will start to run out of flight hours starting around 2030+.

So, my guess is the USN will just continue to purchase additional F-35C's after the orders for the 340 have been filled. This is hardly surprising or even new. As it happens all of the time.....(with the Super Hornet itself being a good example)

Super Hornets aren't going to wear out by 2030. They're 9000 hour airframes. The oldest Block 1s didn't enter service till 1999, and Block 2s are about the same age as Raptors (10 or less years old.) F-15s built in the 1980s will be retiring then barring any significant changes in USAF plans. The oldest Super Hornets are still ~10 to 20 years newer than F-15Cs.


HOW MANY YEARS DID IT TAKE TO GET TO 6,000 HRS???

Quote: The US Navy plans to modify 45 more Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets in the next two years to increase the aircraft’s service life and capabilities, the US Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) announced on 27 March.

The potential contract will cover modifications to up to 15 aircraft in fiscal year 2019 and a maximum of 30 aircraft in FY2020, NAVAIR says. The modifications are designed to extend the fighter’s airframe life from 6,000-9,000h, adding up to 10 years of service.

Boeing will also convert existing Block II Super Hornets to a new Block III configuration starting in the early 2020s. This conversion will include adding an enhanced network capability, a longer range thanks to internal conformal fuel tanks, an advanced cockpit system, reduced radar signature and an enhanced communication system. Such updates are designed to keep the type effective in combat until at least into the early 2030s.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ts-447133/

Also, the USN has no plans to give the 135 or so Super Hornet Blk I's a SLEP. So, they will just be retired....

They aren't at 6000. They're extending the 6000 to 9000 (i.e. 10 years = 3000) The usage will be going down, due to the introduction of MQ-25 + >100 new aircraft + changes in OPTEMPO.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 07:41
by quicksilver
BA has promoted the idea that slapping CFTs on the jet is a simple proposition; it’s not. Just ask LM about CFTs on the Viper.

Good chance that the SLEP jets will not have CFTs because the development and testing is not complete, and the incremental costs are prohibitive.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 07:44
by weasel1962
The low MC rates is not only an airframe life issue. See pg 18 of the final SH SAR. 1st lot 1997 was delivered in 1999 through 2015. Its ~127 in the 1st 5 lots (15-19 years), 215 in next 5 (11-15 years).

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military ... 12_sar.pdf

45-50 each year for SLEP makes sense because at its max, there was 48 SH produced in 1 year. Why do an SLEP before its time?

As to CFT, we'd know by 2022.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 07:45
by Corsair1963
wrightwing wrote:
They aren't at 6000. They're extending the 6000 to 9000 (i.e. 10 years = 3000) The usage will be going down, due to the introduction of MQ-25 + >100 new aircraft + changes in OPTEMPO.



Wrong the first Super Hornet reached 6,000 flight hours last April......


QUOTE:

Naval Aviation News

Long Live the Super Hornet!

– December 6, 2017

The platform having never known peacetime and racking up flight hours more quickly than anticipated over 15 years of constant combat operations in the Middle East exacerbates the problem. The first Super Hornet to reach 6,000 flight hours is projected to do so in April, just ahead of its 15th birthday in June.

http://navalaviationnews.navylive.dodli ... er-hornet/

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 07:49
by weasel1962
"last April" being April 2018 which is exactly when the 1st F-18 goes into SLEP. Not sure what's the big issue.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 07:56
by Corsair1963
The Block I Series aren't going to be upgraded. (i.e. SLEP) While, the Super Hornets dedicated to Tanker duties have seen very heavy use.....Plus, all I am saying is post 2030. The USN is likely to retire small numbers of Super Hornets annually. While, ordering a like number of New F-35C's to replace them. This would be hardly surprising and has happen before. Just look at the Hornet and Super Hornet for examples...

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 07:57
by Corsair1963
weasel1962 wrote:"last April" being April 2018 which is exactly when the 1st F-18 goes into SLEP. Not sure what's the big issue.




I sure don't.... :?

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 08:19
by weasel1962
That would be rather strange since the 1st block 2s were delivered in 2005 - with fleet deliveries in Jan 2006 i.e. 12 years as of today.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 12 Oct 2018, 10:23
by hythelday
USS Essex Enters Persian Gulf with Squadron of Marine F-35s:
https://news.usni.org/2018/10/11/37228

Amphibious warship USS Essex (LHD-2) is now in the Persian Gulf, bringing for the first time a squadron of Marine Corps F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters through the Strait of Hormuz. [....] However, just after Essex entered the Persian Gulf, its complement of F-35 fighters was grounded as part of enterprise-wide joint strike fighter stand-down.


USS Essex is in the Persian Gulf, but there are no confirmation yet whether VMFA-211 has been cleared to fly or not. Not impossible, as some F-35s across all variants are already flying (see relevant "crash" thread)

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 12 Oct 2018, 13:21
by quicksilver
hythelday wrote:...USS Essex is in the Persian Gulf, but there are no confirmation yet whether VMFA-211 has been cleared to fly or not. Not impossible, as some F-35s across all variants are already flying (see relevant "crash" thread)


VMFA-211 was not grounded. A TCTD/TCTO was issued that specified inspection of a specific engine component in all F35s/F135s before the next flight. Jets (individual tail numbers, as opposed to an operational unit) are cleared to fly pending completion and the results of the directed inspection.

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 12 Oct 2018, 17:05
by blindpilot
quicksilver wrote:
hythelday wrote:...USS Essex is in the Persian Gulf, but there are no confirmation yet whether VMFA-211 has been cleared to fly or not. Not impossible, as some F-35s across all variants are already flying (see relevant "crash" thread)


VMFA-211 was not grounded. A TCTD/TCTO was issued that specified inspection of a specific engine component in all F35s/F135s before the next flight. Jets (individual tail numbers, as opposed to an operational unit) are cleared to fly pending completion and the results of the directed inspection.


Agreed.

This sounds like an IRAN (inspect and repair as needed) project.
1. The inspection (records and airframe) sounds like it is low impact. Those not needing repair can be checked in the normal cycle of waiting in the hangar for the next flight, and in fact may have no real "down time" at all, going to the next sortie.
2. Those that need the part apparently are only down for 24-48 hours according to reports.
3. I'm not sure where the fuel tube is located (airframe or engine) but the parts are likely in Europe now as needed, with the assembly there. Worse case they'll take a few days to back fill the European assembly/depot locations from the States. ?days not weeks.

I don't expect there to have been any noticeable loss of missions to the casual observer, with VMFA-211. Perhaps one aircraft held back for 48 hours. Perhaps one Osprey sortie to go get the parts.

MHO,
BP

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 29 Oct 2018, 17:00
by zerion
Video: Iranian fast attack boats harass USS Essex featuring F-35Bs.

https://twitter.com/Capt_Navy/status/10 ... 2310184961

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 13 Dec 2018, 23:18
by spazsinbad
USS John C. Stennis, USS Essex Conduct Joint Operations In Arabian Sea
13 Dec 2018 Ben Werner

"The John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Group (CSG) and the Essex Amphibious Ready Group (ARG) started integrated operations in the Arabian Sea on Wednesday, supporting operations in Afghanistan. “Carrier strike groups and amphibious ready groups are inherently flexible maneuver forces, and these high-end integrated operations illustrate our commitment to the Central Region and demonstrate our ability to deliver naval combat power at a time and place of our choosing,” Vice Adm. Jim Malloy, the commander of U.S. Naval Forces Central Command and U.S. 5th Fleet, said in a statement....

...The crews and fighters from both Stennis and Essex are expected to conduct a series of joint exercises, including an in-flight refueling of an F-35 from an F/A-18F Super Hornet, and cross-deck training of deck, supply, intelligence, media, and medical personnel, according to a 5th Fleet statement....

...In October, Wasp-class amphibious warship USS Essex (LHD-2) entered the Persian Gulf, bringing for the first time a squadron of Marine Corps F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters to the region through the Strait of Hormuz...."

Photo: "Wasp-class amphibious assault ship USS Essex (LHD-2) transits the Gulf of Aden during a vertical replenishment while on a regularly scheduled deployment of Essex Amphibious Ready Group (ARG) and 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU). US Navy Photo" https://news.usni.org/wp-content/upload ... 714153.jpg


Source: https://news.usni.org/2018/12/13/39636

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 15 Dec 2018, 05:54
by marauder2048

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 15 Dec 2018, 14:57
by sferrin
Cue haters, "OH MAH GERD, NO STEALTH!!!".

Re: F-35B in the ME for first time

Unread postPosted: 15 Dec 2018, 19:53
by marsavian
Less stealth but probably still under 1 sq m frontal but if it can jam radars locking onto accompanying F-16s it can do the same for itself in that configuration which is a subtlety lost on haters. The F-35 will be hard to shoot down in any configuration.