Commander Naval Air Forces wants more F/A-18s

chucky2 · by **chucky2** » 22 Mar 2018, 23:11

110 more SH?! This is some kind of alternate reality...just WTF...

SpudmanWP · by **SpudmanWP** » 22 Mar 2018, 23:27

Corporate welfare

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 22 Mar 2018, 23:54

Fight to Hawaii: How the U.S. Navy is Training Carrier Strike Groups for Future War
https://news.usni.org/2018/03/22/fight- ... future-war

jetblast16 · by **jetblast16** » 23 Mar 2018, 00:13

SpudmanWP wrote:Corporate welfare

Taxpayer footing the bill. Seriously, what is up with the Navy and the Stupor Hornet? 5th Gen not enough in the F-35C?

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 23 Mar 2018, 00:15

USN same USAF want/require/desire BLOCK 4 F-35s - they want all the future goodies ASAP hence procurement slowdown.

jetblast16 · by **jetblast16** » 23 Mar 2018, 00:17

Unrealistic. That's like saying, the USAF wanted a block 50 F-16 back in 1979. I'm not doubting what you're saying, but the level of tech baked into the F-35 takes time and money, testing, to field.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 23 Mar 2018, 03:28

The issue is upgrading cost. USAF particularly has a lot of early F-35As that will need more upgrading to 'Block 4 whatever standard', so they would rather buy fewer aircraft to wait for less expensive ones - USN says more or less the same thing.

And as usual the USMC are just happy to have whatever they can get their hands on - whatever standard is HUGE for them.

SpudmanWP · by **SpudmanWP** » 23 Mar 2018, 03:39

The USN is the only Service "waiting".

The rest are ramping up.

Theis is likely due to the "Everything sacrificed at the Altar of the Carrier".

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 23 Mar 2018, 03:49

Back in this thread there is a CONN explanation of the USN position on procurement which is similar to the USAF position.

viewtopic.php?f=58&t=13143&p=390378&hilit=Conn#p390378 (page 24 'PROGRAM UPDATES' thread)

HARRIS USAF here: viewtopic.php?f=58&t=52254&p=390340&hilit=Harris#p390340 (page 56 this thread)

SpudmanWP · by **SpudmanWP** » 23 Mar 2018, 04:08

Actions speak louder than words and the USAF/USMC have been ramping up and requesting more in the unfunded lists. What has NEVER happened is either the USAF/USMC buying any more 4th gen assets in place of a faster ramp of the F-35. While they might not ramp as fast as we'd like, under no circumstances will they "cut their nose off to spite their face", aka buy more 4th gen assets.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 23 Mar 2018, 04:34

Fair enough comment however one must acknowledge the USN CVNs need to be upgraded in their own cycle to be able to operate F-35Cs. This process appears to be slow because there are few with their own cycle of docking for lengthy nuclear fuel and other items for refurbishment. Plus these CVNs are in demand & often miss intermediate cycles when work done.

SpudmanWP · by **SpudmanWP** » 23 Mar 2018, 04:56

They have no excuse. They have known for 5+ years exactly when the F-35C would IOC. Carriers are constantly cycling through home port for refit & resupply and they could have easily scheduled the IOC & R&R to coincide.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 23 Mar 2018, 05:00

My reading over that time period suggests that there were many hiccups in the refurb CVN cycle due to operational requirement and of course that damn sequestration B/S that US Congress has got hold of for a similar number of years. For sure I would like to see the USN purchase more F-35Cs even if they stay ashore/operate ashore for the time being but I ain't 'merican and I don't vote there. VOTE CONGRESS SHITHEADS OUT OF OFFICE TOOTSWEET I say.

SpudmanWP · by **SpudmanWP** » 23 Mar 2018, 05:03

That's all fine & dandy.. but you don't buy MORE 4th gen assets in the meantime.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 23 Mar 2018, 05:12

You must admit that the SUPAdupas are being worn out by none other than use - especially as a tanker. IF the F-35C could be an interim tanker then perhaps your suggestion makes sense and IF the USN DID accelerate the acquisition of MQ-25 (as first posited but now they dawdle with it) tanker, but as you suggest the USN apparently want to 'fumble the F-35C ball'.

Even though I bad mouth your CONGRESS ne'er do wells there are some that get it. Maybe this budget passes?

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=53979&p=391455&hilit=avoid#p391455

"...[USMC] 4 C-model aircraft carrier variants (CV)... [& USN] USD1.4 billion for the F-35C, 133% more than the USD582 million requested." [confusingly explicated in this truncated report so look uphill for perhaps a better explaino]

8 F-35Cs for USN with 2 F-35Cs for USMC - NOT all EXTRA (from second quote in thread)