Marines F-35 reset

Variants for different customers or mission profiles
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

blain

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 157
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2017, 22:52

Unread post13 Sep 2019, 23:47

"The U.S. Marine Corps is poised to reshuffle planned fleets of Lockheed Martin F-35Bs and F-35Cs for the third time in a decade, in response to a fundamental shift in the service’s operational philosophy that could affect acquisition priorities across the aviation branch."

https://aviationweek.com/defense/marine ... and-f-35cs

There you go. More Cs, less Bs. The Cs have more range and more payload. A much better fit for slugging it out at range against a near peer threat. No numbers yet, but replacing the Harriers one for one with Bs would be a little overkill, but a good start.

Berger is slaying his service's sacred cows and challenging Marine dogma.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23306
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post14 Sep 2019, 01:26

Anyone have the full text for the article 'blain' cites above please? This is only what is available for NONsubscribers: :(
"The U.S. Marine Corps is poised to reshuffle planned fleets of Lockheed Martin F-35Bs and F-35Cs for the third time in a decade, in response to a fundamental shift in the service’s operational philosophy that could affect acquisition priorities across the aviation branch. Marine and Navy officials are renegotiating the terms of a tactical aircraft (TacAir) integration (TAI) agreement, with a clear mandate from newly appointed Marines Commandant Gen. David Berger, which favors less …" https://aviationweek.com/defense/marine ... and-f-35cs
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1221
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post14 Sep 2019, 03:39

spazsinbad wrote:Anyone have the full text for the article 'blain' cites above please? This is only what is available for NONsubscribers: :(
...


Ditto that request. Does it specify change in total numbers or ...

Is this just rehash of the decision earlier this year to move C's left and B's right to support TAI carrier commitments?

BP
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23306
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post14 Sep 2019, 03:55

Recent usefulness of the BEEs demonstrated:
How to Seize Islands, Set Up a Forward Refueling Point: Marine Corps Recipes for Expeditionary Operations
13 Sep 2019 Megan Eckstein

"... • With Golf Company and Fox Company ashore, a HIMARS with Battery Q, 3rd Battalion, 12th Marines, 3rd Marine Division went ashore on a Landing Craft Utility (LCU) and simulating firing the HIMARS using data from an F-35B flying overhead, “demonstrating the capability for long-range precision fire support during expeditionary operations,” according to the news release...."

Source: https://news.usni.org/2019/09/13/how-to ... operations
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2662
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post14 Sep 2019, 13:16

blain wrote:"The U.S. Marine Corps is poised to reshuffle planned fleets of Lockheed Martin F-35Bs and F-35Cs for the third time in a decade, in response to a fundamental shift in the service’s operational philosophy that could affect acquisition priorities across the aviation branch."

https://aviationweek.com/defense/marine ... and-f-35cs

There you go. More Cs, less Bs. The Cs have more range and more payload. A much better fit for slugging it out at range against a near peer threat. No numbers yet, but replacing the Harriers one for one with Bs would be a little overkill, but a good start.

Berger is slaying his service's sacred cows and challenging Marine dogma.


From one of your earlier posts on CVW mix —

“I am wondering whether the gaps in transitioning squadrons is due to a lack of airframes. From the chart OPNAV showed it appears that each CVW will have a squadron of F-35s by 2030. They will the start adding a second F-35 squadron thereafter, which is weird because a buy of 260/270 does not support two F-35 squadrons per CVW.” (my emphasis added)

But an earlier buy of F-35Cs by the USMC would...ref the new TAI agreement (which would be entirely consistent with Navy’s long-apparent aversion to all things F-35, dating from the days of JAST).
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23306
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post14 Sep 2019, 13:48

For above TOTAL USN/USMC 340 F-35C buy reference: viewtopic.php?f=54&t=56074&p=426395&hilit=Tailhook#p426395
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1262
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post14 Sep 2019, 14:24

Stepping back a minute isn't it fundamentally strange that the USMC has to augment USN planes on their carriers ?? How much real control does the USMC have over their planes in this situation ? Can they be offloaded at all at any time to augment their F-35B ? On the surface it appears to me that the USN is getting extra planes for free but eager to be suitably educated on this matter.
Offline

wolfpak

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 116
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post14 Sep 2019, 14:58

Emphasis is mine. Some excerpts from the article:

"The Marines’ overall program of record of 420 aircraft is expected to remain unchanged, but the fleet split between the current plan to buy 353 short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing (STOVL) F-35Bs and 67 carrier-based F-35Cs could change dramatically.
Both of Berger’s policy preferences, outlined in a three-month-old strategic plan, lean toward a new TAI agreement that results in a larger number of F-35Cs in the Marine Corps’ future aviation fleet, along with fewer F-35Bs.
The 2011 version of the TAI requirement called for the Marines to split the fleet between 340 F-35Bs and 80 F-35Cs, allowing the service to provide five squadrons of F-35Cs for the carrier air wing. By 2015, the Marines had diluted that commitment, updating the TAI agreement to provide four squadrons of F-35Cs totaling 67 aircraft, with the balance of 353 aircraft under the program of record devoted to filling its 22 squadrons of F-35Bs.
The TAI agreement is being revised again, but this time for a different reason. Only two weeks after becoming the 38th commandant on July 11, Berger released a 26-page “planning guidance” document that called for the most sweeping reorganization of the Marines’ force structure in the modern era. Most importantly, the planning document dropped the previously sacrosanct Marine requirement for a 38-ship fleet of amphibious ships.
“The commandant, Gen. Berger, has said that the number of amphibious ships—and I’m talking about big decks, LH’s—may change in the future,” Rowell says. “His druthers is that they change in the future. He has also emphasized naval integration. For us, that means TacAir integration within the carrier air wings.”
The Marine Corps is now in the process of standing up the first F-35C squadron at NAS Lemoore in California. VFA-314, nicknamed the Black Knights, is scheduled to be integrated into Carrier Air Wing 17 by next March and deploy for the first time in fiscal 2022. But the schedule is subject to delays as the Marines cope with shortages of pilots, maintainers and aircraft.
Even the F-35B squadrons have struggled to muster enough pilots and maintainers to support roughly 75 aircraft delivered so far to three squadrons, but it has been even harder to support the single F-35C unit.
“We’re challenged right now with F-35Cs not only with personnel, but with [the number of] platforms,” Rowell says. Lockheed Martin has delivered eight F-35Cs to the Marines so far, with two more aircraft scheduled for delivery by the end of this year. Each Marine Corps F-35 squadron is required to be equipped with
10 aircraft."
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23306
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post14 Sep 2019, 15:01

USN / USMC have agreed to co-operate. Nine page PDF attached helps explain why; oops I see 'wolfpak' has posted text....

Thanks for the text 'wolfpak' - can the entire article be posted please. Thanks. It will be for my records. You can see from the attached PDF that this stuff interests me going back to that 2011 agreement (because Oz F-35Bs on Oz LHDs'). :mrgreen:
Attachments
USN-USMC Agreement F-35C + Changes PRN pp9.pdf
(527.96 KiB) Downloaded 141 times
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

bjr1028

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 518
  • Joined: 07 Jul 2009, 03:34
  • Location: Dubuque, IA

Unread post14 Sep 2019, 17:20

marsavian wrote:Stepping back a minute isn't it fundamentally strange that the USMC has to augment USN planes on their carriers ?? How much real control does the USMC have over their planes in this situation ? Can they be offloaded at all at any time to augment their F-35B ? On the surface it appears to me that the USN is getting extra planes for free but eager to be suitably educated on this matter.


The Marine Corps are not organized at the service level, they're organized at the Department of the Navy level with operational Fleet Marine Force units then allocated to Commander, Pacific Fleet and Commander, Fleet Forces (Atlantic) and further dispersed from there.

From the the Navy and Marine Air side, three things can happen to a strikefighter squadron.
1) A detachment is sent is sent to reinforce a Marine Medium tilt rotor squadron as part of a MEU. They are then under the operational control of the VMM squadron commander.
2) They are assigned to a Carrier Air Wing. They are then under the direct command of the CAG.
3) They are sent on a ground deployment under the Unit Deployment Program. This can be to either a combat zone or forward deployed to a place like Japan or Guam.

Number 1 isn't at all likely for anything but a Marine squadron since there are no Navy F-35Bs, but the door swings both ways nice they are department, no service assets. Navy squadrons have been been deployed UDP if required for additional tempo and their CVW is not able to deploy. In addition, CVW assets can and have been deployed to a FOB if required for mission tempo. Navy usually doesn't publicize when its done for OPSEC.
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2662
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post15 Sep 2019, 00:04

marsavian wrote:Stepping back a minute isn't it fundamentally strange that the USMC has to augment USN planes on their carriers ??...On the surface it appears to me that the USN is getting extra planes for free but eager to be suitably educated on this matter.


Strange? Not really. Free jets? Kinda, but it’s not about the jets; it’s the bodies...people (units of people) because institutionally people are really expensive.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5710
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post16 Sep 2019, 00:28

While, the number of F-35C's for the USN/USMC. Will naturally fluctuate somewhat over the next few years.



I expect the overall numbers will grow with time. As the USN will start retiring older Super Hornets post 2030. So, I expect to see additional F-35C orders long term. Until the New NGAD (6th Generation Fighter) comes online....
Offline

blain

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 157
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2017, 22:52

Unread post17 Sep 2019, 00:16

The key issue to consider is where is the short fall?

Has there ever been a STOVL shortfall? If anything, they are over allocated.

After the end of the Cold War, one fighter/attack squadron was eliminated from the CVW. They were replaced with a squadron of MH-60S during the GWOT, but the mix of squadron has not been refocused to the new threat. The Knighthawk has value as a CSAR asset but that role could be filled by MH-60Rs. Reducing the number of helicopters and increasing the number of fighters would seem reasonable.

During the latter days of the Cold War the Navy experimented with different tac air mixes on CVWs. They added a second A-6E squadron to CVW-5, CVW-13, and CVW-8. CVW-2 went to sea with an all Grumman tac air wing with Tomcats and Intruders.

It would seem that the Navy needs to begin a similar effort, focusing on reforming the CVW with an emphasis on preparing to fight at long range. Adding CFTs to Super Hornets and Growlers and developing the MQ-25 is a good start. But the Navy has been too slow to introduce the F-35C. Reallocating the Marines' F-35 buy will bring the Cs quicker to the fleet and enable to Navy to fill decks to counter the A2/AD challenge. They could add a fifth fighter squadron to the CVW or they could do it on a selective basis, experimenting/training with different CVW mixes.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23306
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post17 Sep 2019, 00:28

All that may well be however the CVNs have to be modified for operational use of the F-35C - is this a constraint on that?

Others have pointed out issues affecting the USN changeover to the F-35C - these are on another thread - I'll look for it...

'USNVO' is but one good example from thread below: viewtopic.php?f=58&t=52254&p=393541&hilit=enlisted#p393541

This is the thread with one example from 'usnvo' whilst there are other good contributors:
Commander Naval Air Forces wants more F/A-18s: 06 Apr 2018 viewtopic.php?f=58&t=52254
"Actually the first F-35C squadron demonstrates the dilemma that the Navy is in and why they keep buying Super Hornets. The first squadron stood down in early 2018 to begin the transition to the F-35C but won't be a deployable asset until 2021. So for three years, there is a one squadron shortfall of strike fighters (more as additional squadrons transition). Buying more F-35Cs than planned only makes this problem worse as it takes that many more squadrons out of the rotation.

Simple problem you say, just add new squadrons, get more maintainers and pilots to cover the shortfall, and handle the transition that way. However, the well is pretty empty at this point...."
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23306
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post18 Sep 2019, 00:15

spazsinbad wrote:Recent usefulness of the BEEs demonstrated:
How to Seize Islands, Set Up a Forward Refueling Point: Marine Corps Recipes for Expeditionary Operations
13 Sep 2019 Megan Eckstein

"... • With Golf Company and Fox Company ashore, a HIMARS with Battery Q, 3rd Battalion, 12th Marines, 3rd Marine Division went ashore on a Landing Craft Utility (LCU) and simulating firing the HIMARS using data from an F-35B flying overhead, “demonstrating the capability for long-range precision fire support during expeditionary operations,” according to the news release...."

Source: https://news.usni.org/2019/09/13/how-to ... operations

31st MEU USMC Island Hopping Ex. 12 Aug 2019 - F-35B at end https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYcW5pJPGT0

A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Next

Return to F-35 Variants and Missions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests