F-35B for USN???
-
- Elite 1K
- Posts: 1396
- Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
- Location: Colorado
quicksilver wrote:Here’s your thread opener —
“Should the US Navy consider acquiring a modest number of F-35B's??? These could operate along side USMC F-35B's on Amphibious Ships.....or numerous other missions well suited to the type.“
Where do the articles you post above suggest the Navy is considering such a thing? Nowhere...because they aren’t and won’t be. ... This stuff goes on all the time. ... Why do I say this? Here in the interweb, institutional history, tradition, culture, practice — and the organizational behavior that results from those things over time .. what government institutions will or will not do. This case would be one of them; for the foreseeable future, you can bank on it.
Not in my humble opinion; in my experience...
Well said.
These institutional anchors do not appear out of nowhere. Experience, good and bad, breed the core truths around which institutions develop. For the Navy in this case, they have decades ... shoot centuries ... of being prepared for national strategic flux. The national command authorities (ie. NCA President etc. ) are very wishy washy, and vague about details. But when the SHTF, they expect specific responses. The Navy knows this and plans accordingly, according to hard learned lessons in the past.
Let's take a benign example of such processes. Say you have a friend/brother who lives out of town. You have a convention center in your town and it is hosting his industry's big show. So he calls you, and says, "Hey can you meet me at the airport, and get me to the center by noon tomorrow?" Well if you live in a place like Denver you come to expect this from every friend/family member you have. It just happens ... especially around Ski Season. I plan accordingly.
Your friend doesn't care if you pick him up in a sedan, pickup truck or SUV. You can even meet him at the airport, and show him, take him, to use the light rail, or even take UBAR. But I have learned, that living here I should just have a big 4x4 SUV. And everyone knows they can always call me and get a ride ... maybe even to the ski slopes.
Yeah I know, I could buy monthly bus passes, and get around on a bicycle, but basically I have a pickup truck, a high gas mileage sedan ... and an SUV. Those work based on experience. It's sort of been institutionalized over the decades. And when you come to Denver, you'll expect the SUV .... but for a one time good deal, just for some who have creative solutions, I might just throw their bags and wife into the back of the pickup. I mean "It would work."
And you know, the US Navy is always examining new things, and options ... but if the NCA calls, they know they better have the "SUV." They won't be selling those anytime soon. Yeah I know,- the light rail works pretty good in today's world .... but it still doesn't go to the ski area, when the snow is coming down hard.
MHO
BP
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 9825
- Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14
wrightwing wrote:There isn't a single good reason for the USN to buy F-35Bs, to operate off of LHA/LHDs.
I suggested a number of possible roles for USN F-35B's not just operation from Amphibious Ships.
Nonetheless, considering the US is and plans to use LHA's and LHD's as Mini Carriers and even within Blue Water Operations. I think you could easily make a case....
The Marine Corps' dream of 'Lightning Carrier' full with F-35s is slowly becoming a reality
https://www.businessinsider.com/marine- ... y3pzg9ufWQ
F-35B Allowed Essex ARG to Flex New Blue-Water Capabilities in Absence of Carrier Nearby
https://news.usni.org/2019/04/16/f-35b- ... ier-nearby
USMC to Fly First F-35B from Japan’s Izumo-class Aircraft Carriers
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... 4pGo4hf44A
US Marine F-35B Fighter Jet Deployment Onboard British Warship Made Official - US Marine Corps F-35Bs are to be deployed onboard the British Royal Navy's new Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier when it undertakes its first operational tour.
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2016/ ... -official/
Last edited by Corsair1963 on 21 Oct 2019, 02:45, edited 3 times in total.
-
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 28404
- Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
- Location: Australia
The business insider link is broken - what is it? What is the title etc [URL fixed now above TAH]
https://www.businessinsider.com/marine- ... y3pzg9ufWQ [broken]
https://www.businessinsider.com/marine- ... &r=AU&IR=T [fixed]
ORIGINAL 'Task & Purpose' article: https://taskandpurpose.com/marine-corps ... rica-f35bs
_________________________________________
USNI:
https://news.usni.org/2019/04/16/f-35b- ... ier-nearby
https://www.businessinsider.com/marine- ... y3pzg9ufWQ [broken]
https://www.businessinsider.com/marine- ... &r=AU&IR=T [fixed]
ORIGINAL 'Task & Purpose' article: https://taskandpurpose.com/marine-corps ... rica-f35bs
_________________________________________
USNI:
https://news.usni.org/2019/04/16/f-35b- ... ier-nearby
Last edited by spazsinbad on 21 Oct 2019, 03:36, edited 3 times in total.
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 9825
- Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14
quicksilver wrote:
Where do the articles you post above suggest the Navy is considering such a thing? Nowhere...because they aren’t and won’t be. Cool operational STOVL stuff around Navy CVs or Gators goes back to ROOSEVELT (CV-42) in the 70s, and NASSAU (LHA-4) in the early 80s, and later in the last week of DS. Two big decks stuffed themselves with Harriers for OIF-1. Harriers did bow-to-stern recoveries to allow ESG flexibility in the Libya thing a few years ago. Cross-axials to ships pier-side or steaming out of wind to make PIM. This stuff goes on all the time. These mini-this, or light-that things are not new ideas — nor is the occasional casual observer from the cheap seats who thinks the Navy might buy some stovl jets. Interesting idea...not gonna happen — ever.
Why do I say this? Here in the interweb, institutional history, tradition, culture, practice — and the organizational behavior that results from those things over time — are vague, nebulous and often discounted or ignored. In the real world, they are significant predictors of what government institutions will or will not do. This case would be one of them; for the foreseeable future, you can bank on it.
Not in my humble opinion; in my experience...
I was merely making a case for the F-35B in USN Service. I never said they had a firm plan in place to do so.
That said, they do have a plan to operate LHA's and LHD's as Mini Aircraft Carriers and in Blue Water Operations. A mission in the past performed strictly by Conventional USN Aircraft Carriers.
So, while the USN may have no firm plans to acquire the F-35B at the moment. It is hardly implausible either.
Man you think I suggested the Philippines was going to send a man to mars next week or something....
- Elite 4K
- Posts: 4474
- Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22
Corsair1963 wrote:wrightwing wrote:There isn't a single good reason for the USN to buy F-35Bs, to operate off of LHA/LHDs.
I suggested a number of possible roles for USN F-35B's not just operation from Amphibious Ships.
Nonetheless, considering the US is and plans to use LHA's and LHD's as Mini Carriers and even within Blue Water Operations. I think you could easily make a case....
The Marine Corps' dream of 'Lightning Carrier' full with F-35s is slowly becoming a reality
https://www.businessinsider.com/marine- ... y3pzg9ufWQ
F-35B Allowed Essex ARG to Flex New Blue-Water Capabilities in Absence of Carrier Nearby
https://news.usni.org/2019/04/16/f-35b- ... ier-nearby
USMC to Fly First F-35B from Japan’s Izumo-class Aircraft Carriers
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... 4pGo4hf44A
US Marine F-35B Fighter Jet Deployment Onboard British Warship Made Official - US Marine Corps F-35Bs are to be deployed onboard the British Royal Navy's new Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier when it undertakes its first operational tour.
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2016/ ... -official/
There's absolutely no advantages to mixing aircrews/squadrons, instead of just using an all Marine airwing. No additional capabilities are added, but you do add cost and complexity. There'll be plenty of Marine B models, and the Navy is better off buying more C models. That's something I could get behind (i.e. an extra squadron per carrier of Cs, or make the current squadrons bigger.)
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 9825
- Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14
wrightwing wrote:
There's absolutely no advantages to mixing aircrews/squadrons, instead of just using an all Marine airwing. No additional capabilities are added, but you do add cost and complexity. There'll be plenty of Marine B models, and the Navy is better off buying more C models. That's something I could get behind (i.e. an extra squadron per carrier of Cs, or make the current squadrons bigger.)
There absolutely no advantages to mixing Aircrews and Squadrons??? That's funny considering the USN currently operate mixed Navy and Marine Strike Fighter Squadrons from Aircraft Carriers and have so for decades. This will of course continue with the New F-35C's
In addition there isn't "plenty" of F-35B's to go around. Especially, now having to provide them for Mini Carrier Operations and to support allied carriers like the British Queen Elizabeth and Japanese Izumo Class Aircraft Carriers. Which, will take the F-35B's away from their primary mission. That is to support MEU's...
Regardless, I am not making a case for F-35B's to replace F-35C's within Carrier Air Wings. In fact they need to increase the buy of the latter in my opinion. Yet, that doesn't take away the need for more F-35B's in service with the USMC and/or USN...
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 9825
- Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14
UK, US Enter New Era: ‘Unprecedented’ Carrier-Sharing Plan
“We’re not talking about interoperability anymore, we’re talking about proper integration to a level we’ve never seen,” Fleet Commander Vice Adm. Jerry Kyd told me on the deck of the UK's new carrier.
By Paul McLeary October 21, 2019
ABOARD HMS QUEEN ELIZABETH: For the first time, a US Marine Corps F-35B squadron will deploy aboard the UKs new aircraft carrier on its maiden voyage in 2021, a milestone hailed as “unprecedented” — even among close allies.
“We’re not talking about interoperability anymore; we’re talking about proper integration to a level we’ve never seen,” British Fleet Commander Vice Adm. Jerry Kyd told me on the deck of the carrier as it launched and recovered aircraft during an exercise in the Atlantic.
The integration of Marines into the British carrier’s operations from Day One is “unprecedented,” he said. “It would be hard to think of another two countries on the planet who can do that right now.”
As Kyd and fellow Royal Navy officers praised the “special relationship” between Washington and London during a recent visit to the ship, the US Navy’s top admiral was half a world away, using much the same language to pitch his own ideas for closer linkages between allied navies.
“Today, the very nature of our operating environment requires shared common values and a collective approach to maritime security,” Chief of Naval Operations, Adm. Mike Gilday, told a seapower conference in Venice.
Gilday alluded to the British upgrades and increasing operations with NATO allies at sea, noting that Adm. Mike Mullen, former Navy chief, once talked about a 1,000-ship Navy. “I say, why not a 10,000-ship navy? With like-minded partners, there’s a lot we can do together to keep the maritime commons free and open.”
Spurring the move toward greater linkages between allied forces are the realities of a more aggressive and rapidly modernizing Chinese navy, and an increasingly unpredictable Russia. “We are defending international norms to foster global economic prosperity; we do it to protect the right to navigate the world’s international waters; we do it to ensure smaller nations are not bullied by others,” Gilday said in Venice.
Similarly, Kyd sees the increasing integration as an obvious move in an era punctuated by a variety of potential threats. “Why wouldn’t we be far more integrated with our key ally at a moment where the rules-based international system is under threat, and we need to reinforce our western values and operate together?”
Kyd, who commanded the Queen Elizabeth last fall when she ran weeks of trials off the US east Coast, is now responsible for overseeing all operational elements of the Royal Navy. Last year’s deployment saw the Brits flying US-based F-35s, but just this past week Royal Navy pilots began flying their own F-35Bs from the ship, becoming the first non-US pilots to own and fly carrier-based Joint Strike Fighters.
The QE is joined on this trip by the newly-formed Westlant 19 Carrier Strike Group – comprised of Type 45 destroyer HMS Dragon, submarine hunter HMS Northumberland and tanker RFA Tideforce.
“We are learning how to fight a carrier strike group beyond the jets for the first time,” Commodore Michael Utley told me. The new ship, flying new aircraft, “is a huge step forward. It’s not just a return,” to carrier operations, he said.
The QE has been working up to its 2021 deployment to the Mediterranean and Middle East in the waters along the US East Coast since July, readying for the Royal Navy’s first carrier operations in a decade.
The new carrier has been specifically designed to operate the F-35, and British officers on board refer to it as a “5th generation” ship that represents a massive leap over the Invincible-class big decks the Royal Navy retired in 2010, leaving the country — which has one of the proudest naval traditions in the world — without a carrier.
“This aircraft carrier for the UK is strategic, not just in terms of scale — she’s the biggest carrier we’ve ever had — but she’s interoperable with the US Marine Corps and again it’s that trust. You can’t surge trust,” Kyd said.
That integration with the Marines comes as the Corps and the Navy are working on a new force structure assessment due later this year aimed at more closely linking the operations of the two. It’s a major shift for the Corps, which is coming off almost two decades of operating primarily as a ground force in the Middle East. As part of the emerging shift back to the sea, the Marines are looking to begin testing unmanned platforms to quickly refuel and rearm their F-35Bs operating from remote, austere bases in the Pacific — part of an effort to be more nimble and unpredictable, as the traditional American dominance at sea and in the air erodes.
Last month, Marine leaders announced a year-long round of war games to push the force into the future, while Gilday and Marine Commandant Gen. David Berger recently signed a memo pledging to work on a joint project to hack out a new way to project power forward. The goal is to more closely align their doctrine, training, and equipping plans to complement one another, rather than the Navy simply providing lift and cover for the Corps.
And now, with the QE preparing to set sail, it appears the Royal Navy may play a key part in those plans.
With the QE in the fleet, “we’ve jumped into a much more sophisticated networked environment, and together [with the US] there’s huge potential in the next 4 to 5 years to really squeeze out the maximum from this very advanced aircraft that we couldn’t even think about 10 years ago,” Kyd said.
The Royal Navy’s second F-35-specific carrier, HMS Prince of Wales, is currently undergoing sea trials in the North Sea in preparation for its planned first deployment in 2023. Having two brand-new carriers that can swap aircraft and missions with the US Navy and Marine Corps is, by any measure, a significant move at a time when US East Coast-based carriers are having some trouble making it out to sea on schedule.
https://breakingdefense.com/2019/10/uk- ... Defense%29
“We’re not talking about interoperability anymore, we’re talking about proper integration to a level we’ve never seen,” Fleet Commander Vice Adm. Jerry Kyd told me on the deck of the UK's new carrier.
By Paul McLeary October 21, 2019
ABOARD HMS QUEEN ELIZABETH: For the first time, a US Marine Corps F-35B squadron will deploy aboard the UKs new aircraft carrier on its maiden voyage in 2021, a milestone hailed as “unprecedented” — even among close allies.
“We’re not talking about interoperability anymore; we’re talking about proper integration to a level we’ve never seen,” British Fleet Commander Vice Adm. Jerry Kyd told me on the deck of the carrier as it launched and recovered aircraft during an exercise in the Atlantic.
The integration of Marines into the British carrier’s operations from Day One is “unprecedented,” he said. “It would be hard to think of another two countries on the planet who can do that right now.”
As Kyd and fellow Royal Navy officers praised the “special relationship” between Washington and London during a recent visit to the ship, the US Navy’s top admiral was half a world away, using much the same language to pitch his own ideas for closer linkages between allied navies.
“Today, the very nature of our operating environment requires shared common values and a collective approach to maritime security,” Chief of Naval Operations, Adm. Mike Gilday, told a seapower conference in Venice.
Gilday alluded to the British upgrades and increasing operations with NATO allies at sea, noting that Adm. Mike Mullen, former Navy chief, once talked about a 1,000-ship Navy. “I say, why not a 10,000-ship navy? With like-minded partners, there’s a lot we can do together to keep the maritime commons free and open.”
Spurring the move toward greater linkages between allied forces are the realities of a more aggressive and rapidly modernizing Chinese navy, and an increasingly unpredictable Russia. “We are defending international norms to foster global economic prosperity; we do it to protect the right to navigate the world’s international waters; we do it to ensure smaller nations are not bullied by others,” Gilday said in Venice.
Similarly, Kyd sees the increasing integration as an obvious move in an era punctuated by a variety of potential threats. “Why wouldn’t we be far more integrated with our key ally at a moment where the rules-based international system is under threat, and we need to reinforce our western values and operate together?”
Kyd, who commanded the Queen Elizabeth last fall when she ran weeks of trials off the US east Coast, is now responsible for overseeing all operational elements of the Royal Navy. Last year’s deployment saw the Brits flying US-based F-35s, but just this past week Royal Navy pilots began flying their own F-35Bs from the ship, becoming the first non-US pilots to own and fly carrier-based Joint Strike Fighters.
The QE is joined on this trip by the newly-formed Westlant 19 Carrier Strike Group – comprised of Type 45 destroyer HMS Dragon, submarine hunter HMS Northumberland and tanker RFA Tideforce.
“We are learning how to fight a carrier strike group beyond the jets for the first time,” Commodore Michael Utley told me. The new ship, flying new aircraft, “is a huge step forward. It’s not just a return,” to carrier operations, he said.
The QE has been working up to its 2021 deployment to the Mediterranean and Middle East in the waters along the US East Coast since July, readying for the Royal Navy’s first carrier operations in a decade.
The new carrier has been specifically designed to operate the F-35, and British officers on board refer to it as a “5th generation” ship that represents a massive leap over the Invincible-class big decks the Royal Navy retired in 2010, leaving the country — which has one of the proudest naval traditions in the world — without a carrier.
“This aircraft carrier for the UK is strategic, not just in terms of scale — she’s the biggest carrier we’ve ever had — but she’s interoperable with the US Marine Corps and again it’s that trust. You can’t surge trust,” Kyd said.
That integration with the Marines comes as the Corps and the Navy are working on a new force structure assessment due later this year aimed at more closely linking the operations of the two. It’s a major shift for the Corps, which is coming off almost two decades of operating primarily as a ground force in the Middle East. As part of the emerging shift back to the sea, the Marines are looking to begin testing unmanned platforms to quickly refuel and rearm their F-35Bs operating from remote, austere bases in the Pacific — part of an effort to be more nimble and unpredictable, as the traditional American dominance at sea and in the air erodes.
Last month, Marine leaders announced a year-long round of war games to push the force into the future, while Gilday and Marine Commandant Gen. David Berger recently signed a memo pledging to work on a joint project to hack out a new way to project power forward. The goal is to more closely align their doctrine, training, and equipping plans to complement one another, rather than the Navy simply providing lift and cover for the Corps.
And now, with the QE preparing to set sail, it appears the Royal Navy may play a key part in those plans.
With the QE in the fleet, “we’ve jumped into a much more sophisticated networked environment, and together [with the US] there’s huge potential in the next 4 to 5 years to really squeeze out the maximum from this very advanced aircraft that we couldn’t even think about 10 years ago,” Kyd said.
The Royal Navy’s second F-35-specific carrier, HMS Prince of Wales, is currently undergoing sea trials in the North Sea in preparation for its planned first deployment in 2023. Having two brand-new carriers that can swap aircraft and missions with the US Navy and Marine Corps is, by any measure, a significant move at a time when US East Coast-based carriers are having some trouble making it out to sea on schedule.
https://breakingdefense.com/2019/10/uk- ... Defense%29
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 9825
- Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14
Yeah, there is no reason for the USN to acquire the F-35B........ 
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 9825
- Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14
madrat wrote:Corsair1963 wrote:Yeah, there is no reason for the USN to acquire the F-35B........
But you could justify A models for training to save money for more operational C models
Don't see purchasing another model of the F-35 not currently in service with the USN/USMC as beneficial??? Which, also couldn't operate from either Amphibious Ships (LHA/LHD) or Aircraft Carriers. (CVN)
- Elite 3K
- Posts: 3772
- Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12
At a 50% premium for the C model over the A, there is a lot of incentive to do initial training with A and move up to C models for deck landing. For every two C models you can get three A models. And that is being generous, because that is the gap now. The A model could be down to 60% the price of a C model down the stretch.
They can simulate deck landing at a base with the A giving you plenty of similarity on characteristics of flight on approach. You don't simulate catapult launches until you get on the deck. Nor should you need fully sea-hardened models for lead up to carrier trials. There is plenty to learn on the A model and flight simulators. So when they get to carrier trials they move on to C models with minimal transition. But on the grand scale of the budget there are more C models for the carriers.
They can simulate deck landing at a base with the A giving you plenty of similarity on characteristics of flight on approach. You don't simulate catapult launches until you get on the deck. Nor should you need fully sea-hardened models for lead up to carrier trials. There is plenty to learn on the A model and flight simulators. So when they get to carrier trials they move on to C models with minimal transition. But on the grand scale of the budget there are more C models for the carriers.
- Elite 3K
- Posts: 3901
- Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30
You cannot fly A model F-35s to carrier touch and gos. The jet is not designed to absorb those kinds of structural loads.
-
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 7505
- Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
madrat wrote:
They can simulate deck landing at a base with the A giving you plenty of similarity on characteristics of flight on approach.
really? how?
Choose Crews
-
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 28404
- Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
- Location: Australia
At NAS Nowra when the Kiwis invaded with No.2 Squadron RNZAF A-4K Kahus for initial pilot training and Fleet Defence work, the aircraft were powered up again just before touchdown instead of a touch and go to save wear & tear on tyres.
Personally I don't like the idea of an F-35A simulating an F-35C because I think it would give the incorrect muscle memory.
The Kiwis used to flare slightly before touch down also to save wear and tear but not always I'm told. The Skyhawk was designed for NO FLARE landings & it was only for EMERGENCIES when high landing speeds were required that it was flared.
However the A-4K Kahu retained the AoA indexer and of course it now had a wide HUD with such symbology to squizz at. Not being familiar with the new setup caused a TA-4K Kahu to land short at OHAKEA to then drop tank arrest on foam.
Personally I don't like the idea of an F-35A simulating an F-35C because I think it would give the incorrect muscle memory.
The Kiwis used to flare slightly before touch down also to save wear and tear but not always I'm told. The Skyhawk was designed for NO FLARE landings & it was only for EMERGENCIES when high landing speeds were required that it was flared.
However the A-4K Kahu retained the AoA indexer and of course it now had a wide HUD with such symbology to squizz at. Not being familiar with the new setup caused a TA-4K Kahu to land short at OHAKEA to then drop tank arrest on foam.
-
- Elite 3K
- Posts: 3664
- Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36
XanderCrews wrote:madrat wrote:
They can simulate deck landing at a base with the A giving you plenty of similarity on characteristics of flight on approach.
really? how?
Xander Xander Xander... really... I am quite surprised at you. Isn't it obvious? You re-fit the A model with larger Fowler flaps that will increase the wing surface area by 45%. The 668 ft^2 wing area of this trainer Aye Aye model will perfectly duplicate the approach speed and handling conditions of the Sea model.
I'm quite sure the experts at NavAir have already proposed just this solution to Lockheed Martin... but those darned engineers just won't budge.
I mean, we all know it's just foolhardy to expect these young whippersnappers today, raised on computers and all, to learn to fly the aircraft almost totally in a simulator before stepping to the aircraft. I even heard the Israeli's are creating their own two seat model for just these exact problems...
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests