Marines Won’t Cut Planned F-35 Buy Totals for Now, But Exter

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24860
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post01 Apr 2020, 22:08

The 'reset USMC' thread is locked so this goes here.... MAYBE it is an april fool joke?
Marines Won’t Cut Planned F-35 Buy Totals for Now, But External Review Could Change That
01 Apr 2020 Megan Eckstein

"A Marine Corps decision to reduce the number of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters per squadron from 16 to 10 won’t lead to a cut in the total number of planes the service wants to buy just yet – but the commandant warned industry that external factors could lead to programmatic changes down the line....

...An independent assessment would likely be kicked off in a matter of months, Berger told reporters today in a media roundtable, but the Marine Corps hasn’t decided who would conduct the assessment and how long it might take. Berger did stress that the service needs to know now if it’s headed down the right path with F-35 and that the assessment couldn’t drag on for a year, for example.

“Outside external looks are helpful because there’s no ego, there’s no vested interest; it’s in the purest sense a completely objective look. So if it confirms the direction we’re headed, that’s fantastic. If it gives us some other insights, certainly that’s worth considering,” he said.

The commandant told reporters that the decision to move from 16 jets to 10 in each squadron was “not a lack of confidence in the airframe” but rather making sure “it’s manageable and embarkable on ships with us.”

Berger said of the F-35 that “there’s nothing like it” and that the uncertainty about how many jets to field per squadron and how many squadrons to aim for comes from the plane’s newness – the Marines have employed their F-35B short takeoff/vertical lift variant operationally for about three years, but there’s still a limited track record for things like readiness and maintainability.

“We may over time learn that 10 is the wrong number, it could be 11, it could be 12, I don’t know. But right now the target is good at 10. We know how to employ the aircraft in a contested environment, but some of it depends on factors we don’t control – in other words, this is an airframe, a capability on the front end of its delivery. The maintenance track record of this aircraft, we’ll just learn over time. If the maintenance readiness of the F-35 proves to be very very strong, then of course, just like any other system, you need less of them because more of them are up all the time. On the other hand, if it turns out not to be so, then you’re going to need more of them to account for the ones that are in repair, that are down right now. So we’ve more to learn over the coming years about what we can effectively operate from ship with, and maintenance availability track record of the F-35,” he said.

The upcoming external review will certainly influence the plans for how many F-35s to equip each squadron with and how many to buy overall. [Who said this? OR is it just FUD from reporter? OR just realistic result?]

“I’m confident in the target that we’re at right now and the aim point that we have to go to 10 per squadron. But if an external assessment, if future wargames, if we learn more about the maintenance track record of the F-35, if that causes us to change the PAA, the number of aircraft in a squadron, we should absolutely be willing to do that,” he said.

“Right now, I’m not changing the program of record. Right now the program of record plows ahead as it is. But I’m signaling to the industry, we have to be prepared to adjust as the operating environment adjusts. Right now the program of record stays the same, but we must adapt to the adversary and we must adapt to the operating environment that we’re challenged with being in.”

According to the most recent Marine Corps Aviation Plan, [ https://www.aviation.marines.mil/Portal ... AvPlan.pdf (31.5Mb) ] the service plans to buy 420 F-35s: 353 F-35Bs and 67 F35Cs. That would have supported nine squadrons of 16 F-35Bs each, five squadrons with 10 F-35Bs each, four squadrons with 10 F-35C carrier-variant jets, two reserve squadrons with 10 F-35Bs, and two fleet readiness squadrons with 25 F-35Bs each.

Despite the upcoming external review, Berger repeatedly expressed his support for the jet. “For us, the F-35B, the ability to operate from austere airfields and ships, both incredible. In fact, in war games, one of the handful of capabilities that really causes an adversary problems, because it is so flexible, its’ employable ashore or from ship,” the commandant said.

“Game-changer is sort of an overused phrase, but I am a huge advocate of the F-35 and its capabilities.”

Source: https://news.usni.org/2020/04/01/marine ... hange-that
Attachments
USMC2019F-35BCplan.gif
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2432
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post02 Apr 2020, 01:24

Berger said the above in March, not April. It will take time to permeate and realize how serious he (and the USMC) is on this subject.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6931
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post02 Apr 2020, 01:31

Berger is just pushing Lockheed Martin to drive down the cost of ownership for the F-35B. While, moving numbers around to better utilize the F-35 Fleet.



Honestly, I don't see anything to get excited about.......
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2432
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post02 Apr 2020, 01:44

LM has nothing to do with pilot numbers, unless April fools apply.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24860
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post02 Apr 2020, 02:23

https://www.aviation.marines.mil/Portal ... AvPlan.pdf Reprinted PRN to reduce file size & cropped for readability

2019 Marine Corps Aviation Plan 26 Mar 2019
Attachments
USMC 2019 AvPlan 26 Mar 2019 PRN pp196.pdf
(6.62 MiB) Downloaded 674 times
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6931
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post02 Apr 2020, 02:53

weasel1962 wrote:LM has nothing to do with pilot numbers, unless April fools apply.



No, got the stories confused........
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3160
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post02 Apr 2020, 20:25

“We may over time learn that 10 is the wrong number, it could be 11, it could be 12, I don’t know. But right now the target is good at 10. We know how to employ the aircraft in a contested environment, but some of it depends on factors we don’t control – in other words, this is an airframe, a capability on the front end of its delivery. The maintenance track record of this aircraft, we’ll just learn over time. If the maintenance readiness of the F-35 proves to be very very strong, then of course, just like any other system, you need less of them because more of them are up all the time. On the other hand, if it turns out not to be so, then you’re going to need more of them to account for the ones that are in repair, that are down right now. So we’ve more to learn over the coming years about what we can effectively operate from ship with, and maintenance availability track record of the F-35,” he said."

Doesn't seem to understand how his aviation force structure is built, nor how procurement objectives support the recapitalization of his force over time. Bet he doesn't know what a Nunn-McCurdy breach is either.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6466
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post07 Apr 2020, 21:50


Despite the upcoming external review, Berger repeatedly expressed his support for the jet. “For us, the F-35B, the ability to operate from austere airfields and ships, both incredible. In fact, in war games, one of the handful of capabilities that really causes an adversary problems, because it is so flexible, its’ employable ashore or from ship,” the commandant said.

“Game-changer is sort of an overused phrase, but I am a huge advocate of the F-35 and its capabilities.”

Source: https://news.usni.org/2020/04/01/marine ... hange-that



Where is Blain?
Choose Crews

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests