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

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

squirrelshoes

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 90
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2016, 23:53

Unread post01 Jun 2019, 12:19

SpudmanWP wrote:You are right that JSM can handle "most" targets, but LRASM is for the "worst of the worst". That is why LRASM is not being bought in large numbers.
I'm not sure LRASM is for the worst of the worst, I have trouble imagining any commander deciding to use anything but the best weapon available if they are trying put an enemy ship out of commission. Cost isn't really a factor when it comes to what you're launching at enemy ships, when they're talking about chucking 5 million dollar SM-6s at ships they aren't going to blink at launching an LRASM even if target isn't worst of the worst.


I thought the reason LRASM numbers were more related to the stop-gap nature of the acquisition proposal until OASuW Increment 2?
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 716
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post01 Jun 2019, 23:50

The Air Force view was that a hit from subsonic ASCM with a 500 pound warhead was
going to typically result in a mission kill for a surface combatant like a destroyer.

SM-6 Blk IA is around $3 million; LRASM is around $3 million and the Navy just tripled the
total quantity they intend to buy to 324.

The real question in my mind is if they'll re-host the LRASM stack on JASSM-XR; some upgrades
from JASSM-ER are flowing in LRASM 1.1.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5304
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post02 Jun 2019, 03:35

marauder2048 wrote:The real question in my mind is if they'll re-host the LRASM stack on JASSM-XR; some upgrades
from JASSM-ER are flowing in LRASM 1.1.


Is JASSM-XR still a thing? Just haven't heard anything about it for some time.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 716
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post02 Jun 2019, 04:21

AGM-158D was in the FY20 budget at around ~ $300k more a pop than AGM-158B (-ER).
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22984
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post07 Jun 2019, 09:14

IF anyone wonders at the slow pace of USN for fielding the F-35C OR even buying more - more quickly - look no further.
Nimitz and Ford Carriers Need Upgrades to Deploy With F-35Cs
06 Jun 2019 Ben Werner

"Currently, the Navy does not have an aircraft carrier — either Ford-class or Nimitz-class — that can support the service’s most advanced fighters for a full deployment, service officials told USNI News on Thursday.

Earlier this week, lawmakers expressed their frustration with the Navy for accepting delivery of Ford-class carriers before they can accommodate deploying with F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters, while considering the Fiscal Year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act. But the Navy currently doesn’t have a Nimitz-class carrier that can deploy with F-35Cs either.

“The Nimitz-class and Ford-class aircraft carriers, by design, can operate with F-35Cs, however, there are modifications to both carrier classes that are required in order to fully employ the capabilities of the F-35s and enable them to be more effective on a full-length deployment,” Capt. Daniel Hernandez, a Navy spokesman, said in an email to USNI News.

The modifications required to make each aircraft carrier class able to deploy with F-35Cs don’t require a fundamental redesign of either class. Hernandez described the modifications as involving work to support the long-term deployment of F-35Cs, such as adding classified spaces to the carriers and installing more robust jet blast deflectors.

Each class of carrier is currently able to launch and recover F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters, the variant designed for catapult launching and arrested landing on carriers. Without the carrier modifications, the ships are unable to support an F-35C for more than a short visit....

,,,There are no technical difficulties involving either the aircraft or the catapults and recover systems aboard the carriers that are preventing the F-35C from deploying.…"

Source: https://news.usni.org/2019/06/06/nimitz ... ith-f-35cs
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

aussiebloke

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2017, 22:29

Unread post07 Jun 2019, 10:05

marauder2048 wrote:The real question in my mind is if they'll re-host the LRASM stack on JASSM-XR;


What is “the LRASM stack”?
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8367
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post07 Jun 2019, 14:32

spazsinbad wrote:"Currently, the Navy does not have an aircraft carrier — either Ford-class or Nimitz-class — that can support the service’s most advanced fighters for a full deployment, service officials told USNI News on Thursday.


That was a typo that has been corrected.

Currently the USN has ONE Nimitz carrier that can support F-35C ops.

This post has been updated with additional information from the Navy. The service has one aircraft carrier able to deploy with F-35C Lighting II Joint Strike Fighters, USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72).
Last edited by SpudmanWP on 07 Jun 2019, 14:35, edited 1 time in total.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8367
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post07 Jun 2019, 14:33

aussiebloke wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:The real question in my mind is if they'll re-host the LRASM stack on JASSM-XR;


What is “the LRASM stack”?


My guess is all of the avionics & ESM that make the LRASM unique.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22984
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post07 Jun 2019, 17:15

:devil: Good update except LINCOLN can only accept :shock: LIGHTING II :roll: airyplanes arrest/cat by SPALLingCHUCKERS. :doh:
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 716
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post07 Jun 2019, 21:15

SpudmanWP wrote:
aussiebloke wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:The real question in my mind is if they'll re-host the LRASM stack on JASSM-XR;


What is “the LRASM stack”?


My guess is all of the avionics & ESM that make the LRASM unique.


Yeah. The datalink and the RFS (ESM). GAO says that everything else (autorouter, low altitude
control/sea state estimator, multi-target tracker, and simultaneous time of arrival algorithms)
is software-based.
Offline

blain

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 122
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2017, 22:52

Unread post07 Jun 2019, 23:51

spazsinbad wrote:IF anyone wonders at the slow pace of USN for fielding the F-35C OR even buying more - more quickly - look no further.
Nimitz and Ford Carriers Need Upgrades to Deploy With F-35Cs
06 Jun 2019 Ben Werner

"Currently, the Navy does not have an aircraft carrier — either Ford-class or Nimitz-class — that can support the service’s most advanced fighters for a full deployment, service officials told USNI News on Thursday.

Earlier this week, lawmakers expressed their frustration with the Navy for accepting delivery of Ford-class carriers before they can accommodate deploying with F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters, while considering the Fiscal Year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act. But the Navy currently doesn’t have a Nimitz-class carrier that can deploy with F-35Cs either.

“The Nimitz-class and Ford-class aircraft carriers, by design, can operate with F-35Cs, however, there are modifications to both carrier classes that are required in order to fully employ the capabilities of the F-35s and enable them to be more effective on a full-length deployment,” Capt. Daniel Hernandez, a Navy spokesman, said in an email to USNI News.

The modifications required to make each aircraft carrier class able to deploy with F-35Cs don’t require a fundamental redesign of either class. Hernandez described the modifications as involving work to support the long-term deployment of F-35Cs, such as adding classified spaces to the carriers and installing more robust jet blast deflectors.

Each class of carrier is currently able to launch and recover F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters, the variant designed for catapult launching and arrested landing on carriers. Without the carrier modifications, the ships are unable to support an F-35C for more than a short visit....

,,,There are no technical difficulties involving either the aircraft or the catapults and recover systems aboard the carriers that are preventing the F-35C from deploying.…"

Source: https://news.usni.org/2019/06/06/nimitz ... ith-f-35cs


Isn't this the chicken or the egg like issue. For whatever reason the Navy wanted to slow roll the F-35C and keep on buying Super Hornets. If they wanted to buy more F-35Cs they would have modified more carriers.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22984
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post08 Jun 2019, 02:07

With the USN CVNs 'things are not simple'. They are modified on a schedule that apparently is not changed easily however there have been real world changes over the last decade for various reasons. As suggested 'saving money' is one reason. Already (like USAF) USN admits not buying as many PRE Block 4 F-35s 'to save money' on later mods for their earlier F-35s.

On and on it goes. IF the USN could reliably predict the future they would be in better shape all round. So would we all. None of us can predict the future that well. We can anticipate potential futures though, planning several courses of action. One may recall a decade ago the F-35 variants were not in good shape, particularly the F-35C - unable to arrest. I'm guessing 'bets were made' that have an impact today resulting in slow updating of F-35C inventory & CVN mods. I'll admit my view expressed here is from the extreme outside whilst IF one looks at the posts of more knowledgeable former / serving USN personnel one may see more detail about these issues on this forum (not just in this post / thread).

What is easy to see as has been explained in various ways in this thread (& some others) is the USN preference to buy 'what they know and have modified CVNs for' is the Shornet. One may see the corollary in the USAF buying F-15EX.

NAVAIR wheels grind slowly to maintain safety. New aircraft are tested to the nth degree on land before ever on a deck. How the USN conducts naval aviation is well-known to them (perhaps not to outsiders so much these days). Our loss.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8367
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post08 Jun 2019, 03:47

Like I have been saying for years.....

In the USN, all will bow down to the gods of the flattops.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22984
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post08 Jun 2019, 04:36

Whilst the weather gods destroy USAF bases, they are easier to upgrade over the longer term - or not - depending on wx.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5485
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post09 Jun 2019, 00:18

Just the usual hype as the first F-35C Carrier won't deploy until 2021. So, it will be years before the entire fleet is converted to do so. So, to jump up and down and say the Ford can't operate the F-35C. Is twisting the truth.....Which, is hardly surprising coming from the critics.
Previous

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests