f-35 survivability

Discuss the F-35 Lightning II
  • Author
  • Message
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7833
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post30 Oct 2018, 18:42

The logistics issue is paramount in areas where there is an absolute limit on space, like a carrier.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3640
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post30 Oct 2018, 19:17

Which is how we ended up in the situation where every fixed wing jet is a Hornet.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7833
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post30 Oct 2018, 19:20

Not really.. The USN failed in it's bid for the A-12v2 and never pulled the trigger on NATF which would have lead to 2+ airframes per carrier.

The F-35C will fix that mistake.

Besides, the Classic Hornet and Super Hornet are not close to being the same.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3640
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post30 Oct 2018, 23:40

Less so now. The Blk I shared most of the avionics. The F404 and F414 are related, there may or may not be savings there. We are down to two tactical airframes right now for the USN until the Cee Monster comes online. Then it will still be two. SHornets and Cee Monsters. Not until the Fuel Drone comes online will that change.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline
User avatar

Gums

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2181
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2003, 17:26

Unread post31 Oct 2018, 00:51

Salute!

Some good points lately.

- The sale of the century prolly hastened the collapse of the evil empire. No offense to our Russian posters, but the introduction of a thousand highly capable jets within 30 minutes of the Fulda Gap and many Pact bases must have played a role in the eventuakl burnout of the Soviet empire, not Russia itself as a nation and historical entity.

- The Hornet was needed, and to adapt the Viper to carrier ops was the same as developing a new jet. The YF-17 was much easier to add strong gear and such. By the time it came aboard, its avionics were a generation ahead of what we had in the early Vipers ( remember, I flew the beast at McAir's sim building in 1985). Biggest drawback I saw with that machine was it guzzled gas. Some still think the Viper has short legs. But they have to look at how many bombs, how many miles, how fast and low the profile, and so forth.

The U.S. naval air arm should have a great 20 years with the Super Bugs, the Cees and the new UAV tanker. Those Bugs should not be used as tankers for the other half of the strike force. They should be used as fleet interceptors and bomb/missile trucks once the SEAD effort allows.

Gums sends....
Gums
Viper pilot '79
"God in your guts, good men at your back, wings that stay on - and Tally Ho!"
Offline

krieger22

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 36
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2018, 22:02

Unread post02 Nov 2018, 15:10

SpudmanWP wrote:Not really.. The USN failed in it's bid for the A-12v2 and never pulled the trigger on NATF which would have lead to 2+ airframes per carrier.

The F-35C will fix that mistake.

Besides, the Classic Hornet and Super Hornet are not close to being the same.


Not even that - the Classic Hornet's final carrier deployment was in April. https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-nav ... er-vinson/

The differences between the Classic and Super on a carrier are moot, because the former isn't going to be deployed on one any more.
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1157
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post02 Nov 2018, 17:07

krieger22 wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:Not really.. The USN failed in it's bid for the A-12v2 and never pulled the trigger on NATF which would have lead to 2+ airframes per carrier.

The F-35C will fix that mistake.

Besides, the Classic Hornet and Super Hornet are not close to being the same.


Not even that - the Classic Hornet's final carrier deployment was in April. https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-nav ... er-vinson/

The differences between the Classic and Super on a carrier are moot, because the former isn't going to be deployed on one any more.


I haven't actually checked squadrons deployed since April, but I believe that -- Technically - The US Marines are required to provide F-18C/D squadrons to carriers by law, until they have their F-35C's operational to meet that commitment. But yes, the USN is done with them, and I'm not sure people aren't just ignoring the law until the "C" IOC, and USMC can send those to the carriers. Still there may be a USMC F18 C/D squadron flying on a carrier somewhere... technically if not in reality. VMFA 312 (as of May 9th, 2018 according to news release) and 323( ?was at RIMPAC in Hawaii in Oct '18?) were assigned TRoosevelt and Nimitz at last Wiki updates. (for whatever Wiki is worth)

MHO,
BP
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2159
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post03 Nov 2018, 00:01

Not sure USMC TACAIR integration is set in law. SECNAV (eg Gordon England) has played around w it from time to time, hence the fluctuation in the F-35 B/C numbers.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21722
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -1

Unread post03 Nov 2018, 00:20

Here is how the USMC winds down the HORNET Squadrons (posted earlier elsewhere) from USMC Aviation Plan 2018.
Attachments
FA-18A-D HORNET (VFMA) PLAN USMC 2018.gif
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2159
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post03 Nov 2018, 00:28

Which says nothing about TAI on the CVs...
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21722
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -1

Unread post03 Nov 2018, 00:47

WOW. How about that and yet we know the olde worlde Hornetos will live on and on and on via USMC good graces eh.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

mr.gibbys

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 13 May 2018, 17:27

Unread post03 Nov 2018, 01:12

crazyguy wrote:The F-35 costs 100 million USD. An F-16 costs 16 million USD.


Well, not at FRP. The F-35 at that point with full block 3F(afaik, maybe block 4 at that point?), will cost around 83-85 million at flyaway costs. A modern F-16 could cost up to $35-40 million, at least when adjusted to what I believe is in 2016 dollars. A modern F-16V which still has considerable less capability than the F-35 but with a similar price tag of around 80 million per.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... -up-up-up/
https://www.business-standard.com/artic ... 953_1.html

crazyguy wrote:If some bad guy country wanted to defeat the USA in an air war they could just make [ 5 ]- F-16 type fighters to every one of our F-35 fighters.


In theory, maybe, in practice, absolutely not. If you get 5 4th graders to go attack an adult male with a baseball bat the adult will still win, as a simple analogy. Just because it seems more cost effective in a very simple theory doesn't make it correct.

crazyguy wrote:Considering the armament the F-35 carries it will take out [ 4 ] of the F-16 type jets and the remaining one F-16 type will take out the F-35 since it will be out of ammo.


1. More extremely simple examples without anything else taken into account
2. Assuming the theory is right, why couldn't the F-35 disengage and use its LO features to be fairly undetected when it leaves? Where are the F-22s? Where are the hi fighters? What about external weapons? What about the F-35s 6 AMRAAM storage in block 4? What about ECM? Chaff? The F-35As canon?

crazyguy wrote:The 5 cheap jets will overwhelm the F-35.


As the F-22 and F-35 have demonstrated in red flag and other events, the term "force multiplier" isn't just some useless buzzword.
Know thy self, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21722
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -1

Unread post03 Nov 2018, 01:49

PDF 15 Pages of USN USMC TAI Tactical Air Integration GOODness (no hint of squadrons today though so BEWARE) below.
Attachments
USN-USMC TAI Tactical Air Integration F-35C pp15.pdf
(10.49 MiB) Downloaded 63 times
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2159
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post03 Nov 2018, 02:16

Spaz, let me be more specific; find us the law that specifies the USMC tai commitment.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21722
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -1

Unread post03 Nov 2018, 03:16

I'll be even more specific: WHY ME? I don't care - not my country - not my services - not my interest - do I go on....?
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
PreviousNext

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests