Forum: General F-35 Forum

http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/the-n ... amp;c=1171
In addition, the short take-off/vertical landing variant, the F-35B, will allow the Marine Corps to maintain its proven Air-Ground Task Force concept and permit the Navy to employ its large deck amphibious warships as virtual mini-aircraft carriers.

Real aircraft carriers have multiple layers of defense. Without E-2D Advanced Hawkeye coverage, these "virtual" aircraft carriers will not be able to defend themselves against the coming ASBM threat.

And another thing that seems to have gone virtual instead of real about these new ships is the process of transporting Marines to hostile shores.

USS America has no dock, because the Osprey and the JSF ate too much space onboard. Deleting the F-35B will give follow on ships room for their docks and the task force can be protected by the F-35Cs of the real carriers.

F-16.net Sponsor

The COO of Lexington is Loren Thompson who is a paid consultant of LM. Anything from either source is simply a press release by LM. Leaving aside the entire notion of whether it's a good idea to use the LHD's as small carriers the statement that doing so maintains the Corp's air ground team is highly misleading. Either the LHD embarks the MEU's supporting helicopters and operates with the rest of the amphibious ships to employ the MEU or it can operate as a small carrier.

Normally the USN and USMC maintain 3 MEU's afloat. This requires the a complex dance of working up of the ships, aircraft, sailors, and Marines. Taking an LHD out of the dance for duty as a carrier impacts current and future operations. It's simply not going to be done often enough to matter. The MEU's have real tasking all the time year in and year out.

Why not just hand over one of the real carriers to the Marines, kill off the B and everybody walks away happy. How many cats and traps carriers do we have mothballed away?

The Gator fleet is designed to support embarked Marine units ashore. The Corp already operates squadrons aboard USN carriers and has for many decades and they will continue to do so for decades to come. The USN operates all the Gators (amphibious ships) and no ships are given to the Marines.

The Corp is already not getting it's all STOL force as the USN made them agree to operate some F-35C's. If they cancelled the B the Corp still has a requirement for for tactical aviation and would just fly a different jet. The B brings some utility and it's a reasonable capability for the nation to have in the USMC. That said the all STOL force was partially about getting away from having to operate on the Carriers and since that's gone it's a matter of debate how many they really need and the notion that any significant amount of time the LHD's will operate a heavy B force is not realistic.

hcobb There's a discusssion on f-16.net under 5th Generation Fighter, Possible small STOVL carrier USN/USMC see <a href="http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-12631-postdays-0-postorder-asc.html">here</a> you might find interesting. It covers much of the same ground (allbeit, it starts off more slanted towards small carrier's), be advised it's not nicknamed "the very long thread" for nothing!

I agree that AWAC support is crucial to naval aviation (Britain learned that the hard way in the Falklands, I hear Argentina is sabre rattling again - but that's another topic). The F-35 has a way to go yet before it reaches production, and the F-35B STOVL version looks the most vulnerable to cuts, as lb pointed out if they had to, the marines would "make do" with the F-35C or another aircraft, they've done it before. I think conventional carriers are as big as they are for a reason and I'm more concerned in having enough aircraft to fly off the carriers myself right now. But with budget cuts on the horizon conventional aircraft carriers make an awful tempting target for budget cutters. And the amount of numbers purchased is already down for the F-35 (all versions) and not surprising the cost is rising, and it is behind schedule... We'll just have to wait and see how this turns out there's an awful lot at stake!

FlightDreamz wrote:

hcobb There's a discusssion on f-16.net under 5th Generation Fighter, Possible small STOVL carrier USN/USMC see <a href="http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-12631-postdays-0-postorder-asc.html">here</a> you might find interesting. It covers much of the same ground (allbeit, it starts off more slanted towards small carrier's), be advised it's not nicknamed "the very long thread" for nothing!

I agree that AWAC support is crucial to naval aviation (Britain learned that the hard way in the Falklands, I hear Argentina is sabre rattling again - but that's another topic). The F-35 has a way to go yet before it reaches production, and the F-35B STOVL version looks the most vulnerable to cuts, as lb pointed out if they had to, the marines would "make do" with the F-35C or another aircraft, they've done it before. I think conventional carriers are as big as they are for a reason and I'm more concerned in having enough aircraft to fly off the carriers myself right now. But with budget cuts on the horizon conventional aircraft carriers make an awful tempting target for budget cutters. And the amount of numbers purchased is already down for the F-35 (all versions) and not surprising the cost is rising, and it is behind schedule... We'll just have to wait and see how this turns out there's an awful lot at stake!

Agreed... But the only problem is there is no other aircraft that fits the job. Look at the UK. The fast jets on their carriers are AH-64's! Shocked

TSFG

Come on guys, E-2D vs ASBM.

Without that you get a big box of Marines on fire.

Think about it.

hcobb wrote:

Come on guys, E-2D vs ASBM.

Without that you get a big box of Marines on fire.

Think about it.

I get it. A box full of jars full of heads on fire!

So we just give the marines some fire extinguishers? What's the big deal? Rolling Eyes

TSFG

hcobb wrote:

Come on guys, E-2D vs ASBM.

Without that you get a big box of Marines on fire.

Think about it.

Does the E--2D, in fact, have the ability to contribute to ASBM Defense? It can function as part of CEC environment in conjunction with other offboard sensor platforms but AFAIK its primary value is in countering airborne threats, maximizing the kinematic perolformance of the SM-6.
AEGIS ships don't require a Hawkeye and attendantt CSG to serve in the BMD role. The EuroMissile shield uses a solo AEGIS destroyer armed with SM-3s astride probable missile routes headed for Europe.

popcorn wrote:

hcobb wrote:

Come on guys, E-2D vs ASBM.

Without that you get a big box of Marines on fire.

Think about it.

Does the E--2D, in fact, have the ability to contribute to ASBM Defense? It can function as part of CEC environment in conjunction with other offboard sensor platforms but AFAIK its primary value is in countering airborne threats, maximizing the kinematic perolformance of the SM-6.
AEGIS ships don't require a Hawkeye and attendantt CSG to serve in the BMD role. The EuroMissile shield uses a solo AEGIS destroyer armed with SM-3s astride probable missile routes headed for Europe.

E-2D, like F-35, is not intended as part of the ABM system. Such platforms need 24/7 persistence to be effective. Shipboard AEGIS gives you that capability, tactical airborne platforms do not. Cruise missiles with their small radar cross sections OTOH continue to be a major threat to surface vessels, and that is what E-2D brings to the fleet.

http://blog.usni.org/2009/12/09/e-2d-up ... wkeye-bmd/

What Aegis BMD has relied on to date is a forward placed Aegis ship as a spotter to relay targeting info to a ship further back that is the shooter. Given an all-out war that forward picket would go down quickly. E-2D can function as a spotter, without leaving the fleet.

hcobb wrote:

http://blog.usni.org/2009/12/09/e-2d-update-progress-report-and-hawkeye-bmd/

What Aegis BMD has relied on to date is a forward placed Aegis ship as a spotter to relay targeting info to a ship further back that is the shooter. Given an all-out war that forward picket would go down quickly. E-2D can function as a spotter, without leaving the fleet.

j

A very speculative piece. The literature I've seen credits the E-2D Radar with a 200 mile detection range, so it won't be detecting many SRBM/MRBM in launch/ascent phase as envisioned. The Missile Defense Agency envisions this role potentially being filled by stealthy drones that can get much closer to the launch location. There is no mention of the E-2D playing a role in BMD.

The initial detection of missile launch will be via satellite- based sensors. Tracking in midflight will again be by staellite ( if they can find enough money tto put the additional tracking birds in orbit) complemented by surface-based radar, both on land (e.g. AN/TPY-2) and aboard ship.

maus92 wrote:

popcorn wrote:

hcobb wrote:

Come on guys, E-2D vs ASBM.

Without that you get a big box of Marines on fire.

Think about it.

Does the E--2D, in fact, have the ability to contribute to ASBM Defense? It can function as part of CEC environment in conjunction with other offboard sensor platforms but AFAIK its primary value is in countering airborne threats, maximizing the kinematic perolformance of the SM-6.
AEGIS ships don't require a Hawkeye and attendantt CSG to serve in the BMD role. The EuroMissile shield uses a solo AEGIS destroyer armed with SM-3s astride probable missile routes headed for Europe.

E-2D, like F-35, is not intended as part of the ABM system. Such platforms need 24/7 persistence to be effective. Shipboard AEGIS gives you that capability, tactical airborne platforms do not. Cruise missiles with their small radar cross sections OTOH continue to be a major thrmat to surface vessels, and that is what E-2D brings to the fleet.

I see the F-35 as being very useful in a scud-hunting scenario ala Desert Storm. We have an inkling of the sensitivity of its sensor suite detecting a missile launch from 800 miles away..so its up to the professionals to best exploit its potential and see how this can fit into their CONOPS. While the jet may be not tasked for BMD, the extended SA picture it provides just by being in the air will benefit different stakeholders.

A networked grid of F-35s could help in OTH Ballistic missile launch detection but then there's the possibility of using a kilowatt-class solid state laser in the F-35B to destroy scuds on the ground.

Forum: General F-35 Forum

Virtual aircraft carriers vs. real aircraft carriers