Possibility small STOVL carrier USN/USMC

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 03 Dec 2012, 04:29

"Maybe everyone knew exactly what he meant, (thus AvWeek felt they could go short hand) and only you care about winning semantic arguments using a publication that just proved by your own measure that it is pathetic in details?" Give it a rest - you dig a deeper hole.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 05 Dec 2012, 21:14

First F-35B Delivery to MCAS Yuma [At time 1:24 Robert Work begins remarks & mentions 22 aircraft carriers]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... dIs#t=102s

"Published on Dec 5, 2012 by LockheedMartinVideos
Interviews and highlights from the F-35B delivery ceremony at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Ariz., Nov. 20, 2012."

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 09 Dec 2012, 16:18

More on the possibility of the Osprey in the aerial tanker role. Exciting times for the Marines

http://www.sldinfo.com/the-f-35-and-dri ... hts-alone/

THE F-35 AND DRIVING MAGTF INNOVATION: NO PLATFORM FIGHTS ALONE

In the first piece from our interview with Col. Michael Orr, VMX-22 squadron commander, we focused on the co-location of the F-35 squadrons, MAWTS and VMX-22 and its impact on innovation. In this second part, Col. Orr discusses some of the consequences of having such a process in place.

As Col. Michael Orr, the CO of the squadron underscored, “we are testing platforms working together in shaping capabilities. We are not just testing individual platforms. This is especially crucial when you have dynamic, transformational platforms such as the Osprey and the F-35.”..

Col. Orr: ...What I’m very, very excited about is just a tremendous future for the V-22 Osprey in a role as as the cornerstone of the power projection capability of the aviation combat element of the future. I’m particularly interested in initiatives to increase the utility and lethality of the aircraft.

And when you start to think about roll on/roll off packages, for example, what you see what we’re doing with the C-130 Harvest Hawk, it opens up a world of possibilities. Signals intelligence, electronic warfare, aerial refueling, are all the kind of things that you can do with the platform.

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 09 Dec 2012, 16:37

More on the possibility of the Osprey in the aerial tanker role. Exciting times for the Marines

http://www.sldinfo.com/the-f-35-and-dri ... hts-alone/

THE F-35 AND DRIVING MAGTF INNOVATION: NO PLATFORM FIGHTS ALONE

In the first piece from our interview with Col. Michael Orr, VMX-22 squadron commander, we focused on the co-location of the F-35 squadrons, MAWTS and VMX-22 and its impact on innovation. In this second part, Col. Orr discusses some of the consequences of having such a process in place.

As Col. Michael Orr, the CO of the squadron underscored, “we are testing platforms working together in shaping capabilities. We are not just testing individual platforms. This is especially crucial when you have dynamic, transformational platforms such as the Osprey and the F-35.”..

Col. Orr: ...What I’m very, very excited about is just a tremendous future for the V-22 Osprey in a role as as the cornerstone of the power projection capability of the aviation combat element of the future. I’m particularly interested in initiatives to increase the utility and lethality of the aircraft.

And when you start to think about roll on/roll off packages, for example, what you see what we’re doing with the C-130 Harvest Hawk, it opens up a world of possibilities. Signals intelligence, electronic warfare, aerial refueling, are all the kind of things that you can do with the platform.

count_to_10 · by **count_to_10** » 09 Dec 2012, 16:40

You are double posting again, popcorn.
Neat stuff on the V-22, though. Roll-on packages seem like they are more likely than dedicated variants.

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 09 Dec 2012, 17:35

count_to_10 wrote:You are double posting again, popcorn.
Neat stuff on the V-22, though. Roll-on packages seem like they are more likely than dedicated variants.

Sorry..

CNO Greenert seems to think this is the way to go.. I think the analogy tp a pick-up truck is quite apt.

http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedin ... new-course

... Navy platforms, particularly ships and aircraft, are large capital investments frequently designed to last for 20 to 50 years. To ensure our Navy stays relevant, these platforms have to adapt to the changing fiscal, security, and technological conditions they will encounter over their long service lives. It is unaffordable, however, to adapt a platform by replacing either it or its integral systems each time a new mission or need arises. We will instead need to change the modular weapon, sensor, and unmanned vehicle “payloads” a platform carries or employs. In addition to being more affordable, this decoupling of payload development from platform development will take advantage of a set of emerging trends in precision weapons, stealth, ship and aircraft construction, economics, and warfare Iwill describe in this article.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 09 Dec 2012, 18:02

RORO - I like it. Just the thing for the CVFs also. I guess USMC will have to develop the concepts and the UK will tag along (no money). Don't complain - the brits developed STOVL ops etc in the first instance.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 09 Dec 2012, 18:43

MV-22 OSPREYS COMPLETE LANDMARK DEPLOYMENT TO GUAM 08 Dec 2012 Guam News

http://www.pacificnewscenter.com/index. ... Itemid=156

"NAVAL COMPUTER AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS AREA MASTER STATION, Guam – Marine Corps Aviation hit another significant landmark yesterday with the successful deployment of three MV-22 Ospreys across 1500 nautical miles in just over five hours from Okinawa, Japan to Guam. The aircraft arrived at Andersen Air Force Base at 5:09 p.m.

The aircraft are participating in the Marine Aircraft Group -12 (MAG-12) exercise FORAGER FURY 2012 (FF12).

The MV-22s from Marine Medium Tilt Rotor Squadron 265 (VMM-265), 1st Marine Aircraft Wing (1st MAW), III Marine Expeditionary Force (III MEF) completed the simulated “assault support” mission with four F/A-18 Hornets and KC-130J from Aerial Refueling Transport Squadron 152 (VMGR-152), 1st MAW, III MEF.

The MV-22s linked up with a VMGR-152 KC-130J about 850 nautical miles into the flight, southwest of Iwo Jima, to aerial refuel en route to Guam.

The flight from Okinawa enabled 1st MAW to simulate safe flight passage through 500 nm of permissive territory free of enemy threats, and 200 nm of hostile territory with four F/A-18s providing realistic replication of enemy aircraft.

This event reinforces Marine Air-Ground Task Force (MAGTF) integration and exercises maneuver to an objective from over the horizon. Lessons learned from this exercise will enable the Marine Corps to refine the tactical application of MV-22s in support of current and future contingency operations in the Asia-Pacific area...."

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 10 Dec 2012, 00:32

spazsinbad wrote:MV-22 OSPREYS COMPLETE LANDMARK DEPLOYMENT TO GUAM 08 Dec 2012 Guam News

http://www.pacificnewscenter.com/index. ... Itemid=156

"NAVAL COMPUTER AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS AREA MASTER STATION, Guam – Marine Corps Aviation hit another significant landmark yesterday with the successful deployment of three MV-22 Ospreys across 1500 nautical miles in just over five hours from Okinawa, Japan to Guam. The aircraft arrived at Andersen Air Force Base at 5:09 p.m.

The aircraft are participating in the Marine Aircraft Group -12 (MAG-12) exercise 8FORAGER FURY 2012 (FF12).

The MV-22s from Marine Medium Tilt Rotor Squadron 265 (VMM-265), 1st Marine Aircraft Wing (1st MAW), III Marine Expeditionary Force (III MEF) completed the simulated “assault support” mission with four F/A-18 Hornets and KC-130J from Aerial Refueling Transport Squadron 152 (VMGR-152), 1st MAW, III MEF.

The MV-22s linked up with a VMGR-152 KC-130J about 850 nautical miles into the flight, southwest of Iwo Jima, to aerial refuel en route to Guam.

The flight from Okinawa enabled 1st MAW to simulate safe flight passage through 500 nm of permissive territory free of enemy threats, and 200 nm of hostile territory with four F/A-18s providing realistic replication of enemy aircraft.

This event reinforces Marine Air-Ground Task Force (MAGTF) integration and exercises maneuver to an objective from over the horizon. Lessons learned from this exercise will enable the Marine Corps to refine the tactical application of MV-22s in support of current and future contingency operations in the Asia-Pacific area...."

So was the idea for the Ospreys to evade the Hornets somehow? No way they could outrun them.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 12 Dec 2012, 18:33

Probably one could argue that this video belongs with the now OLD NEWS about the USS Wasp/F-35B trials in Oct 2011, however the attached video became available at the URL today so I class it as relevant to the general info about F-35Bs on flat decks, especially the fuel bringback etc. ["3 to 4 thousand pounds of usable fuel] however this is really a bit nebulous but gives an idea about these 'bringback issues'.

About the fuel I would guess that there is an absolute minimum fuel to add to the "3-4K usable fuel" bringback with which the aircraft MUST be on the deck. What that is I do not know. To give an idea. The A4G had to be on deck with 500 lbs indicated which translated into a guaranteed 250 lbs because - would you believe - at Opt AoA the aircraft fuel reading was unreliable with a margin of 250 lbs. So this was indicated 500lbs which could have been that or only 250lbs - shudder - which was enough for a 'quick' circuit and land before the BIG silence. The SHAR had to be on deck with some similar 500lbs from memory but I could be wrong on that. I'm sure that SHAR 'min fuel' is mentioned a few times on this forum by now.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/12/12 ... de=1270360

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 04 Jan 2013, 20:38

'popcorn' popped the question above: "So was the idea for the Ospreys to evade the Hornets somehow? No way they could outrun them." Perhaps the escort Hornets and aggressor Hornets? faced off?

Shaping Operational Flexibility: An Interview with Major General Owens NO DATE c.Jan 2013

http://www.sldinfo.com/shaping-operatio ... ral-owens/

“...We had aggressor air involved and we had maritime targets in the warning areas south of Guam. We had live troops on the ground, up on the one land-based impact area that we have north of Saipan. The Hornet crews got a good workout, especially during surge periods involving a lot of dynamic retasking of airborne aircraft to new missions. MWSS-171 also got a good workout; they set a record for the number of “traps,” arrested landings, of aircraft when they trapped 13 Hornets in an hour on a single set of expeditionary arresting gear.

What was unique about Forager Fury was this was the first time we deployed MV22s in the exercise.

This was just the first demonstration of the capability that aircraft brings to our AOR. And it went very well; the aircraft self-deployed, nonstop, supported by our KC130 aerial refuelers. They also worked in a fixed wing escort with the Hornets for a training opportunity we don’t often get, complete with aggressor air enroute.

Once we got the Ospreys to Guam, they did troop lifts, they did logistics flights; and then, the culmination was a Tactical Recovery of Aircraft and Personnel mission, to an island 200 miles away from Guam. We simply couldn’t have done this with helicopters without doing front side and backside fueling stops in Tinian or Saipan.

With the Osprey, we were able to do it nonstop flying from Guam....”

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 05 Jan 2013, 14:26

spazsinbad wrote:'popcorn' popped the question above: "So was the idea for the Ospreys to evade the Hornets somehow? No way they could outrun them." Perhaps the escort Hornets and aggressor Hornets? faced off?

My bad.. confused the 4 escort F-18s with the 4 aggressor F-18s. 3 :oops:

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 27 Jan 2013, 05:54

BAE Systems Williamstown - Final Block Heavy Lift - LHD Superstructure VIDEO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kaao_1eh ... r_embedded

“Published on Dec 18, 2012 This timelapse video shows the movement of the final block of the LHD superstructure moving through the BAE Systems Williamstown shipyard and the heavy lift of the block onto the LHD deck.”

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 31 Jan 2013, 12:28

Look at these chaps... not a care in the world... with another USMC AV-8B in the distance getting ready to VL also. Cool as. Fanks to the SNAFU! 'solomon': http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-N_GmuDY6Sh4/U ... 39ba_h.jpg

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 28 Apr 2014, 17:19

How good are Ski Jumps? Compare this 1998 graphic from the early Harrier era.... (I guess this graphic should go on the very long thread eh).

‘BAe/McDonnell Douglas Harrier’ by Andy Evans | CROWOOD AVIATION SERIES 1998

“...A study which evolved from an idea by a Naval officer, Lt Cdr D.R Taylor. was undertaken at Southampton University in 1972. This was to have a great impact on the Sea Harrier's ability to carry a heavier load direct from the ship, thus increasing its effectiveness. He showed that an appreciable advantage could be gained by launching a VSTOL aircraft from a flat deck with an upward inclined ramp at the end. RAE Bedford undertook to try out the theory, building an adjustable, scaffolded ramp, and between August 1977 and June 1978 tested it at inclinations varying from 6 to 20 degrees. with Bill Bedford making the first 'leap' in XV281, followed by the two-seater XW175. The idea was that the pilot would start a 90ft run, and the ramp would impart a ballistic trajectory to the aircraft, while the pilot would select 35 degrees down nozzle to arrest the aircraft's sink rate as the ‘white line’ at the end of the ramp passed the edge of his peripheral vision, before he gradually moved the lever aft as the aircraft achieved wingborne flight. The gear came up as the aircraft reached 220 kts pulling 12 degrees AOA (angle of attack): a simple yet devastating answer to a big VSTOL headache. Thus for any Harrier take-off weight, the launch speed could be about 25 kts or less than from a flat deck. This also then translates into a 50 per cent shorter take-off run, or more importantly 30 per cent more fuel or weapons can be carried. So conclusive and impressive were the test results that the Navy took the decision to incorporate a ski-jump on the Invincible class carriers, where for reasons of self defence (mainly due to the position of the forward Sea Dart launchers) they were initially set at 7 degrees, but during Hermes's refit her ramp was set at what was considered to be the optimum, 12. The ramps were later revised to a 12-degrees fit on Ark Royal, Invincible and Illustrious....”