F-35B/C Lightning II (Joint Strike Fighter)

[exo]

Well, I think the OTT (Obama Transition Team) would argue that we do not have a fighter gap, rather too many big deck carriers. But at this point we will have to wait and see. Change is on the way.

I agree, although according to the article we shouldn't slip below the 11 carrier limit. Change is certainly on the way, I just hope that change, or the situation that started this thread, doesn't dries up the fighter slots when I'm at that point.

 

[Sky-Pig]

I agree, although according to the article we shouldn't slip below the 11 carrier limit. Change is certainly on the way, I just hope that change, or the situation that started this thread, doesn't dries up the fighter slots when I'm at that point.

The army will always need UAV drivers.

Hmmm...sounds like it's time for another bottom-up QDR.

So...let's consider the options:
1. Build more aircraft = $$$ and lead time (POM-12 and beyond)
2. Fly unsafe Hornets = bad, bad idea
3. Fly fewer hours on the Hornets you still have (P-3C solution) = extends the service life of the legacy hornets but is bad for readiness
4. Change the requirement = stroke of a pen/word processor

Requirements can be a tricky son of a gun. It's a rhetorical question for this board, but for the heavy hitters...what are the requirements? Can we justify them...or are these future requirements based upon what we can currently support today?

Historically, the tacair warhead-on-forehead crowd usually (but not always) wins out at the expense of the support aircraft...so I'd keep a close eye on P-8A, E-2D, BAMS, and any EP-3 replacement aircraft programs.

While this will be an decision for the Obama administration...this isn't necessarily a democrat or republican mistake...we've taken a procurement holiday pretty much since the end of the Reagan administration...and now we are reaping what was sown.

One of my favorite acronyms from my purgatory at NAVAIR was "CAIV" or Cost as An Independent Variable. Basically, I translated it to mean "All things being equal, fat people use more soap. And if you only have $4.00 you can't go out and buy $11.50 worth of stuff."

So...for all the folks on this site, be you aviators of the old-school, new-school, or registered for pre-school...what would you trade off for some more hornets? Or not?

 

[NozeMan]

We've touched on this issue in another thread about a NYT article. The DoD will be forced to cut some big ticket items at some point. What are they for the Navy? JSF, P-8, LCS, new subs to name a few.

Good thing we have our helo plan figured out ahead of time!

 

[Mumbles]

If P-8 is canceled, the USN will lose it's fixed wing MPRA community. Flying P-3s ad infinatum is an untenable solution.

 

[skidz]

Jsf-35

I have heard near to nothing from any channels for quite some time about this aircraft.

Lately, from news channels and military reviews from outside of the United States, they have seemed to have lost faith in this aircraft. Making one wonder why the media blackout of the aircraft here in the states.

I know that there were many dislikes and heavily contested compromises that it's design took, but what about now? Is there anything more recent of the development and testing?


One link I managed to find: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/The-F-35s-Air-to-Air-Capability-Controversy-05089/

 

[stalk]

If P-8 is canceled, the USN will lose it's fixed wing MPRA community. Flying P-3s ad infinatum is an untenable solution.

Though I agree with your statement, I'll throw out for discussion, USAF's decisions with the B-52 and KC-135 as past examples of coping.

 

[MasterBates]

Were the -52 and -135 falling and corroding apart?

Some of the P3s are as old as those, (or older) and operate in possibly a harsher environment.

 

[HeyJoe]

I have heard near to nothing from any channels for quite some time about this aircraft.

Lately, from news channels and military reviews from outside of the United States, they have seemed to have lost faith in this aircraft. Making one wonder why the media blackout of the aircraft here in the states.

I know that there were many dislikes and heavily contested compromises that it's design took, but what about now? Is there anything more recent of the development and testing?


One link I managed to find: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/The-F-35s-Air-to-Air-Capability-Controversy-05089/

What media blackout? The F-35 is routinely in the news. Perhaps. part of your problem with your channels is calling it "Jsf-35". Trying putting F-35 Lightning II into your search engine and you'll get pages of places to go to hear the latest. Or simply go to the official website which has an archive of all the new releases.

 

[exo]

According to another article by some Merrill Lynch analyser (didn't know they did this), it seems one possible and likely situation is to cut the F-22 program substantially if not completely with focus shifting to the JSF. Any administration has to respect and understand the important of air superiority, we can't simply decide it's not affordable right now. The JSF is much more affordable, and also has smaller maintenance cost from what I hear.

In addition, I imagine land based missile interceptor systems will get the axe for more affordable sea based systems. Army's future combat system has been a financial mess since inception. Are fighter jets expensive to maintain, train, and run? Yes. Are they indespensible? I think so. Any incoming administration has to see the global instability that the world resides in right now and much of the budget woes can be cleared up by eliminating 2 or 3 very big ticket items (land interceptors, F-22 program) as well as the inevitable withdrawal from Iraq.

I think it's important to realize that this economic downturn is global, not just local. Nothing this big can be local on the global scale we operate on today. Therefore, foreign nations are also dealing with a lot of the economic insecurities that we are working through. I don't think we have anything to worry about in the short term though. These things take times and Obama's advisors say there will be no major military budget cuts for almost 18 months.... in terms of economic stability returning, a lot can happen in that time. Every record recession has been followed by record highs, the tax player still may come out on top from these bailouts.

 

[stalk]

Were the -52 and -135 falling and corroding apart?

Good question. The 135's were re-engined and structurally reworked but I don't have a clue what's keeping the 52's flying :icon_mi_1

 

[Junkball]

I don't have a clue what's keeping the 52's flying :icon_mi_1

Duct tape and faith

 

[zippy]

Good question. The 135's were re-engined and structurally reworked but I don't have a clue what's keeping the 52's flying :icon_mi_1

Many years of sitting on the ramp doing sac alert duty- and relatively lower stresses on the airframes due to the type of flying compared to the constant/continuous use of P-3s in the low altitude ASW environment.

The community could probably survive without BAMS (since they haven't figured out how exactly it is going to fit into the way we operate anyways), but will not survive without P-8.

 

[Swanee]

According to another article by some Merrill Lynch analyser (didn't know they did this), it seems one possible and likely situation is to cut the F-22 program substantially if not completely with focus shifting to the JSF. Any administration has to respect and understand the important of air superiority, we can't simply decide it's not affordable right now. The JSF is much more affordable, and also has smaller maintenance cost from what I hear.

In addition, I imagine land based missile interceptor systems will get the axe for more affordable sea based systems. Army's future combat system has been a financial mess since inception. Are fighter jets expensive to maintain, train, and run? Yes. Are they indespensible? I think so. Any incoming administration has to see the global instability that the world resides in right now and much of the budget woes can be cleared up by eliminating 2 or 3 very big ticket items (land interceptors, F-22 program) as well as the inevitable withdrawal from Iraq.

I think it's important to realize that this economic downturn is global, not just local. Nothing this big can be local on the global scale we operate on today. Therefore, foreign nations are also dealing with a lot of the economic insecurities that we are working through. I don't think we have anything to worry about in the short term though. These things take times and Obama's advisors say there will be no major military budget cuts for almost 18 months.... in terms of economic stability returning, a lot can happen in that time. Every record recession has been followed by record highs, the tax player still may come out on top from these bailouts.

With operational F-22 squadrons at Langley, Elmendorf, Holloman and soon to be Hickam, the training squadron at Tyndall, the test squadron at Eglin and now with the Weapons School squadron at Nellis standing up (not to mention the Guard squadrons sharing iron with the AD folks at these bases) I seriously doubt that the F-22 "program" is going anywhere. The AF has bought way to far into that airplane to cancel it.

 

[Flash]

Lately, from news channels and military reviews from outside of the United States, they have seemed to have lost faith in this aircraft. Making one wonder why the media blackout of the aircraft here in the states.

HeyJoe is right, you need to open your eyes a little bit more. There are a few people out there with an axe to grind against the JSF for some reason, one guy in Australia comes to mind, but the facts really don't jive with their claims. And I have no idea where you are getting 'military reviews' out of it, most military procurement is even more political than ours so I wouldn't count on their judgement anyways.

With operational F-22 squadrons at Langley, Elmendorf, Holloman and soon to be Hickam, the training squadron at Tyndall, the test squadron at Eglin and now with the Weapons School squadron at Nellis standing up (not to mention the Guard squadrons sharing iron with the AD folks at these bases) I seriously doubt that the F-22 "program" is going anywhere. The AF has bought way to far into that airplane to cancel it.

The F-22 is not going to get cancelled, it is pretty much impossible to do to a fielded system nowadays. A big decision looming though is just how many total they are going to buy. The last I remember it was 189, the USAF has been saying to anyone that listens that they desperately need more, but they may get stuck with what they have.

Good question. The 135's were re-engined and structurally reworked but I don't have a clue what's keeping the 52's flying :icon_mi_1

Duct tape and faith

Along with what Zippy said, a lot of USAF care and feeding. I got a brief on what they do to their RC-135's while in depot, it is impressive and humbling for a Navy guy.

 

[exo]

With operational F-22 squadrons at Langley, Elmendorf, Holloman and soon to be Hickam, the training squadron at Tyndall, the test squadron at Eglin and now with the Weapons School squadron at Nellis standing up (not to mention the Guard squadrons sharing iron with the AD folks at these bases) I seriously doubt that the F-22 "program" is going anywhere. The AF has bought way to far into that airplane to cancel it.

I apologize for not being as precise and clear as I should have been. My intended statement wasn't that they would go back on the F-22 program and it would be stopped, only further purchases would be reassessed in light of having a more affordable alternative in the JSF.

However, I will say as a civilian and someone less in the know about military procedures and the support structure already in place for the F-22, my opinions in the matter are less than substantial.