-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
F-35B/C Lightning II (Joint Strike Fighter)
- Thread starter jai5w4
- Start date
And that's why the F-35B (or should it be F/A-35B) is such a waste of money for the Corps.
Our reliance on PGM munitions and A/A missiles is going to bite us in the future.
Serious question, how well does that strap-on 25mm work for you guys? You guys ever use it for A/A?
and finally, once again, the Air Force is doing it right with the F-35A, while we are punting it.
S/F
Like I tell my Marines, I don't mind a complaint, as long as they have a solution to go with it. What's your alternative? It's not as if the Harrier or Hornet rock the CASbah any harder right now.
Can the GAU-12 be used for A/A? Sure. Do we ever use it for A/A? I guess Harriers have used it for A/A exactly as much as Hornets have used their gun. The rest of the time (for Harriers, or presumably for F-35B's and C's) it can come off for an extra thousand pounds of gas at the boat.
I agree in that regard. The service that can break a rubber mallet is not the best suited for a low-observable, high maintenance platform that is compromised when the paint is chipped, so to speak. I've heard all kinds of rumors about maximum time in chocks before you have to get it to altitude so you don't overheat the fuel-cooled avionics, limited time below certain altitudes, and what-not. How this will work out in warmer places like Yuma or the conflict theaters du jour, I don't know.
I don't necessarily agree with the PGM/missile assertion. They are the future, but an over-reliance on either does come at a cost. I think the biggest rub is their success in a relatively benign OIF/OEF scenario leads to the belief that one bomb/missile = one kill, and in any larger scale threat-heavy environment, that will not be the case.
The larger argument for VSTOL/STOVL is the fact that it's the main reason for keeping the Marine Corps' TACAIR side of the future at all, and getting rid of it costs a small chunk of the US' strategic power projection. Without a VSTOL/STOVL platform, the FW strike assets of the MAGTF are limited to land-based and CVW assets only. With 100% commonality between USN and USMC TACAIR, what's the incentive for keeping a USMC air arm at all? What do we really bring to the table that justifies a separate entity from the USN/USAF if we demand the same support structures? I'm not a blind proponent of VSTOL though - a lot of those above points were brought to my attention by a former MAWTS Hornet guy-turned F-35 aviation-hallway guy (you probably know who I'm referring to).
Our GAU-12 works fine more or less. We don't often keep them on the jets unless we're preparing for something. Initially, we often have issues with them due to the bleed air drive system (the F-35's is supposed to be electric drive), but after a few iterations of shooting the gun, our maintainers often get it worked out. The gun is not optimized for the A/A arena like the Hornet's as our's is depressed 2-degrees to optimize it for strafing. It packs a pretty good punch over 20mm, but not on par with 30mm. It does take a little away from the lateral stability of the jet over the strakes though.
I don't know what the right answer is for Marine Air in the modern times of tight budgets and desired commonality. Thankfully, I don't have to make that decision, and my platform will be around till about 2025 anyhow.
/a bit rambling, but hey, I've got a few beers in me.
There was Marine Air before V/STOL, and it will still remain even if V/STOL goes away.
As we are looking at reducing CVN-based air, though, having some extra mini-carriers out there seems like some cost-effective power projection, though. It's been demonstrated to be useful very recently.
As we are looking at reducing CVN-based air, though, having some extra mini-carriers out there seems like some cost-effective power projection, though. It's been demonstrated to be useful very recently.
Harriers dropping bombs off big-deck gators, and Devil's Whirlybirds doing a SAR pickup... Libya validated both the Corps' high-profile aviaiton projects in a matter of days.
Well said. I wish the gator decks were operated a little differently when it comes to big picture power projection though. Operating them as small CVs would be highly effective when it comes to strike capability and power projection IMHO. Even more so when the F-35B comes online.
Perhaps the direction they're going with the America-class LHAs sans well decks. That thing is going to have one hell of a hangar deck.
That would get in the way of steel beach, captain's call, section PT, and GQ drills on the
I hold out hope for when the F-35 gets out there. Hopefully it will get the bigger, stronger Hornet mafia involved in LHD ops and bring some change about. We, the red-headed step children, are at the mercy of the larger V/HMM mafia ("we're in charge because there are more of us because we're in charge"), who do have brass on their side. The Hornet community has more. The clash will be interesting if nothing.
Which I expect to be a one-off. That was a humongous screwup not putting a well-deck on that thing, and from what I've heard from buddies in the Pentagon, the follow on ships will have one. There is nowhere close to the vertical lift in a standard MEU ACE to get everything ashore in any semblance of a rapid manner.
Awesome
Cool video. We just have to get them to license some better tunes for background music!
ryan1234
Well-Known Member
Did they borrow their soundtrack from Funkyzeit Mit Bruno?