Tuesday, November 12, 2013

F-35 now faces X-47 for carrier missions.

Thanks for the article 0802


The F-35 is suppose to be the Navy's "deep strike" asset.  It goes in using its stealth for 1st day of war missions to attack targets that the Super Hornet can't.  Now we have news that instead of the X-47 being a seagoing Predator UAV, its now competing to do the exact same mission.

via USNI News.
The U.S. Navy appears to have shifted its position on the requirements for its next generation carrier-based unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), Navy officials told USNI News.
Instead of developing the planned Unmanned Carrier Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) to only conduct operations in uncontested airspace, the service will instead pursue a design that can be adapted over time to operating against higher threat levels.
“As a system, what we want to do as an affordability initiative is to ensure that the air vehicle design upfront has the growth capability without major modifications to go from permissive to contested [environments],” said Rear Adm. Mat Winter, Naval Air Systems Command’s (NAVAIR) program executive officer for unmanned aviation and strike weapons during an interview with USNI News on Nov. 10.
“Specific proposals and the designs that are given back to the government, those will be informing us of how much of that permissive to contested and the air refueling provision actually shows up in their designs.”
You have to search high and low but its becoming more and more apparent to me that the US Navy is willing to maintain capability, improve its strike power AND keep its carriers.

And its willing to sacrifice the F-35 to get it done. 

32 comments :

  1. i love the 47, i think its the future of naval aviation to an extent, reminds me of Doolittles raid in WWII, we are kind of going back to that, except this time instead of just a pin prick and a morale booster (which was what we needed and the raid was one of the ballsiest and best raids of the war) we can now launch bombers from our flattops to hit things i think commanders may not even send a 35 into, if you have a highly contested airspace why send a manned plane to do what an unmanned can? the logic points towards the 47 and its made slow yet steady and great progress towards a great weapon system.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Slow is the right word.

      This Dorito won't get into service until at least 2020 :)

      The X-47 is like an X-35, a very early prototype.

      Delete
    2. david, yes but given its progressing well, software is capable and on target, meeting its goals, its better than the F35 or other procurement disasters and if we seem to need to ramp up things i think we could get it combat ready a bit quicker if we needed to. also this kind of bombing platform has the ability to inform on next generation bomber and other advanced aircraft.

      Delete
  2. Right now it looks like the US Navy is the only service willing to go it alone when it comes to decision making. The Air Force is in full bed with the Pentagon and defense contractors for the F-35A. The Marines have sold their soul for the F-35B. The more I look at the Army, the more I am convinced that they are becoming a victim of this system. The Army is meant to be large and medium tech in order to fulfill its purpose. That's not a good place for greedy defense contractors to make big dollars and that's not good for the F-35 program. It looks like the Army is being completely gutted to satisfy more sequester budget cuts and I personally think that in the current environment they are helplessly at the mercy of the F-35 mafia since they don't have very many cards to play against them, especially when it comes to the jobs and technology development factor. In fact, I don't see any cards that the Army does have that they can play effectively.

    The Navy on the other hand has alternative options that are blatantly and obviously better. These are their cards and this is what freaks out the F-35 program contractors. In this game the F-35 program has all the cards to play on the Air Force, Army, and Marine Corps, but it only has one card on the Navy and that's this: if the Navy does not buy F-35Cs, then the price of the others variants will increase. That's the only real thing that's keeping the Navy chained in the program and it looks like the Navy is fighting with everything its got to break that chain.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Being a Marine this is hard to say, but please remember that we are part of the dept of the navy, so hence our budget is directed/impacts the navy. Based on my previous post and my utter disdain for the F-35, I would hope that the Adrimals are trumping our misguided, nay short sighting wants, by purposely increasing the net price if the F-35, in a lay attempt to save all of the other branches. I have many concerns about aircraft, sans pilot, but I will table off the time being.

      Delete
    2. I'm active duty Navy in the aviation community so I could be a little biased, but I guess I kind of rag on the Marine Corps sometimes for completely going head first into the F-35 program without a second thought. There was a time when the F-35B was about to be cut and in order to save it the Marine Corps propaganda machine, which does its job extremely well, was fully brought into action. In fact, it could be argued that the Marines were more adamant about the F-35B than the Air Force was about the F-35A. Now I think the only thing keeping the USMC in the F-35 program is a group of high ranking Marine Corps pilots and aviation officers led by a morally bankrupt General Amos wielding the power of the office of the Commandant. He and his posse of officers seem to be willing to sacrifice every other weapon in the Corps for the F-35B and a small miniaturized air force of their own. And it does not look like much will be able to change that unless Amos and his friends are somehow removed from power.

      I have not forgotten, however, that both of our services are still in this together and the Navy and Marine Corps budget are tied together as well so it's affecting both of us and that will not change even if the F-35C is canceled. I actually feel really bad for the Corps when I read about the Commandant or the F-35B in the news. The Navy at least has the F/A-18 mafia to fight back, the X-47B as a back up, and a CNO who is playing the game smartly. The Marines Corps doesn't have anyone to fight back against the F-35B wrecking their budget and their STOVL specific mission leaves them with no alternatives. On top of that Lockheed Martin has turned completely vicious about protecting this program and it's painful to watch how many cuts are occurring everywhere to keep it alive.

      Delete
    3. The F-18 was shit all over by Tomcat pilot, and you see the same with the F-35.

      Hell, F-4 pilots though the F-15 was a piece of shit because it only had 1 person in it.

      Winslow "Know Nothing" Wheeler advocated for the F-15s cancellation because it was more expensive than a F-5E.....

      Delete
    4. David, go fuck yourself. People in the service actually have to deal with the ramifications of what the F-35 will do to our readiness and our ability to carry out the mission. You're getting payed by defense contractors to just fuck us over. No one cares about anything you say anymore because you don't actually care about coming to an understanding on what's best for the armed forces. All you care about is that money you're getting money for advocating the obvious wrong choice. You're no different than a hired thug. Just go somewhere that you can enjoy your fat corrupt paycheck and shut the fuck up.

      Delete
    5. ohh, I think I just hit a nerve Andy.

      What's BEST for the Armed forces was decided to be a plane that wouldn't get anally penetrated by a S-300/S-400 system, and a jet with sensor fusion, not a warmed over 1970s era design, like what EVERY SINGLE Teen series fighter is. The MISSION is to kill the enemy before he can kill you, and the F-35 is the best jet, bar the F-22, for the job.

      If anyone is getting paid, it's you Andy, by your buddy Boeing, because they are terrified of the impending shutdown of both the F-15 and F-18 lines.

      Delete
    6. In fact Andy, I may wager that you have a nice fat, "consulting job" in Chicago after your service contract is up.

      It would certainly explain the hatred.

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    8. You hit no nerves. I can assure you of that. You're not important enough for me to give you that pleasure.

      You are also delusional. You claim that Boeing's fear of the F-15 and F-18 lines closing is evidence of me getting payed by Boeing? How is that evidence? Listen to your logic.

      Again, I get nothing from Boeing. My rank isn't high enough to get offers like that if they do exist. You've resorted to accusing me of this before it was obvious what you are. Seems you like to accuse others of the things you're guilty of if they have different points of view. The hatred comes from your hypocrisy. It's as simple as that. You are the only one to have ever accused me of being payed by a defense contractor to spill lies and now you are also the only one I've met who is guilty of it. Congratulations.

      Delete
  3. Wow, the PAK-FA is back in the Korean F-X race.

    http://www.janes.com/article/29936/russia-renews-pak-fa-overtures-to-south-korea

    Interestingly, Putin is in Seoul right now signing a bunch of economic and military cooperation agreements.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow, if South Korea chooses the PAK-FA over the F-35 that will be the biggest bitch slap to Lockheed's face ever. Actually, this will now be the first competition where the PAK-FA and F-35 will go head to head.

      The Lockheed mafia is probably going to go ballistic crazy to kick Sukhoi out of this.

      Delete
    2. Kicking Sukhoi out of contest is difficult to do because 1. The PAK-FA is closer to what the ROKAF envisioned for the F-X than the F-35. 2. Russian actually holds a carrot that the Koreans desperately want in this case, the joint development of a long range(1,000 km+) anti-ballistic missile radar that the Koreans have been trying to close for years. If Russians tie the PAK-FA sales with the signing of the radar deal as being implied, then Koreans have no choice but to go with the PAK-FA.

      Delete
    3. From what I hear Putin has also been trying to build a gas/oil pipeline from Russia to South Korea that goes through North Korea. Putin talked about this yesterday saying that it's still possible: http://www.platts.com/latest-news/natural-gas/moscow/putin-says-gas-pipeline-from-russia-to-south-21810296

      I'm starting to wonder if Russia is trying to steal South Korea away from us. South Korea is strategically located in a spot that would be beneficial to them for influence in the region.

      Delete
    4. Andrew

      Russia and Korea always had good relations since the collapse of the Soviet Union. During the Imperial Russia era, Russia and Korea were allies against Japan, and it was Russia's defeat at the Russo-Japanese war which resulted in Japan's annexation of Korea. The reason Russia wants a closer tie with Korea and Japan is to fend off the Chinese invasion of the Russian Far East. Russia fears China is trying to take over Russian Far East through a heavy migration and overwhelm the local Russian population with a mass influx of Chinese immigrants. The only way to fend off this Chinese invasion is to attract Russian citizens to the Far East through economic development by developing energy sources and attracting foreign investments from East Asian countries with no territorial ambitions on Russian Far East, namely Korea and Japan(Except for the Southern Kurils Islands).

      Anyhow, the opposition party just announced that they were going to cut, not increase, next year's F-X budget, meaning the F-35 purchase is becoming increasingly more difficult because the opposition party will not agree to any budget increase. At the same time they approved a $8 billion local attack helicopter program which is criticized by experts for overlapping with an existing local helicopter from which an attack variant could be built, illustrating how local weapons program get easy funding while imported weapons program are under a heavy scrutiny.

      Delete
    5. Okay, that doesn't surprise me then. Somehow I get the feeling that the US is going to now pressure South Korea to buy something like 20 F-35As. I think LM will get vicious over this and their lobbying power is a beast.

      I would really like to see what would happen if they chose the PAK-FA though. It would be a bitch slap to LM on an extreme scale and a huge boost for Sukhoi to have the PAK-FA trump the F-35 in their first competition.

      Delete
  4. On a side note, it looks like Egypt has gone full swing back into Russia's palms.Russia negotiates its biggest arms deal with Egypt since the Cold War after Barack Obama cut of defense aid: http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/11/12/russia-negotiates-its-biggest-arms-deal-with-egypt-since-the-cold-war-after-barack-obama-cuts-defence-aid/

    ReplyDelete
  5. May 14 2009
    Future of military aviation lies with drones: US admiral

    Washington (AFP) --Unmanned aircraft likely represent the future for US military aviation with next generation bombers and fighter planes operating without pilots onboard, the top US military officer said on Thursday.

    "We're at a real time of transition here in terms of the future of aviation, and the whole issue of what's going to be manned and what's going to be unmanned," Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Senate hearing.

    "I think we're at the beginning of this change," Mullen said when asked about plans for developing a new bomber aircraft.

    The use of drones has dramatically expanded just in the past few years, he said.

    Defense Secretary Robert Gates told the same hearing that military planners needed to answer the question whether a new bomber would have a pilot in the cockpit or operate as unmanned aircraft.

    Appearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Mullen said that Lockheed Martin's Joint Strike Fighter now being built could be the last manned fighter jet before robotic planes take over that role.

    "I mean, there are those that see JSF as the last manned fighter," Mullen said of the F-35. "I'm one that's inclined to believe that."

    http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Future_of_military_aviation_lies_with_drones_US_admiral_999.html

    ReplyDelete
  6. The F-35 development began twelve years ago and to this date has not provided a carrier-ready aircraft.

    GAO Report, March 2013
    The program was rebaselined in 2004 following weight and performance problems and rebaselined again in 2007 because of additional cost growth and schedule slips. Following an extensive department-wide review, the Secretary of Defense in February 2010 announced a major restructuring of the program due to poor cost and schedule outcomes and continuing problems. DOD added time and money for development, provided additional resources for testing, and reduced the number of aircraft to be procured in the near-term. . .DOD is investing billions of dollars on hundreds of aircraft before the design is stable, testing proves that it works and is reliable, and manufacturing processes mature to where aircraft can be produced in quantity to cost and schedule targets.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Yeah, no doubt great use of financing to spend $4 billion on more weapons, sure the Egyptian population is thrilled....

    ReplyDelete
  8. Untill the USNavy choses an UCLAS, of cancel thr F-35C why not to buy hundred of this Kamikazes launched from different platforms?

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=25Uqu9mc72g&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    ReplyDelete
  9. I know it isn't quite comparable but one of the many problems I have with F35 program is kind of like saying: "let's buy this NOKIA phone which is kind of buggy, we think we can get it to work" when you know that just the around the corner the new IPHONE 7 is coming out....I would far prefer to keep Super Hornets around and spend more on X47s (IPHONE 7)and future developments than waste money on F35 (crappy NOKIA)....

    ReplyDelete
  10. Which one of the aircraft in this discussion is faulty, unreliable overly expensive and at high-risk of not trapping aboard the ship?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A Super Hornet trying to land on a gator?

      Delete
    2. How is the Just So Failed fan club going SF?

      Delete
    3. @sferrin. recheck the date on the article. this is new. seems like they're reversing themselves on the sea going predator thing and now going full out strike ...

      Delete
    4. Sol, I don't remember the X-47 dropping a LGB or firing an AMRAMM last week, do you?

      The X-47 is like the X-35, a tech demonstrator. If it's progeny is ever bought, it will be in small numbers, maybe 4-6 a carrier.

      Delete
  11. Hey Sol, you're behind the times. UCLASS requirement was gutted. Instead of something in the X-47B class you're more likely to see something like a Reaper. Thanks for playin' though. Will let the F-35 Bitter Tears Support Group get back in session now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The details are here.

      http://news.usni.org/2013/08/29/pentagon-altered-uclass-requirements-for-counterterrorism-mission

      The knuckle-dragging big spenders will do their best to stop a killer direct threat to the world's largest military contractor, Lockheed-Martin with $15 billion annual sales, by trying to stop progress. Good luck on that. China probably already has the X-47 plans.

      Delete
  12. A blast or two from the past--

    2,400-mile Made Flight Made By Drone Bombers .
    Schenectady Gazette - Aug 7, 1946
    http://tinyurl.com/7qcjlqt

    Crewless Flight Points Way To Push-button Wars
    Deseret News - Aug 7, 1946
    http://tinyurl.com/mrogj8g

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.