Check out this passage from National Defense...
“There will be some challenges integrating the F-35 on the carrier. Most have been identified,” he says. A carrier air wing typically has anywhere from 44 to 54 fighter jets. The Navy expects that for the foreseeable future, most of the fighters in the air wing will be Super Hornets, and that the F-35C will have a niche role as an airborne intelligence nerve center.Everyday its becoming more clear why the US Navy wants out of the F-35 program.
The F-35C will be predominantly an “information collector and distributor in the air wing,” says Burks. As the Navy’s only “stealth” aircraft that can fly undetected by radar, it will be prepared to “go alone into highly contested areas,” he adds. But most of the time it will serve as the hub of a “network centric” air wing.
“It may not matter what weapon we have on board,” Burks says. F-35 pilots will pass information over the network that would allow other aircraft to engage targets. “I may pull the trigger in the cockpit but the weapon may come from a different platform,” he explains.
They simply don't have a use for it.
It will serve virtually no role in the carrier air wing.
It will serve as an airborne ISR node and that role can BETTER be performed by a fully rationalized X-47. Additionally the command and control that we're talking about will better be performed by Navy or Air Force AWACS.
The endgame for the Navy is clear. They'll stick with the program as long as they have to....while pushing procurement to the right as much as possible and while they continue to work on the X-47 and the 6th gen fighter, they'll play nice with the USAF and Marines.
When its realized that the F-35 costs too damn much they'll punch out of the program and never look back.
Brilliant.
The Koread Defense Ministry is making exactly the same arguement in its justification of F-35A; that it would provide targeting info for use by cruise and ballistic missiles, and subsequently provide a visual verification of target elimination upon strike so that second attacks could be launched in case the first one misses. The supersonic penetration is supposed to be critical because the KILLCHAIN system requires the elimination of any target(be it Kim Jong Un or North Korean nuclear missile) within 30 minutes of detection. For this specialized role the F-35 makes sense, as long as you intend to use the F-35 as a single mission aircraft.
ReplyDeleteSo for militaries that could afford to use the F-35 as a modern-day F/A-117 it may not be such a bad deal, assuming there are other aircraft types for A2A, CAS, and simple bomb-truck roles. The problem is that there will be no other aircraft in production to fulfill those roles for the US forces, while the US's Asian allies would have other aircraft to fill those roles.
time for some painful truth.
Deletethe only reason why Japan and S. Korea are buying this plane is because they're scared shitless of China and are suspicious of each other.
thats the only reason. plus you have them wanting to gain favor with the US and the US is pushing this airplane hard so that LM and a few generals can be happy.
as far as how the airplane is actually going to be used you can stow your theory. the USAF is saying that this plane is going to be the key to air superiority
thats bullshit and they know it, advocates of the airplane know it and its just more bullshit.
It would be cheaper to mount sensors on another missile and have it orbit the point of impact. Even if such a contraption costs twice as much as the standard version. It would cost less to design and build than $125 million aircraft plus development cost.
DeleteThere are too many commentators on the West's defense blogs still in their minds climbing into B17 and Lancasters. And then viewing modern airpower through that lens.
This reminds me of when USMC Colonel (ret.) Art "Turbo" Tomassetti was asked "What impact will the F-35 have on US Marine Corps operations?"
ReplyDeleteTomassetti. who might correctly be called the father of the F-35B, didn't respond with any CAS opinons, but rather:
"The F-35 will have a significant impact on the Marine Air-Ground Task Force in bringing fifth generation capabilities and flexibility. It will be an important node in a networked battlespace by gathering and disseminating information, which can increase the overall situational awareness for Marines on the ground as well as for Marines and other friendly forces in the air."
I'm sure the grunts at the pointy end will be thrilled by all this situational awareness when what they want is close air support.
If it is only really used as a ISR/network connector that can fly deep inside contested airspace, why use a manned jet with an internal bomb bay? Wouldn't it be just as good to fly an extreme LO UAV or just use a standoff AWACS/JSTAR?!? This "Burks" guy almost sounds like he knows it's a lie, doesn't believe his own BS and trying to find some kind of line that he can kind of play off as the truth..."platform performance doesn't matter" sounds really thin when you look at the performance of the F22, PAKFA and J20......He and all those pro F35 crowd are just throwing everything in the kitchen against the wall hoping something will stick.....
ReplyDeletethats my point NICO! the X-47 will do the job of information node much better than an F-35 ever could. if you want command and control then thats an E-2 Hawkeye job.
Deletethe F-35 has no real role! the idea that its the focus of coordinating an effort in a MAGTF is so much bullshit that i'm surprised that anyone that has ever worn the uniform would actually mouth such stupidity.
the F-35 is nothing more than a money pit. its an example of how certain leaders refuse to take a step back and say "WE WERE WRONG!"
pride means more to them than properly defending their country...be that the USA, S. Korea, Japan, the Netherlands, Canada, Italy, or whoever/wherever.
+10000000000 Nico
Delete(Should have read all comments before commenting.)
What really helps the Navy, as somebody I forget who pointed out here the other day, is the UK switch back to the B which means Navy is the sole prospective user. That's not true for the other two models which gives Navy free reign, assuming some Navy influence over the Marines who are slated for 80 CV.
ReplyDeleteAnd correct me if I'm wrong, but controlling one or more armed drones requires a two-seater doesn't it, like the F/A-18F.
ReplyDeletequite honestly i don't know. i'll have to ask Eric or Peter about that. i have always been under the impression though that to do anything worthwhile that you would need an E-2 or an AWACS to control a small swarm of the things...i'm saying if you're talking about 2 to maybe 4 then you're outside the realm of a backseater and into the realm of a dedicated airplane.
Deletei'll send out an e-mail in a few to find out.
I raised the point because I have a faint memory that somebody claimed that the JSF might control drones, with all its 'situational awareness' and all.
Deleteyou're quite right. no one has ever investigated the situation to see if its real or just another fantasy capability.
ReplyDeleteseems like we're asking questions that people in the USAF, USMC and USN should be asking and getting answers to...but they won't. they're just tossing shit at the wall to see what the public will believe.
Why, because operational readiness of F35C are very low <50%, therefore IMO it won't enter service in the navy.
ReplyDeleteNot just the X-47B. I think the US Navy is thinking in something as big as the Avenger.
ReplyDeletewww.youtube.com/watch?v=g-mtvZoq4N0&feature=youtube_gdata_player
www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLE-v-ldaHM&feature=youtube_gdata_player