I've posted my thoughts on what we should do IF the powers that be decide enough is finally enough with the F-35. I'm just a blogger so my thoughts on the subject mean nothing.
Things have changed though.
Now we have a MAJOR Washington DC think tank that has published alternatives to the F-35. Center for a New American Security is a LEFT leaning organization. It was founded by Michèle A. Flournoy, former advisor to SecDef Panetta. Quite honestly this makes this paper even more important. This might be an indication of what policy makers are actually thinking.
Read it all and give me your opinion on the piece. Sidenote. How this escaped my attention (it was published in Feb of this year) is beyond me!
MAJOR HAT TIP to Canuck Fighter for the link.
28 pages of reading.....this will take a while.
ReplyDeleteI found this a few months ago after reading somewhere that the F-35 squadrons were going to have 16 planes each, couldn't figure how that was going to work on a carrier WITH UCLASS being a thing on top of an extra Hawkeye and Growler. So 10 per squadron like the legacy Hornet squadrons makes sense.
ReplyDeleteReal Clear Defense posted a video of a DC breakfast panel they did that I think included one of this reports authors. During Q&A the F-35 came up and the CNAS guy said don't be surprised by 3 Super Hornet squadrons with only 1 F-35 squadron in a CVW.
That all being said this report isn't an outright alternative to the F-35, just ideas about what to do with the money if its delayed til 2020ish (fleet sensor upgrades, Advanced Hornet, or UCLASS).
Based on what's happening with UCLASS I think the navy is gearing up for that to be their next clusterfuck (like LCS, America class LHAs, Zumult destroyers).
I also don't see how F/A-xx is going to be the Navy's saving grave unless MAJOR changes to the DOD procurement process are made following the F-35. At this point Lockheed should NOT be profiting from this program.
The people that made this report have not done all their homework.
ReplyDeleteSuper Hornet is not a "significant" upgrade over, let us say late-lot F-18C/Ds that were in production at the time. Also the Super Slow Hornet has less energy than a late-Lot F-18C in the heart of the combat envelop. Of interest. F-18F has better Mach performance than the F-18E. Reason? E's little canopy isn't very area-rule friendly.
Stating the Super Hornet "bettered the combat range of the F-18A/C by 33 percent" is not true. 40 was a hope. The stores seperation problem resolved by pointing the SUU-79 pylons out 4 degrees and canting the outer station pylon created drag that pulled that down to 20 on a good day. F-18F actually failed its range KPP from the carrier unless they took off without burner. Also, while the Super carried more gas. It also had more weight.
Not true: production did not "soon" turn over to the Block II. That took awhile. Completey different cooling systems and interfacing that with the motors took some work. The software by the way is still on a long upgrade spirial... to this day.
As for the Growler... for years... USN stated the ALQ-99 was not going to be good enough. Too legacy. Hard to repair. Can't keep up with the threat. We need the Next Gen Jammer now to field with the Super by gosh... They marked the Growler on the Next Gen Jammer being available sooner. Guess what main ECM pods went into the Growler? It is also very draggy, highly tanker dependent and has no persistance. Emerging threats will kill it. Next Gen Jammer is back as a program but has not done OPEVAL, pencil-whipped or otherwise.
And about that threat. Both the Super and the F-35C mean that we are fielding a carrier air wing that will not be able to take on emerging threats. Part 2 of that? The Super does every other mission better/cheaper than the Just So Failed ...ever will.
Navy reasoning on page 11 in regard to the alleged prowess of the F-35C is nonsense. That which can be presented without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
"Stealthy" F-35C. Good luck with that theory.
"Upgrade 130" Super Block 1s to Block II. This will be a complete gutting. And some early lot-Block I's can't upgrade this way... and not because of airframe age.
Page 14. The Navy claims thrift but anything other than an all-Super Hornet composition for the fast-movers in the carrier air wing is not thrifty.
Page 16. Yet another Internet meme: "Delaying the F-35C potentially jeopardizes the Navy's ability to operate effectively on the first day of future high-end combat operatations when the air defense threat is at its peak." well..no. The F-35C is no more survivable than a Super which has an outstanding towed decoy fused to its self-defense ECM system. The F-35C has narrowband-narrow-nose-on low observable ability, no defensive jamming, (Sorry inband little-AESA with limited FOV and thermal sustainment and low power won't hack it.) E/F Super defensive jamming covers a wider band. Both would get shot down vs. high end threats, but the E/F is probably more survivable.
So again, the Super brings more capability from high end threats (carrying JASSM-ER SOW) all the way down to proper close air support and always leavs the deck with a gun. Also, the Super has a real HOBS/AIM-9X solution. At the merge the Super is better.
And, the F-35C can't even tank. Or, trap with one engine at idle, or carry 2 air crew.
What was the Navy asked when they stated what they wanted with the JSF years ago? 1000 mile radius (goofed that with A-12, weight etc... never going to happen), 2 aircrew option, 2 engines.
USN's carrier air wing of the "future" will do a very nice job at it's "high-end" threat, if that threat is the same as ALLIED FORCE 1999.
Finally, flying safety around the carrier. It doesn't get much better than the Super which has held on to very excellent safety metrics, to and from the ship.
Do tell me where you learned all of the details about the F-35's ASQ-239 ESM suite? I'm quite interested in how you've determined it has no self-defense ECM capabilities beyond what the APG-81 can do. While you're at tell us the details on the ALE-70 too. Or inform us how you know the specifics of the F-35's stealth characteristics? Or maybe give us the specs on the "little" (same array size as the Super Hornet last I checked) APG-81 and how it is "low power".
DeleteThe ECM/ESM suites on aircraft have gotten increasingly integrated since the 1980s. Do you really think the F-22 lacks on-board ECM capabilities unlike the F-15 which preceded it? It's integrated into the ALR-94. Do you really think it is different with the the F-35's ASQ-239?
I'm not interested in repeating the same back and forth arguments about the Super Hornet that occurred throughout the '90s. Yet regardless of the questionable decisions that led to the Super Hornet, it seems to me like the past 14 years has proven the aircraft to be far more capable than the critics would like to admit. I still think the "could have been" Super Tomcat of 2014 would have been superior in many aspects, but we can't go back and change history.
The Navy didn't "want" the JSF, after the A-12 they wanted the A-X, which later became A/F-X. Probably for budget reasons the Navy's requirement for requirement for new aircraft somehow got thrown into the JSF program. This despite the fact that USAF/USMC requirements and USN requirements didn't really align all that nicely.
I'm really not inclined to argue how most of your claims are false but do you even look over what the hell you are writing? The F-35 can't use JASSM and AIM-9X and doesn't have a HMS? The F/A-18 is better at CAS because of the gun? What sort of high-threat environment would restrict the F-35C from carrying a gun pod yet allow for F/A-18s to be strafing the enemy with their 20mm Vulcans? This is simply idiotic.
And BTW the Navy chose to forgo the internal gun.
And for the love of God would you cut the "Just So Failed" and "Super-Slow Hornet" nonsense? It's not at all clever or funny, especially after at least a decade of it.
Sorry, the Super IS a huge upgrade over legacy Hornets, not in terms of raw performance, but in terms of upgradability, electrical power, and systems reliability and modularity. These are very important attributes in modern aircraft. The aircraft did fail to achieve some performance metrics, but at the time, the Navy decided that the extra development time and expense was not worth it, in other words, it was good enough.
ReplyDeleteContrast this to the F-35, where they have all the money in the world it seems, yet this aircraft will not meet all its design goals even with a huge influx of cash the program received a few years ago. Wondering why a nominal F-35 squadron has 16 aircraft, compared to 10-12 for Super Hornets? Does reliability ring a bell? If you are lucky, you'll have a 60% availability rate with F-35. Right now, it is sub 50% (and closer to 30% on some days.)
Solomon:
ReplyDeleteYou are not "just a blogger", you're a conscience, a nationalist.
There is a big difference between Patriot and Nationalist.
The Patriot struggle for land, a government, the nationalist struggle by his peers, his friends, his peers.
Introspecte about it, the art of both the Patriot War and the Nationalist gana have the same, what changes is the prism, the motivation in the art of killing - it is after all the motivation in a war.
Really respect what you write and speak (there is also a difference - one person writes a text, but in-between those who have mastery of reading understand what the person is talking, it's like talking to a table).
This is one reason I like to come back here and listen to what you say, you're transparent.
You might ask yourself: "like a son of a bitch who lives in Brazil, read what I write in Google Translator can say that!
My answer is simple and sincere:
Is ideas that move the world!
Google Translate sucks? Yes, it sucks but it allows ideas and concepts to move from one head to another.
Bration there!
Alexandre.
:-)
Solomon, the day you say "- Alexandre (or Proftel), stop writing on my blog," you can be sure never to write, I'm a decent guy. Still continue
What about a Navy Scorpion with radar absorbing skin?. It is already a very cheap and stealthy airplane that can carry 1.5Tn internally. It could designate targets for the SH/Growler/X-47B, Also It can do reconnaissance and CAS Missions for several hours.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.operatorchan.org/v/src/141087717784.jpg