Question.
You're going to do this on a pitching deck on a carrier in the Pacific while being pounded by sea spray while the ship is doing 30 knots to put wind over the bow, not to mention rain, snow and ice? I won't even talk about the beating that the airplanes stealth surface will take (have you seen F/A-18's after deployment??? they look like dogshit) just concentrating on the poor saps that have to crawl underneath all that to shove missiles and bombs onto the internal racks!
This MIGHT be the plane for the USAF but for naval service, I'm beyond having doubts...its just plain wrong.
Building a naval fighter is no simple task. When it comes to naval aviation we are talking about a totally different animal vs land based aviation.
ReplyDeleteReinforcing the landing gear and tail hook is just part of a much larger engineering exercise. Vibration and handling severe decelerations repeatability on all aircraft components in a corrosive environment are an absolute must. How is an F-35 and it's engine going to handle this environment? We have F-35 engines currently catching fire in a land based environment due to load deflections. What's going to happen after repeated carrier landings?
Conditions at sea are tough, exposure to salt is harsh; blue water operation is nasty. Takeoff is acceleration assisted (catapults) and landings are controlled crashes with huge deceleration.
As a Naval fighter the Super Hornet has it all, 1 seat, 2 seats, electronic attack, buddy tanking, large weapons load, towed decoys, great low speed maneuver, easy handling for the pilot, easy to maintain at sea and exceptional high alpha characteristics. The Advanced Super Hornet with EPE engines, internal IRST & cockpit, CFTs, EWPs is all the Navy needs for the next few years until F/A-XX comes to play. Not only can it afford to buy them it can afford to maintain them also.
Let me get this right...is the USNAVY going to use mj-1 loaders on the carriers just to load the internal bays of the F-35C???
DeleteLoading a hardpoint in the internal bay of the F-35 is no harder than a Superhornet at sea. If anything it's a bit easier due to a lower center of gravity and more to hold onto for the crew.
ReplyDeleteIronically, you might be on to something that the guys (poor saps) working inside the bay could even be protected from harsh maritime conditions by the bay doors -- not disadvantaged. (Actually might even like it under there and perhaps wish to take a coffee break) lol.
DeleteThe one problem right off however, would seem to be the apparent need for the loading vehicle to have an extended arm so that the driver (wearing a helmet on a carrier) doesn't slam his head repeatedly into the intake's underside during bouncy sea-states? Or include a remote-driven loading vehicle? (Hopefully hacker-proof)?
That said, the conclusion drawn by Solomon that the F-35C and even B are probably not the most cost-effective, prudent and feasible solutions to USN/USMC's future TACAIR mix potential is valid (for a host of other valid, logical reasons).
This comment has been removed by the author.
Deletegeogen you do not know anything
DeleteSolomon:
ReplyDeleteRecognize, you like the F-35.
I like it too since he quit under a submarine.
See this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J470gPWhmlY
:-)
Sol, the F-35's carrier deployment got pushed to next month, but General Bogdan said that the November deployment is going to happen: http://news.usni.org/2014/09/25/f-35c-carrier-tests-slated-november-uss-nimitz
ReplyDeleteNext month the Navy will send two F-35C's to the USS Nimitz for carrier trials. If the F-35C can't trap a wire before December it's pretty much done. The Navy may be forced to buy a few planes, but those planes won't be used for anything and it's likely that if any further cuts come to the program, the F-35C will be taking all the hits.
+ 1, Very Good F35!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVtW4CP5YW8
:-)
Never done jet weapon loading but white part of the door is very very close of touching the loading vehicle. Driver is unable see upper part of the hold-area where bombs go. Pilot's ladder it's not in extended position, most likely for a very good reason.
ReplyDeleteYa left out a crowded hangar deck, multiple aircraft being loaded and red lights.
ReplyDeletePerhaps a bomb loading elevator just for the F-35 as in a grease pit type scenario.
Good point Sol.
ReplyDeleteTo rise a big bomb they have no choise, but are they going to use the vehicle to rise small bombs and missiles too? It's goina be a long process compared to manually.
It seems they wont have too much room any way.
Look minute 4:02,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNt4XabicY4&feature=youtu.be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEtcx3_xwDA&feature=youtu.be
BTW, this post makes me think how boeing is planning to fill the internal weapons bay of the advanced Super Hornet, they say it's as easy to mount a central fuel tank. But are they going to arm them inside the carrier? It dosn't look as a secure procedure.
http://cavok.com.br/blog/wp-contents/uploads/2011/11/Super_Hornet_International_Roadmap.jpg
Amazing that no one mentioned never mentioned the S-3 Viking has internal bays and A3B Skywarrior did as well. This is not new to the navy.
ReplyDeleteamazing that you ignore the stealth skin that means that the aircrew has to be extremely careful not to scratch the skin or else they're causing expensive damage and perhaps even diminishing the stealth's effectiveness.
Deleteadditionally the Viking didn't have weapons bays. it dropped sonobouys and it was originally an anti-sub plane. it evolved into electronic attack and aerial tanking. the Skywarrior didn't last in use long and was soon relegated to refueling, electronic attack etc...its time in navy service was extremely brief.
so no Harlan. your example is as flawed as your reasoning on the F-35.
Odd that must be news to the sailors who loaded this torpedo:
Deletehttps://www.flickr.com/photos/24302898@N08/4582147126/
A simple google search would have shown you that the S-3 has 2 weapons bays that can hold 4 torpedo's (2 each) or 8 depth charges (4 each). The Skywarrior was a bomber till 1967, that is 11 years of service as the Navy's primary bomber. Given the the RA-3B has film based cameras in its weapons bays that had to be remove to recover film and load fresh film, just because they did not drop bombs did not mean the bays were unused.
The A-6 may have regulated it to tanker, EW, and reconnaissance till just after Gulf War 1; 35 years of brief service. Kind of like the "interim tanker" the USAF got 1953, FYI it was called the KC-135.
and why did the navy move away from bomb bays? simple. tactics changed and they're into surge operations. that means you load bombs, you launch aircraft rinse and repeat. it won't work with the F-35. eat it fyi thats called common sense.
Delete@Sol
ReplyDeleteHere is a good read, "The Carrier Air Wing of the Future". Some interesting options, including delaying the F-35C and going with ASH F-18s.
http://www.cnas.org/sites/default/files/publications-pdf/CNAS_CarrierAirWing_white.pdf
As I proposed before, there is an easier option for the USNavy not considered in the analysis . To operate F-35B instead of the F-35C. For the famous day one, they could act as target designators for the Growlers, Advanced Super Hornets and X-47B with stand off weapons. To increase the range for day one, those F-35B instead of bombs could even carry internal fuel tanks and two Amraams in the bay or a combination of one internal fuel tank, a big bomb and two Amraams, pretty much like the advanced Super Hornet.
DeleteFor that purpose they should modify the front landing gear of the F-35B, using the one from the F-35C with two wheels and the hook, to use the catapult to take off fully loaded. For landings they have enough space at the beginning of the landind field, before the arrest cables, but they should adapt the deck to resist the heat of the engine.
And for the missiles and small bombs, it seems they will use the same method as the one showed by Solomon
http://elpdefensenews.blogspot.ca/2014/10/amraam-load-sim-f-35.html
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/22/US_Navy_111003-N-ZZ999-003_An_F-35B_Lightning_II_makes_the_first_vertical_landing_on_a_flight_deck_at_sea_aboard_the_amphibious_assault_ship_USS_W.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/US_Navy_030331-N-9228K-008_An_F-A-18F_Super_Hornet_assigned_to_Strike_Fighter_Squadron_Forty-One_(VFA-41)_aboard_the_aircraft_carrier_USS_Nimitz_(CVN_68)_comes_in_for_a_landing_on_the_flight_deck_of_aircraft_carrier_USS_Abraha.jpg
the loading vehicle is called a "jammer". Most of the jammers I've seen have a joystick control for the arm and platform that the weapon sits on. the platform can be tilted and spun in multiple directions to adjust for parking and "shoulder of pylon" loading. The driver is probably only there as a safety precaution, monitoring power and hydraulic status. The parking brake should be set and the remote control should be used for uploading munitions.
ReplyDeleteNow for the bad news. Most stealth planes have very sharp seals called "blade seals" that line weapon and landing gear bays. the blade seals make for a tight conformal edge around doors panels. Aerodynamic friction actually sharpens these seals over time. working around blade seals can be dangerous, and the seals themselves are particularly vulnerable to damage. The white you see around the periphery of the door is probably some kind of foam cover they've put over the seals. I don't see those covers staying put in the wind and wet of the carrier deck. I see crewchiefs saying "Ain't got no time fo' dat!" and taking the risk of injury and/or damage to get the jet turned around.
Navy loaders have dealt with payload bays in the past, but the combination of stealth surfaces, small size (Vs the torpedo bay on a TBM avenger for example) and the blade seals, could make for hardcore challenges. the AF had 10-20 years with B-2 and F-117 in the black world to work out the stealth warplane kinks. The navy and MC is going to be cutting their teeth on water while the whole world watches. And everyone else with a thru-deck cruiser and an order out for F-35Cs' is going to have to learn it too.