via Breaking Defense.
“We all want the same thing and we have to find ways to get there,” Welsh said near the end of the Air Force Association’s annual winter conference. But much of the public discussion about the Air Force, the A-10, and the CAS mission “is really kind of a little ridiculous,” he said, noting that the Air Force has flown more than 20,000 CAS sorties a year for ground troops.I want to stop right here and point something out.
He pointed to the F-35B as a key CAS platform. “That’s all the Marine Corps is buying it for,” he told us. “It will be a good CAS platform… It takes time to develop these things,” noting that the A-10 took years to become the excellent CAS weapon it is now.
I've never seen a brief on the F-35B that described how it would put steel on target better than the Harrier or the Super Hornet. Everything that's come down the pike has been how it will provide superior situational awareness for the ground force. But I digress...more from BD...
In the longer term, Welsh said the weapons used for close air support “need to change.” Among the possibilities — lasers and much smaller projectiles; perhaps even “splintering bullets.” The Air Force has “look at different ways of doing this.”And there you have it.
Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James chimed in, saying she hoped “this body of thought that comes from the summit would help us reengage with the Congress and find a different approach.”
The USAF is going to try and "reset" the debate on the F-35. That means they're losing and need to try to convince everyone that its really worth the grind.
The fact that they're talking about lasers or "splinter bullets" is just talk to calm the crowd.
They're losing the F-35 fight in the military and Congress. The Air Force Secretary's words are telling....
“this body of thought that comes from the summit would help us reengage with the Congress and find a different approach.”The F-35 message has been lost and my prediction is coming true. How do we know? The Secretary of the AF told us so.
There are several things that answer the "how it would put steel on target better than the Harrier or the Super Hornet." question:
ReplyDelete1. For the USMC, the SH is a non-starter since it cannot do LHA/D or austere basing.
2. It fly's farther = Can be based farther away from the action and affect a larger footprint
3. It fly's faster = Quicker to react & respond to a need
4. It carries more = Less platforms needed to address the threat
5. It has much better sensors = Harder to hide from, less of a chance of Blue-on-Blue.
6. Safer to fly = More pilots & airframes available in the long run
7. It self-escorts = More airframes available for other duties.
your diatribe is predictable.
ReplyDeletelisten carefully. i stated that the powers that be inside the USMC never explained how it would put steel on target better than the Harrier or the Super Hornet. oh and yeah you should include the Super Hornet because as we're seeing with the SPMAGTF-CR, the USMC is now using land based airplanes in support of its MEU's (always has had C-130's assigned to them) and the Hornets to provide support...the Super Hornet would of course do even better than the legacy airplane.
but the point remains. HQMC never pushed the meme of the F-35 being a close air support platform. they've talked about fighting the Air-Sea Battle. they've talked about interdiction missions. they've talked about electronic warfare, but they've never talked about CAS.
It literally pi... ehm.. pees me off that the US Air force wants to get rid of the A10. The best dedicated CAS plane ..basically ever.. Beyond that it is relatively cheap to fly unlike F35.
ReplyDeleteI might be wrong, Solomon might be wrong and F35 could become a great plane capable of doing what it was designed to do, but it is not designed to do what the A10 does. it is not designed to be as survivable and even if I am wrong about that.. here is the kicker: you can fly an A10 at least 4 times cheaper, so 4 times as much as F35. There is no use having a plane that you can not afford to field!
there is nothing cheap about this airplane. more to come on infrastructure cost in a bit.
ReplyDeleteUSAF senior leadership being dishonest ......... again.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of A-10, this might be of interest....
ReplyDeletehttp://www.janes.com/article/48957/afa-2015-usaf-contemplates-a-10-follow-on
I think you need to go back and lookup the meaning of diatribe which is "a forceful and bitter verbal attack against someone or something". Not only was I not
ReplyDelete"forceful or bitter" but I was in "support" of the F-35 rather than "against" something else.
You also might want to do some research about the USMC and the F-35B as it has ALWAYS been about CAS for them. From the earliest JSF docs, the F-35B has CAS as a primary mission. Note that in teh following early doc that only two mission are mentioned for USMC Block2 IOC, Interdiction and CAS.
http://i619.photobucket.com/albums/tt271/SpudmanWP/F-35Blk2.jpg
When the USMC announced the requiremetns for IOC, CAS was first on the list.
"Marine Corps F-35B IOC shall be declared when the first operational squadron is equipped with 10-16 aircraft, and US Marines are trained, manned, and equipped to conduct CAS, Offensive and Defensive Counter Air, Air Interdiction, Assault Support Escort, and Armed Reconnaissance in concert with Marine Air Ground Task Force resources and capabilities."
btw, The USMC does not want eh F-35C. They would rather have all F-35Bs because it allows them to base closer to the action but the USN is forcing the C on them.
Here are some more USMC F-35B Case quotes for you.
"Though some critics deride the JSF’s ability to perform the CAS role, the Marines consider the F-35B to be critical for the service’s continued ability to provide aerial fire support for its ground forces in the post-2020 era, USMC officials say."
This Congressional PDF if full of CAS being near, if not the top of, teh list of core missions for the F-35B:
http://www.marines.mil/Portals/59/NAVMC%203500.118.pdf
i saw that and immediately thought bullshit. the USAF is getting out of the CAS mission and only wants to do two things. keep the US Army from picking up the mission and getting into fast jets and keep the F-35 going long enough to get it into service without the inevitable cuts that are coming.
ReplyDeletethis talk about a follow on to the A-10 is just a smoke screen.
----There are several things that answer the "how it would put steel on target better than the Harrier or the Super Hornet." question:1. For the USMC, the SH is a non-starter since it cannot do LHA/D or austere basing. (Since there is no final operational test on the troubled F-35 program, neither will the F-35. F-35 LHA/D problems are many. F-35B as "austere basing" is a joke: 7 tons of gas per sortie, and the F-35 isn't up to rough conditions).
ReplyDelete2. It fly's farther = Can be based farther away from the action and affect a larger footprint (Unlikely, F-35B has been leaking fuel for years. http://ericpalmerblog.blogspot.com.au/2014/02/the-f-35b-design-is-leaking-fuel.html specific fuel consumption of that huge motor, thermal limits and reserve fuel could even be less capable than...the Harrier)
3. It fly's faster = Quicker to react & respond to a need (really. Mach .9 and 3Gs isn't all that significant)
4. It carries more = Less platforms needed to address the threat (Doubtful in hot/high conditions. Need proof. Not marketing.)
5. It has much better sensors = Harder to hide from, less of a chance of Blue-on-Blue. (Really? Looking at the progress of the program that "better sensors" meme has to also show proof of being reliable and sustainable sensors).
6. Safer to fly = More pilots & airframes available in the long run (Safer to fly... in a scripted environment. Certainly hats off to the landing controls). But safer to fly also means not becoming a fire-ball at the slightest bit of damage. Current engine history of the F-35 isn't impressive in highly scripted and flight-performance envelop limited efforts).
7. It self-escorts = More airframes available for other duties.----- (Must have missed that part. When USMC declares their joke of an IOC, they stated already that it will require escort by other current gen aircraft because so many promises on the F-35...do...not...work). And as for CAS, explain it to this guy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7s73ceVRGI
sorry SPuddy. i used the word properly, even if you choose to attack with that passive pussy ass why of yours its still the same.
ReplyDeleteget over yourself bud. the evidence is right in front of you and bringing out slides that are as old as dirt doesn't bolster your case. what was Amos and friends talking? what were they pushing with those fucked up ass experiments with boot Lt's at the IOC? they weren't talking about delivering ordinance, they were talking about acting as an expensive ass UAV passing along data.
Sweet!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.military-today.com/artillery/m109a7.htm
Super Hornet has a short field capability, like the legacy Hornets that the Marines use at FOBs. Just install the arresting engine and the AM-2.
ReplyDeleteSH can do austere basing, probably better than F-35.
ReplyDeleteThe Bravo does not have better range than a Super at equivalent load outs.
Faster? Meh. There goes any range advantage.
Carries more than SH? Nah, and certainly not while remaining stealthy.
Much better sensors? No.
Safer to fly than the safest naval aircraft ever?
The SH/LH doesn't self escort? That's news.
its not gonna matter in the end. ELP did a post on the infrastructure the Marines installed at Yuma to support this beast and its obvious to me that this plane will never be used aboard an LHD. the support is OVER THE TOP! no way they will be able to modify a ship to be able to support this flying disaster at sea. no way in hell. as a matter of fact the truth is even more stark. to make this work they're going to have to develop mini-aircraft carriers and even then change up how they do things TO MAKE IT WORK AT SEA!
ReplyDeletewant to know the real reason why the US Navy isn't wanting this piece of shit? its because if they take more than five at a time aboard the carriers then that means that some will be parked on deck. the plane can't take that kind of beating that the super hornets and legacy airplanes can.
That's a damn shame. The people I used to work with preached low-level CAS every day. The Air Force will dig itself a really deep hole on the F-35 and "stealth".
ReplyDeleteAt least you folks in the Navy is recognizing the mountain that the project is about to crash to and pulling out. Don't know how the congress will react to that though... LockMart has 44 states in its grip.
The SH requires "thousands" of feet if it wanted to do "austere" basing for a runway while the F-35B can do true STOL in just a few hundred feet.
ReplyDeleteThe other comparisons I made were vs the Harrier, not the SH as the B is replacing the Harrier and not the SH.
I did say that the SH was a non-starter for a reason.
even that is false. the F-35B is replacing the Hornets too so your comparison is still off. additionally the Hornet is used in an austere base role
ReplyDeleteWelsh can put up this "smokescreen" because there has been zilch on CAS coming out of MC HQ. I'll go back again to Colonel (ret) "Turbo" Tomasetti, the "father of the F-35B" and now the B guy at Lockheed-Martin (a seamless transfer of duty).
ReplyDelete“Turbo” Tomassetti began his career with the F-35 in 1998 when he joined the Joint Strike Fighter Test Force, where he became the lead government test pilot for the X-35, the Lockheed Martin demonstrator for the Concept Development phase of the program.
After Lockheed Martin won the downselect and the X-35 became the F-35, Tomassetti followed the program to Fort Worth, Texas, where he represented the US Marines during the System Development and Demonstration phase of the program.
Turbo's the go-to guy on the B, so reading a CodeOne article I was interested in his answer to the question: "What impact will the F-35 have on US Marine Corps operations?" I thought I'd read about how great the B will be in its CAS role, vital to the Corps. But this was Turbo's quizzical response.
"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."
Oh goody, an important node in a networked battlespace, delivering overall situation awareness. Remember that, grunt, when you want ordnance placed a hundred meters to your twelve. Meantime we have General Welsh speaking for the Corps because Marines won't. What's wrong? Send in the Marines.
The USMC does not want to replace their aging classic Hornets with the SH. It is the USN that is forcing the F-35C in their lap. Did you ever stop to think why they want to have a F-35B only force if they had the option to fly the F-35C?
ReplyDeleteThe biggest benefit of the F-35B over the F-35C is STOVL. The fact is that the F-35B, when operated from austere environments, has a 50% advantage in sortie rate over the F-35C. They don't even want the Growler for their EW platform to replace their Prowlers. They would rather wait for a F-35 based solution.
http://i619.photobucket.com/albums/tt271/SpudmanWP/F-35KPP20070402.jpg
again not true. we've seen those numbers change and the number of F-35C's being bought has been reduced with a slight uptick in the number of F-35B's. the reason is simple. the USMC is trying to push the F-35C into the carrier mission when its obvious that the USN would prefer to have them fly the Super Hornet. additionally you keep talking about austere and the F-35B won't be able to do that. its a hangar princess.
ReplyDeletelast but not least the Growler is the crown jewel and the USMC is hoping and praying that the F-35 can grow into that mission. it won't and you'll see the USMC either flying Prowlers till the wheels come off or getting out of the electronic warfare mission or begging for Growlers.
you can keep spouting your garbage but the facts are plain. the budget is wrecked, the F-35 is the blame and the flying piece of shit is about to fuck over all its supporters.
people are going to go to jail for this clusterfuck and i hope to be there to cheer on the FBI agents. think about it. if Navy Admirals can get in trouble over dinners with a con man then what will happen when they're linked to a multi-billion dollar boondoggle?
AviationPros, Nov 19, 2014
ReplyDeleteB GSE Group Awarded Contracts To Supply GSE For Three F 35 Hangars
Since 2010 BGSE Group has been awarded every major F 35 hangar project in the world to supply required POWER, AIR and PIT delivery systems. Three new orders just received.
BGSE Group received orders for Marine Corp Air Station Beaufort, South Carolina, Luke Air Force Base, Arizona and Iwakuni, Japan to supply F 35 hangars with 270VDC power, high-pressure air and service PIT delivery systems.
In 2011 BGSE Group won awards for two F 35 hangars at Marine Corp Air Station Yuma, Arizona, one at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada and one at Hickam Air Force Base Pacific Fleet, Perl Harbor, Hawaii. In 2012 BGSE Group won awards for Marine Corp Air Station Beaufort, South Carolina first hangar and two more hangars Marine Corp Air Station Yuma, Arizona.
There is no way, no how that USAF is going to do a follow up to the A10, they never liked it and have been trying to kill for years. Forget it, pure crap on USAF part.
ReplyDeleteITW GSE US
ReplyDeleteDual Converter Installed at USMC Iwakuni, Japan
The ITW GSE Military Dual Output Converter has been installed at the US Marine Corp Station in Iwakuni, Japan. The latest contract is for both indoor and outdoor configurations.
The outdoor model, which meets NEMA 4 requirements, provides power to aircraft parked on the apron outside the hangar. The Dual Output Converter provides the military end user with a tremendous amount of flexibility.Parking spaces in the hangar or on the apron no longer need to be designated specifically for F-35 or a legacy aircraft. Whether it is an F-16, F-18, F-35, or some other type of aircraft parked in a particular spot, the Dual Output Converter can supply the necessary electrical power to that aircraft. This eliminates the need to move aircraft around in order to park one type of aircraft in one particular spot.
off topic but did you hear about this Solomon? http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/02/13/22-marines-injured-during-california-training-exercise/ it was an aav malfunction
ReplyDeleteIn the meantime. ..
ReplyDeletehttp://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/industry/2015/02/13/egypt-buys-french-rafales-frigate/23311895/
media.wx
ReplyDelete"The F-35 is also a very smart aircraft. If the quality of the 270v DC provided from the converter, or the 28v DC E&F safety power circuit is not the perfect voltage, amperage or harmonics at the aircraft plug, the aircraft will not accept the power and will not turn on when the ground crew hits the external power switch. Nobody likes it when that happens."
None of those have been proven in an operational test. The sortie rates (especially the 90+percentile availability) is also a nonsense. Using LockMart talking points isn't actually analysis.
ReplyDeleteYou are aware that none of that has been shown to be proven in an operational test with an actual finished jet. It is marketing hype for the sheep. As for USMC Air, they are a cabal of dishonesty inside the real Corps.
ReplyDeleteSpudman: I admire your faith in your chosen favorite, but you need to realize some arguments work, some do not and some actually hurt.
ReplyDeleteYour 'figures' and 'statistics' are the last category, they actually make me snicker.. sorry.. How can anyone take any reliability figures serious on ANY plane if it has not actually been in service....
Give it up Spud, I get your point, but they also have theirs in that none of this is actually proven. No point arguing without information and that won't happen until that plane actually gets into active service. If it ever does. I know it will, but it has been so delayed that even if it got into service tomorrow, the correct response will still be "About damn time!"
ReplyDeleteShould have nailed LM with a fixed price contract, so they'll deliver what is practical, not what needs another decade of research to do, all the while collecting development money.
The Navy isn't "forcing" the Charlie on the Marines per se. It 's not going to allow the F-35B on their CVNs (except in emergencies.) When the Hornet goes away and the USMC doesn't purchase any F-35Cs (which will be cheaper than Bravos,) then the Marines cannot fulfill their obligation to provide squadrons for the CVNs. If that happened, money would be transferred from the Marines back to the Navy to fund the shortfall - which would mean fewer aircraft the Marines.
ReplyDeleteNOT TRUE...at least by program logic it isn't. by that i mean if you look at the numbers that are programmed to be bought then the B model will have a bigger ...much bigger production run than the C. by that thinking while they're both going to be wildly expensive the B should cost less than the C...at least if we're going to go by what the JPO is selling.
ReplyDeletenews headline:
ReplyDeleteUSAF says it needs maintainers to reach initial operating capability for F-35
Secretary of the Air Force Deborah James
said the date of initial operating capability for the F-35 is "getting
closer" but required sufficient maintenance personnel to stay on track.
Lorraine Martin, the Lockheed F-35 program manager, bragged in her recent year-end video that 1,500 F-35 maintainers had been trained at Eglin. The AF IOC in August 2016, when many more should be trained.
But a couple thousand maintainers won't be enough for twelve aircraft?
(Initial Operational Capability F-35A USAF Aug 2016 - Dec 2016 with 12 to 24 F-35As)
The budget projection for 2020 shows $147M GWSUC for F-35B @ 20/year, $144M for F-35C @ 12/year. If the Navy ups their purchase rate, the per unit cost should lower even more wrt to F-35B.
ReplyDelete