You won't see any Typhoon with them. Cancelled by the consortium, aerodynamic issues apparently.Ron5 wrote:I don't believe the F-35 conformals story, never have. Neither do I believe we will ever see an RAF Typhoon with them.
F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3243
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3243
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Yes they are. GBU-12 Paveway II.SW1 wrote:Not an expert in bombs but are those not 500lb ones.
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Did,nt Lockheed Martin propose a siz hundred gallon fuel tank for a forty percent increase in fuel capacity after the shelving of the smaller fuel tanks?
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
This article does quote from the manufacturer conformal tanks
https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org ... s-for-f-35
https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org ... s-for-f-35
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3243
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
And just by chance...here's a good example. The US F-35A listing for the Swiss fighter requirement. 40 F-35A and 46 F135 engines.albedo wrote:How many engines might an airframe expect to get through during its life? I'm guessing that engines are swapped out quite often for ease of maintenance but also that older engines get ditched (or put into reserve) and so there is some purchasing of new engines (latest model?) over the lifespan of the airframes?
For the F/A-18E/F proposal its 40 aircraft and 96 engines (8 full spare sets). So a 15-20% spare engine holding appears to be the current position for some US aircraft (at least in these proposals, but they look pretty thorough)
It's not a bad price baseline for people advocating a split buy for the RAF either....40 F-35A for £5bn (although it would probably be slightly lower for the UK as we wouldn't be buying the small numbers of US munitions included in the deal and there may be some crossover with F-35B eqpt).
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
and 9.2 for the first 48 (Bs)Timmymagic wrote:40 F-35A for £5bn
- USAF avg sustainment figure (assume only parts counted, not man hours of consumables) $5 mln per a/c
- so the above fleet (with more Bs) would be c. 500 $ mln p.a. in the steady state (and $27 mln for many of the early a/c, to bring them "up to std")
Surely the real figures have been disclosed and this idle speculation is a waste of time
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3243
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
They switched from 480 to 460 as the main effort, 600 also being studied, but the impression so far is that 460 is going to be the main focus.seaspear wrote:Did,nt Lockheed Martin propose a siz hundred gallon fuel tank for a forty percent increase in fuel capacity after the shelving of the smaller fuel tanks?
Wouldn't read too much into that. Conformals would take a lot of development, just trade show talk, and its the same line they've been using for over 5 years now. Sure if someone comes along and pays they'll do it. But it will cost a lot of money, so realistically the US needs to be involved. The other issue is no-one is going to want to do that now. The focus is all on deliveries, Block IV and extricating Turkey from the programme. There's a pretty full programme of work so doubt you'd see any movement until the late 20's on conformals. And a lot of potential users will have completed their deliveries (or bulk of them) by then. If their aircraft haven't been strengthened or have mounting points added it may be impossible or vastly expensive for them to be retrofitted. It will be External tanks>Improved Engine>Conformal tanks, in that order. I suspect if conformals ever arrive (and thats a big, big if) you may seem them on later users of F-35, in a similar position to F-16 i.e. the Gulf States when the US clears them all in the 20's and 30's for export.seaspear wrote:This article does quote from the manufacturer conformal tanks
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3243
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
There was a lot more in that than the Swiss proposal..ArmChairCivvy wrote:and 9.2 for the first 48 (Bs)
We may only have 1 aircraft in that position (BK-03), at most 5. Someone did work it out, we get away fairly well on the upgrades (unlike the USAF and USMC). Think it was 1 really expensive ($27m), 4 a/c hardware and software changes but not crazy expensive, 6 aircraft minor hardware and software. The remainder are all software only. There is of course the EOTS upgrade the UK has committed to that will be needed on the first 21 or so aircraft. It's for this reason that I think the talk of the UK not upgrading aircraft and leaving them for training is a little off. With such a small fleet, at least initially, we can't afford to have fleets within fleets post Block IV. And the RAF in particular have a well founded aversion to going down that path again following all the hard work to get the Typhoon fleet to a smaller number of standards (based around the Tranche's). Money will be found.ArmChairCivvy wrote:(and $27 mln for many of the early a/c, to bring them "up to std")
And I'm definitely not advocating for a split buy...which is an insane idea (unless we were getting the entire 138 at once with the last 48 as F-35A).
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
AgreedTimmymagic wrote: With such a small fleet, at least initially, we can't afford to have fleets within fleets post Block IV.
The 9.2 was of course the figure (and the only figure) disclosed to our Parliament; I was just adding the El Cheapos as quoted for Switzerland on topTimmymagic wrote:There was a lot more in that than the Swiss proposal..
- the talk about extraordinary costs could easily be suppressed with a little bit more openness. I wonder how the Committee (which is the 'watchdog' on behalf of the wider Parliament) puts up with it, year after year
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Heresy, heresy, burn the witch!!!Timmymagic wrote:It's not a bad price baseline for people advocating a split buy for the RAF either.
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Quick, quick, put out the fire!!!Timmymagic wrote:And I'm definitely not advocating for a split buy...which is an insane idea
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
What is interesting is they have loaded US weapons (AIM9X and GBU-12) rather than use RAF/RN ones, even though with common F35B aircraft they are cleared for them?Timmymagic wrote:Yes they are. GBU-12 Paveway II.SW1 wrote:Not an expert in bombs but are those not 500lb ones.
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3243
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
They might be cleared. But they won't be trained on their use or handling. It's always been the intention for each force to use their own munitions. The only munition common to both is the Amraam. But even then the UK is using C-5, the USMC may be using C-7. There is a possibility that some UK personnel may be familiar with GBU-12 as that has been used on UK Reaper for a number of years.Old RN wrote:What is interesting is they have loaded US weapons (AIM9X and GBU-12) rather than use RAF/RN ones, even though with common F35B aircraft they are cleared for them?
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
UK pers don't load any munitions on reaper/Timmymagic wrote:There is a possibility that some UK personnel may be familiar with GBU-12 as that has been used on UK Reaper for a number of years.
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3243
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Really? Thats incredible after all these years.downsizer wrote:UK pers don't load any munitions on reaper/
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Is it? Don't maintain them either. All contracted out.Timmymagic wrote:Really? Thats incredible after all these years.downsizer wrote:UK pers don't load any munitions on reaper/
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
R&R in Vegas includeddownsizer wrote: All contracted out.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3243
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
I knew there was the takeoff/recovery crew and operational flying seperation. Thought the ground crew was in house now.downsizer wrote:Is it? Don't maintain them either. All contracted out.
Presumably this arrangement will change drastically with Protector though?
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Nahh, we'll give half of the first batch to the NavyTimmymagic wrote:change drastically with Protector though
- so it will only be the second batch that we will keep in a garage
Though the beauty of contracting out needs to be recognised: if Ops scale down, you can change some of the fixed cost into variable... and still have some prospect of bringing the rest of the capability back, if and when it will be needed
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
It did used to be done by RAF in house, but it was contracted out some time around 2011.Timmymagic wrote:I knew there was the takeoff/recovery crew and operational flying seperation. Thought the ground crew was in house now.downsizer wrote:Is it? Don't maintain them either. All contracted out.
Presumably this arrangement will change drastically with Protector though?
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3243
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Are they bringing it back in house for Protector?topman wrote:It did used to be done by RAF in house, but it was contracted out some time around 2011.
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
I don't know.Timmymagic wrote:Are they bringing it back in house for Protector?topman wrote:It did used to be done by RAF in house, but it was contracted out some time around 2011.
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Thx to pointer from post by ARES on Tempest, with ref to the Northrop Grumman video on the F-35 radar APG-81.
The capability of the F-35 radar to search, target and launch long range AShMs, eg SPEAR 3, or pass targeting info to RN frigates/destroyers for ship to launch AShM, eg NSM, if ever funded, will be part of the Block 4 upgrade by adding a wide-area high-resolution synthetic aperture radar, SAR, mode to the NG APG-81 radar.
Defensenews June 2019 article "The US Navy is seeking upgrades for the F-35 radar’s sea-search mode "
"The [US] Navy wants to be able to scan a wider area when in sea-search mode, something that the radar is currently not set up for // the problem is on track for a solution, but may not be implemented until as late as 2024 with the Block 4 upgrades, notably adding that a solution will not be in place before a full-rate production decision on the F-35 this year. // The issue is listed as a category 1 deficiency // The issue dates back to 2012. // We’re not mechanically scanning, we’re electronically scanning,” Winter said. “And being able to accurately scan the maritime environment, it just takes increased computing power, and that’s what we’re doing. … It’s a software fix, and then an allocation of computing power.” Winter may be referring to a planned bundle of computer upgrades called Tech Refresh 3, where the jet will get more modern computing systems that will increase the jet’s processing power [25x] and memory // TR3 is a prerequisite for a future radar fix. Those TR3-equipped jets won’t roll off the production line until 2023."
May 2020 GAO reported development cost of the F-35’s Block 4 upgrade had increased by $1.5 billion in the past year, to $12.1 billion, while adding acquisition will boost total cost to $13.9 billion, plus $6 billion to retrofit Block 4 to aircraft already delivered. Would note MoD, Jeremy Quin, hint not all UK pre Block 4 build a /c will get the partial upgrade to Block 4 standard, ~ $27 million cost per a/c so perhaps cost rising and no additional funding will made available, so unkown how many current UK F-35B and future buys will be upgraded before future Block 4 with SAR and SPEAR 3 capabilities deliveries commence ~2024.
From <https://www.defensenews.com/smr/hidden- ... arch-mode/>
The capability of the F-35 radar to search, target and launch long range AShMs, eg SPEAR 3, or pass targeting info to RN frigates/destroyers for ship to launch AShM, eg NSM, if ever funded, will be part of the Block 4 upgrade by adding a wide-area high-resolution synthetic aperture radar, SAR, mode to the NG APG-81 radar.
Defensenews June 2019 article "The US Navy is seeking upgrades for the F-35 radar’s sea-search mode "
"The [US] Navy wants to be able to scan a wider area when in sea-search mode, something that the radar is currently not set up for // the problem is on track for a solution, but may not be implemented until as late as 2024 with the Block 4 upgrades, notably adding that a solution will not be in place before a full-rate production decision on the F-35 this year. // The issue is listed as a category 1 deficiency // The issue dates back to 2012. // We’re not mechanically scanning, we’re electronically scanning,” Winter said. “And being able to accurately scan the maritime environment, it just takes increased computing power, and that’s what we’re doing. … It’s a software fix, and then an allocation of computing power.” Winter may be referring to a planned bundle of computer upgrades called Tech Refresh 3, where the jet will get more modern computing systems that will increase the jet’s processing power [25x] and memory // TR3 is a prerequisite for a future radar fix. Those TR3-equipped jets won’t roll off the production line until 2023."
May 2020 GAO reported development cost of the F-35’s Block 4 upgrade had increased by $1.5 billion in the past year, to $12.1 billion, while adding acquisition will boost total cost to $13.9 billion, plus $6 billion to retrofit Block 4 to aircraft already delivered. Would note MoD, Jeremy Quin, hint not all UK pre Block 4 build a /c will get the partial upgrade to Block 4 standard, ~ $27 million cost per a/c so perhaps cost rising and no additional funding will made available, so unkown how many current UK F-35B and future buys will be upgraded before future Block 4 with SAR and SPEAR 3 capabilities deliveries commence ~2024.
From <https://www.defensenews.com/smr/hidden- ... arch-mode/>