F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Contains threads on Joint Service equipment of the past, present and future.
bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2684
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by bobp »

It appears that the infighting between the RAF and the Navy is still apparent regarding the future orders of F35B.

https://www.janes.com/article/84593/uk- ... -off-strip


If true 24 airframes on board QE will be a BIG ask indeed.

Little J
Member
Posts: 973
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Little J »

Air Cdre Bradshaw was unsure what effect procuring the land-based F-35A might have on this joint concept of operations, but he did note that there should be no reason to transfer the F-35Bs solely to the RN as the flexibility the aircraft provides is also of value to the RAF.
Does it sound like he wants his cake and to eat it too? Or is that just me?

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by R686 »

Little J wrote:
Air Cdre Bradshaw was unsure what effect procuring the land-based F-35A might have on this joint concept of operations, but he did note that there should be no reason to transfer the F-35Bs solely to the RN as the flexibility the aircraft provides is also of value to the RAF.
Does it sound like he wants his cake and to eat it too? Or is that just me?

Seems like a two fingered salute to me and joint is something only on paper in communicating government wishful thinking :lol:

It be funny if it wasn't so serious.

its a pity that if you knew thing were looking this dire when the CV contracts were signed that you didn't build 3 large LHD which would have been an easier fit into RAF concept of joint operations

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2684
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by bobp »

Of course the Air Commodore may have been expressing his own ideas (prejudices) and that his statement was not official policy. Bur then the article was published in Janes so who knows. But for certain infighting between the services is evident. :lol:

SDL
Member
Posts: 763
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:52
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by SDL »

Am i the only one that thinks the RAF & RN should be put in a room and locked in there until they agree on the best for the F35?

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by RetroSicotte »

SDL wrote:Am i the only one that thinks the RAF & RN should be put in a room and locked in there until they agree on the best for the F35?
Pretty certain they've been in that room for the past 20 years.

SDL
Member
Posts: 763
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:52
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by SDL »

Then take away the scotch...

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

RetroSicotte wrote: Pretty certain they've been in that room for the past 20 years.
Yeah, but only recently it has become evident that you can't get the top job(s) without having showed enough of "jointness" on your way up
- whether it is by holding a post, or showing some "cutting edge" in thinking... that is still not clear
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)

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Scimitar54 »

If the QEC Aircraft carriers ever have to start an Arctic, Middle East, or East of Suez deployment with fewer than 18 serviceable F35B's on board, due to RAF resistance to release either aircraft and/or Crew & Maintenance personnel, then RAF Marham, should without any further delay be transferred complete with all aircraft and personnel to the RN and become RNAS Marham. All future F35s should be of the B variant, unless a decision is made to convert the QEC to CATOBAR, in which case they should be F35Cs.

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2684
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by bobp »

I think its pretty certain the RAF would like the last 90 F35 to be the A variant. Problem is having just 48 B versions is simply not enough to equip one carrier with three squadrons in the event of a conflict and allow some for OCU and maintenance.

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Scimitar54 »

A minimum of around 80-90 F35Bs is what would be required for 4 x Squadrons plus OCU and an attrition/maintenance reserve.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by SW1 »

These low numbers have been known from when the ships were ordered. It’s been known f35 numbers would be small. There’s been much wishful thinking over the last decade or so. 24 uk jets is a maximum once in a 20 year type effort. The f35 numbers are roughly the number of Fa2 sea harriers the FAA had so im sure the naval folks we be able to tell us the regular numbers they embarked back in the day and for how long.

SDSR 2020 has a big decision for the fastjet fleet because it really will be more f35 or tempest it won’t be both. Let alone what variant to buy. That argument is still ongoing and given the seniors in MoDs lust to buy American it remains to be seen what way it will go regardless of published strategies.

If your minimum is for 90 f35s were are you basing them and what roles are they doing because they won’t all fit in Marham and the uk only has 3 fastjet bases and if your swapping one of the other 2 to f35 there qra bases so what are you doing with that. We ain’t expanding a/c numbers in the fastjet fleet or spending mega bucks upgrading long discarded fastjet bases for f35.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

As has been mentioned the 12 routine, 24 rarely embarkation rate for the F-35Bs is the most likely future. However, if the balloon goes up every available F-35b that is serviceable up to 36 along with every qualified pilot will be gong on a cruise. There will be little need for anything but a token OCU. As with most things in our military it would be an all or nothing situation.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by SW1 »

Lord Jim wrote:As has been mentioned the 12 routine, 24 rarely embarkation rate for the F-35Bs is the most likely future. However, if the balloon goes up every available F-35b that is serviceable up to 36 along with every qualified pilot will be gong on a cruise. There will be little need for anything but a token OCU. As with most things in our military it would be an all or nothing situation.
LJ

These numbers keep appearing 12, 24, 36. But does/has the uk routinely deployed 12 fastjets of a single type anywhere since the Cold War and certainly not when it’s half of an operational fleet that I’m aware off routinely. That’s before we get to numbers above that. I think tornado has only deployed 24 or more jets to a single location twice in its 40 year history and from a force many times the size of f35s.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Timmymagic »

To give everyone a sense of perspective...this is what the QE's full on F-35 wing would look like....(minus one bird, and F-35A but you get the drift..)

You never know we may see this once in her lifetime...but I suspect we'll never see more than 24 at once...which isn't that bad really.


SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by SW1 »

The usaf always do a gd elephant walk.

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Scimitar54 »

A (Strike) aircraft carrier needs an adequate air wing, or it will be of little or no use. "24+" F35B deployments are supposed to occur, I think it is between something like every 2 or 3 years. It will also be necessary to operate with 36 F35B sometimes as well, in order to ensure that any practical problems that this may cause are discovered and solutions found & documented. It may even be considered desirable/necessary to stretch this even further, to gain experience of operating a greater number of aircraft. The aircraft for this will have to be made available.

topman
Member
Posts: 771
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Tokelau

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by topman »

Reading some of these posts that people think are going to be routine reality, all I can say is some are in for a big shock.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

SW1 wrote:tornado has only deployed 24 or more jets to a single location twice in its 40 year history and from a force many times the size of f35s.
... and?
SW1 wrote: It’s been known f35 numbers would be small. There’s been much wishful thinking over the last decade or so. 24 uk jets is a maximum once in a 20 year type effort. The f35 numbers are roughly the number of Fa2 sea harriers the FAA had so im sure the naval folks we be able to tell us the regular numbers they embarked back in the day and for how long.
[STILL THE SAME STORY RUNNING HERE; IF YOU INVEST YOUR PENSION, DO NOT RELY ON " PAST PERFORMANCE"?]

SDSR 2020 has a big decision for the fastjet fleet because it really will be more f35 or tempest it won’t be both. Let alone what variant to buy. That argument is still ongoing and given the seniors in MoDs lust to buy American it remains to be seen what way it will go regardless of published strategies.
Yes, and
who believes any of the "Bull" anymore, anyways
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)

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by SW1 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
SW1 wrote:tornado has only deployed 24 or more jets to a single location twice in its 40 year history and from a force many times the size of f35s.
... and?
SW1 wrote: It’s been known f35 numbers would be small. There’s been much wishful thinking over the last decade or so. 24 uk jets is a maximum once in a 20 year type effort. The f35 numbers are roughly the number of Fa2 sea harriers the FAA had so im sure the naval folks we be able to tell us the regular numbers they embarked back in the day and for how long.
[STILL THE SAME STORY RUNNING HERE; IF YOU INVEST YOUR PENSION, DO NOT RELY ON " PAST PERFORMANCE"?]

SDSR 2020 has a big decision for the fastjet fleet because it really will be more f35 or tempest it won’t be both. Let alone what variant to buy. That argument is still ongoing and given the seniors in MoDs lust to buy American it remains to be seen what way it will go regardless of published strategies.
Yes, and
who believes any of the "Bull" anymore, anyways

And we ain’t doing it with f35.

Well past performance gives you a confidence of strategy over many market cycles on which to form a judgement if the management strategy is competent. As we’ve not preformend in the past at the future projected level and in the mean time done nothing but cut maintenance and support since the last time we exercised/deployed at scales close to being mentioned here what would your outlook for future trading look like?

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Timmymagic »

topman wrote:eading some of these posts that people think are going to be routine reality, all I can say is some are in for a big shock.
To be honest, if you'd told me in the year 2000 that the RN would, in the not too distant future, have a 72,000 tonne carriers with 24 stealth fighters onboard I'd have bet my house on it never happening. Amidst all the debate over whether 36 will be routinely aboard, or occasionally or indeed never, we all forget that 24 onboard is an incredible capability. Hell, even 12 is pretty bloody potent...Ok in a toe to toe war with Russia or China you'd want the full 36. But against pretty much anyone else 12 F-35B with Meteor, Asraam CSP, Spear and Paveway IV will take them to the cleaners.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

SW1 wrote:past performance gives you a confidence of strategy over many market cycles on which to form a judgement if the management strategy is competent.
Different management?
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)

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by SW1 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
SW1 wrote:past performance gives you a confidence of strategy over many market cycles on which to form a judgement if the management strategy is competent.
Different management?
all the management in the uk seem to follow the same policy as far as I can see.

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Scimitar54 »

Timmymagic Wrote
But against pretty much anyone else 12 F-35B with Meteor, Asraam CSP, Spear and Paveway IV will take them to the cleaners
12 F35B will be required to secure the CSG 24-7, not enough to use any in the "strike" role, unless there is absolutely no aerial opposition.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

There is going to be an awful lot of pressure to get the QE up and running with a number of F-35s on board as a matter of national pride for one thing. Numbers like 12, 24 and 36 are mentioned as they are basically multiples of squadrons. The MoD cannot operate the new carriers like they did the old CVLs where the Harriers were only embarked for limited periods of time during any one deployment. Too much is ties up in showing the world that we are back in the "Carrier Club". So from the initial pool of 48 aircraft having a squadron sized force on board a carrier during any deployment will almost certainly be mandatory. However such a number is far below what the carriers were designed for and are in no way an effective force for anything other than PR events. For Syria type operations the number will probably remain at this level but there would remain the possibility of surging up to an additional 12 aircraft for a limited period of time. Going full tilt and actually embarking an airwing of the type originally envisaged when the carriers we given the go ahead would only happen in a full on conflict with a major power.

The UK is being forced to operate its impressive new carriers not as carriers but more like the USS America. The way the programme as a whole has been funded has led to the idea of "Flexible" air groups, and the way the MoD and Politicians talk about it you would think that this was how the carriers were designed to be operated form the very beginning. SO why don't we call a spade a spade and call the QE and PoW, Amphibious Assault Ships, LHA-2 and LHA-3 respectively, as they have far more in common with such platforms than the carriers operated by other nations.

Post Reply