F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Contains threads on Joint Service equipment of the past, present and future.
Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

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

Post by Lord Jim »

No surprises there. Nearly as bad as it was for us on the introduction of Typhoon. WE knew where the parts were when we had then, the problem was we didn't have any.

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

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

Post by Scimitar54 »

Sounds a bit like ALIS (or is it ALISS) in blunder land to me! :lol:

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

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

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Lord Jim wrote:you can fire enough IRBMs with conventional warheads to swamp any defence system in place and flatten anything there. Look no further than China for that doctrine
And in reverse... no need for irBm's as the next fill for HIMARS (when talking about the USMC) will have a doubled range
SW1 wrote:What’s more, the DoD’s re-supply network for moving F-35 parts around the world is immature, says the accountability agency.
... that simply means that they will grab theirs first; then the rest of 'the club' can share what, if any, are available
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)

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

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

Post by topman »

The 44% figure stands out a mile for me from that article. Things like that are a pita to manage and put such a handbrake on deployments. They also soak up time and manpower trying to manage day to day flying, longer term dets, PEPS etc.

It's something that has come up time and again but 44% is very high. Also gives a good idea of the fleets within fleets we'll be juggling for years to come.

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

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

Post by Lord Jim »

Scimitar54 wrote:Sounds a bit like ALIS (or is it ALISS) in blunder land to me!
Maybe we should give them a copy of LITS and see if they can get it to work as planned :lol:

On a lighter note I spotted this video introducing this year USAF F-35A Demonstration Team, pretty good.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

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

Post by SW1 »

topman wrote:The 44% figure stands out a mile for me from that article. Things like that are a pita to manage and put such a handbrake on deployments. They also soak up time and manpower trying to manage day to day flying, longer term dets, PEPS etc.

It's something that has come up time and again but 44% is very high. Also gives a good idea of the fleets within fleets we'll be juggling for years to come.
Given how divergent the design of the a/c became in a very chaotic and tetchy redesign the number doesn’t surprise me all that much. Somethings that were warned about a long time ago are now starting to manifest themselves as production numbers ramp up with an immature design. Fatigue with the b airframe will be another shades of the buccaneer..

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

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

Post by Timmymagic »

topman wrote:Also gives a good idea of the fleets within fleets we'll be juggling for years to come.
Probably for the USMC and USAF that will be the case. But from what we know of the UK's F-35B that's less likely. We've only bought limited numbers to date, and those that we have were primarily procured after a number of changes to the airframe were made. This will be a similar problem to the aircraft that needed upgrading to hit Block 3F and 4 in the future. For the USMC it was a considerable issue, with talk of large numbers of the early airframes being seen as fit for training, but not combat unless extensive upgrade work was undertaken, but for the UK comparatively minor. Essentially the UK is going to benefit from letting the USMC do the early adopter work whilst we've bought enough to start the training pipeline and develop procedures etc.

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

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

Post by topman »

Timmymagic wrote:
topman wrote:Also gives a good idea of the fleets within fleets we'll be juggling for years to come.
Probably for the USMC and USAF that will be the case. But from what we know of the UK's F-35B that's less likely. We've only bought limited numbers to date, and those that we have were primarily procured after a number of changes to the airframe were made. This will be a similar problem to the aircraft that needed upgrading to hit Block 3F and 4 in the future. For the USMC it was a considerable issue, with talk of large numbers of the early airframes being seen as fit for training, but not combat unless extensive upgrade work was undertaken, but for the UK comparatively minor. Essentially the UK is going to benefit from letting the USMC do the early adopter work whilst we've bought enough to start the training pipeline and develop procedures etc.
The numbers will be lower but the proportions won't be different, not in any massive way. And I don't mean Block 1/2/3/whatever it'll be the endless different build standards on dozens if not hundreds of items that will cause the problems. None of those different standards will hit the news, but they'll be there.

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

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

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Timmymagic wrote:For the USMC it was a considerable issue, with talk of large numbers of the early airframes being seen as fit for training, but not combat unless extensive upgrade work was undertaken
It is sort of funny that on this forum we can discuss these things as ' a matter of fact' when on many others, after so many years, the techno-infantiles that have not been weeded off the early years' LM marketing literature are still :lol: at arms.
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)

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7931
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

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

Post by SKB »

Image
(bobsurgranny) 14 April 2019
Wednesday 10th April. Two RAF F-35B Lightning II jets took off to go and train on the Holbeach bombing range in Lincolnshire. I managed to get some video of them returning to base, with their nozzles half cocked flying overhead which was a nice sound to the ears, before being wafted with the lovely smell of jet fuel
@ 3:30 F-35Binks ! :mrgreen:

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 539
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
United States of America

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

Post by Halidon »

Lockheed Martin unveils potential maritime follow-on version of DARPA’s Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept at #SAS2019 today. Externally mounted to F-35C.

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

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

Post by bobp »

Back in the 1980's a friend in the USAF told me about spares that had gone missing including a complete mobile radar that was shipped back to the US after a deployment, never to be seen again...….

Fast forward 35yrs...

To make matters worse, the DoD has spent billions of dollars on F-35 spare parts, but does not have records for all the parts it has purchased, where they are, or how much they cost.
“For example, DOD is not maintaining a database with information on F-35 parts the US owns, and it lacks the necessary data to be able to do so,” says GAO. “Without a policy that clearly defines how it will keep track of purchased F-35 parts, DoD will continue to operate with a limited understanding of the F-35 spare parts it owns and how they are being managed. If left unaddressed, these accountability issues will impede DOD's ability to obtain sufficient readiness within affordability constraints.”
So nothing changes :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :crazy:


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... pa-457734/

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

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

Post by seaspear »

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-07/ ... n/11085220
This article refers to the corrosion risk associated with the F35 because of its aluminium structure effected by salt and recomended measures including de humidfying ,has this been thought of for carrier based aircraft ?

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

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

Post by topman »

I would imagine so but perhaps not with that information to hand. Dehumidifying isn't anything new, various types of equipment are in use in the MoD.
The question is how likely is it and where is it likely to appear?
If it's a case of what we've got is good enough it's no issue at all. If the report is saying they need to be stored in dehumidified buildings when not flying then you're looking at some cost infrastructure and equipment wise.

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

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

Post by seaspear »

My thoughts on this are , Would the seaborne f35 models have a shorter life span than the a model not being exposed to as much salt , would the F35 be required to spend more time in the hangars than parked on the deck to prevent exposure or would the aircraft on deck have more frequent wash downs in clean water ?

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

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

Post by topman »

I don't think it would reduce its life. As to what is put in place to reduce this risk, difficult to say without reading the report.

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

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

Post by Timmymagic »

Looks like the USMC/QE Deployment is all done and dusted agreement wise..

https://www.military.com/daily-news/201 ... -2021.html

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

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

Post by shark bait »

Welcome news, its the only chance we have of seeing a 'full' carrier for a long while.
@LandSharkUK

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

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

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

The reason for this entry being posted onto this thread is at the end, in bold.

India did not buy at the offered price that was not 'damn costly' the Su-57 designs, prototypes (and tooling :!: ) so now they (Russia) want to sell the turkey... to Turkey :) . DID of today tells us:

"Russia wants to sell its Su-57 fighter jet to Turkey in case the F-35 deal with the US falls through, reports say. The US has warned Turkey that it would expel the country from the F-35 program if it accepts the Russian-made S-400 surface-to-air missile system as the US sees the purchase incompatible with Turkey’s commitments to NATO. The S-400’s radar system could enable the Russian military to figure out how the F-35 operates."
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)

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

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

Post by dmereifield »

shark bait wrote:Welcome news, its the only chance we have of seeing a 'full' carrier for a long while.
How many jets is a detachment likely to be?

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

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

Post by Scimitar54 »

Enough to bring total of F35 on board to 24! :mrgreen:

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

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

Post by SW1 »

seaspear wrote:https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-07/ ... n/11085220
This article refers to the corrosion risk associated with the F35 because of its aluminium structure effected by salt and recomended measures including de humidfying ,has this been thought of for carrier based aircraft ?
To come to this conclusion there would need to be something more going on than it just being because it’s because it’s aluminium. There’s lots of aluminium aircraft in salty environments it’s a well understood material, the galvanic, and thermal fatigue cracking issues when in close proximity to composite are well known due to some very expensive lessons, and there mitigation’s in place.

The 7085 is newer temper within the 7000 series range which looks to improve impact damage and resistance. Ideally titanium would be used but aluminium is cheaper and lighter. Has caused issues in testing notable on the B.

The other option is the auditors haven’t fully understood a very specialised topic of material science, not entirely unheard of with KPMG audits in aerospace from experience also possible it’s not been reported accurately as they would have even less knowledge of the subject.

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

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

Post by Timmymagic »

Speculation that the F-35 may have ruled itself out of the Canadian competition....with Rafale already excluded and Boeing in the doghouse (surely politically unacceptable for the next few years following the Bombardier furore) that would leave Eurofighter and Saab with a free run....

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national ... h-the-f-35

serge750
Senior Member
Posts: 1068
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34
United Kingdom

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

Post by serge750 »

Well it would be great if the Typhoon won but i'm not holding my breath...new build stealthy hornets maybe....I've always liked the Gripen though !

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7931
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

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

Post by SKB »


Post Reply