F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

[Lugzy]

96 was the number at the time of the F-35C switch.

80 seems about right.

Whether we get there or not is the real question.

80-90 RAF/FAA f-35bs would be a victory in the present climate in my opinion , rumours of a total buy of 48 f-35bs being purchased to cover carrier operations only have been doing the rounds over the last few months , with a possible add on later buy of f-35as, as I said just a rumour/speculation , but if the reported total is true I'd say that's a positive move .

[bobp]

Probably we will get up to 80 airframes, but spread out over a long period, a lot of the earlier purchases requiring modifications to bring them up to later specifications.

[S M H]

The final no of airframes purchased through the whole production run would be 90-100. The first orders will provide carrier strike and limited harrier style forward based ops. While the type develops to full operational capability. Small incremental orders will follow over the production run. As the procurement budget gets tighter with S.S.B.N replacement . I doubt the air force or navy would allow a airframe sub type change as this would be detrimental to the ability to sustain operations. The Typhoon out of service time would be the only possibility of the U.K. purchasing the F35a. they would be separate from the present requirement.

[shark bait]

.
Rumours of a total buy of 48 f-35bs being purchased to cover carrier operations only have been doing its rounds over the last few months , with a possible add on later buy of f-35as

I think 48 is a reasonable number to start at, but I hope the rumour of type A stays exactly as that. I see no point in adopting that until we have over 100 jets, which seems particularly optimistic at the moment.

Small incremental orders will follow over the production run

Small incremental orders make good sense to me, but they can be too small. Trying to guess long term I would expect all our orders to be complete by 2030, I cant imagine the government funding a typhoon replacement and an F35 program at the same time. Total guess, everything could be different by then!

[The Armchair Soldier]

This Guardian piece suggests that only 16 will be confirmed in the SDSR with any further numbers to be decided when the two carriers are in service.

[Jdam]

This Guardian piece suggests that only 16 will be confirmed in the SDSR with any further numbers to be decided when the two carriers are in service.

Ouch, how many have we ordered so far 10?

[ArmChairCivvy]

Don't remember, off the top of my head... but:
- 4 of the earliest order(s) will never come here
- 12 is the FEAR number that would make it possible to meet the the IOC criteria. Would take supreme effort to have all 12 (this side of the pond) available at the same time

Anyway, 16 might be a snapshot next week, but what matters is the number in use by 2022 (when we are supposed to have all the aspects of the first carrier tested and in service).

[SKB]

Why can't we just stick a ski jump onto HMS Ocean and give the FAA/RAF some practice with our F-35B's until QE enters service?

[Jdam]

l guess if we were going to do that we could have kept hms illustrious a few more years.

[Lugzy]

I think 48 is a reasonable number to start at, but I hope the rumour of type A stays exactly as that. I see no point in adopting that until we have over 100 jets, which seems particularly optimistic at the moment.

I think the question is do we need 100+ f-35bs , my belief is no , by all means order enough f-35bs to give us a credible carrier operations capability , around 60-80 aircraft would seem a very good result over time tbh ,

but if costs do decrease when the f-35 production line is fully running , and the gov does continue ordering F-35s , once the carrier airwing and training squadrons are operational giving the FAA/RAF around 60/80 aircraft (best case scenario ) , attention must then turn to the A Version for the RAF as the replacment for older typhoons , the F-35A meets the RAFs operations criteria much better than Bs would and this as to be excepted and acknowledged .

[jonas]

I think 48 is a reasonable number to start at, but I hope the rumour of type A stays exactly as that. I see no point in adopting that until we have over 100 jets, which seems particularly optimistic at the moment.

I think the question is do we need 100+ f-35bs , my belief is no , by all means order enough f-35bs to give us a credible carrier operations capability , around 60-80 aircraft would seem a very good result over time tbh ,

but if costs do decrease when the f-35 production line is fully running , and the gov does continue ordering F-35s , once the carrier airwing and training squadrons are operational giving the FAA/RAF around 60/80 aircraft (best case scenario ) , attention must then turn to the A Version for the RAF as the replacment for older typhoons , the F-35A meets the RAFs operations criteria much better than Bs would and this as to be excepted and acknowledged .

Which is fine,. except that you create more problems in training, logistics, maintenance, extra personel etc. Being that people have been banging on about commonality, this seems to defeat the objective.

Have the RAF actually stated that they want/prefer the 'A' ? Serious question as I know little about the RAF's 'operations criteria'.

[Pseudo]

Which is fine,. except that you create more problems in training, logistics, maintenance, extra personel etc. Being that people have been banging on about commonality, this seems to defeat the objective.

Have the RAF actually stated that they want/prefer the 'A' ? Serious question as I know little about the RAF's 'operations criteria'.

Though if you're replacing Typhoon with an upgraded F-35 (let's call it the F-35D) from the mid to late 2020's you'd be increasing commonality because instead of having Typhoon and F-35 you'd only have two variants of F-35.

[Lugzy]

So, if we have enough airframes for deploying 2 Squadrons on board 2x QE class plus an operational conversion unit, what will the R.A.F. have to replace the 2x squadron of Harriers it requires ?

Also bear in mind the requirement to have plenty of spares donors to keep the fleet airworthy.

I feel 75 airframes plus the spares donors of around another 25...

I think the Typhoon has got another 20-25 years of service, so no F35A.

i wouldn't be surprised if the real number is more like 48 f-35b over time , like it or not nothing is guaranteed and considering there is only so much money available , the RN/RAF will just have to get on with it and make it work . But considering I put the best case scenario at 60-80 aircraft surly this would be enough aircraft to form more than 2 f-35b squadrons and a conversion squadron ???? ,

[jonas]

Which is fine,. except that you create more problems in training, logistics, maintenance, extra personel etc. Being that people have been banging on about commonality, this seems to defeat the objective.

Have the RAF actually stated that they want/prefer the 'A' ? Serious question as I know little about the RAF's 'operations criteria'.

Though if you're replacing Typhoon with an upgraded F-35 (let's call it the F-35D) from the mid to late 2020's you'd be increasing commonality because instead of having Typhoon and F-35 you'd only have two variants of F-35.

I don't see Typhoon being replaced in that time scale, it could be upgraded a number of times to keep it current. Take the F16 for instance. So if we are going to look that far ahead, the US are already looking at it's next fighter programme, including carrier aircraft. So we wait to see what comes up, we convert our carriers into CTOL and the RN gets carrier version. Take the hook off and give the RAF the land based.

There you are, sorted.

[arfah]

.................

[Pseudo]

I don't see Typhoon being replaced in that time scale, it could be upgraded a number of times to keep it current. Take the F16 for instance.

Wasn't the F-16 designed to have a significantly longer airframe life than Typhoon?

So if we are going to look that far ahead, the US are already looking at it's next fighter programme, including carrier aircraft. So we wait to see what comes up, we convert our carriers into CTOL and the RN gets carrier version. Take the hook off and give the RAF the land based.

There you are, sorted.

Yeah, just like that. I can pretty much guarantee that it'll be a cold day in hell before the Treasury of any future government approves funding for CATOBAR conversion. You've also got the issue of negotiating an ITAR waiver, full access to the source code etc. for whatever the US develop next. I can't help thinking that we'll be sticking with the F-35 for as long as it's going and eventually replacing Typhoon with it.

[shark bait]

Once the carrier airwing and training squadrons are operational giving the FAA/RAF around 60/80 aircraft (best case scenario ) , attention must then turn to the A Version for the RAF as the replacment for older typhoons , the F-35A meets the RAFs operations criteria much better than Bs would and this as to be excepted and acknowledged .

Which is fine,. except that you create more problems in training, logistics, maintenance, extra personel etc. Being that people have been banging on about commonality, this seems to defeat the objective.

Have the RAF actually stated that they want/prefer the 'A' ? Serious question as I know little about the RAF's 'operations criteria'.

I agree with jonas on this one. Absolutely no point in investing in a new variant that will be less flexible and increase the logistics.

Perhaps if have we have enough B's to saturate both carriers, plus attrition reserves, and then decide we want another 50 jets it may be with investing in the A variant, but that scenario seems very very unlikely.

The F35A would be a horrible typhoon replacement, I hope that never happens. I would guess that problem is close to 20 years away and I seriously hope we peruse another eurofighter.

[Lugzy]

Which is fine,. except that you create more problems in training, logistics, maintenance, extra personel etc. Being that people have been banging on about commonality, this seems to defeat the objective.

Have the RAF actually stated that they want/prefer the 'A' ? Serious question as I know little about the RAF's 'operations criteria'.

You do have a point about commonality , but A/B do seem to share a lot in common but that doesn't make them similar aircraft that's true ,
tbh maybe I'm just kidding myself in relation to typhoon being replaced a head of time , but to be fair operation requirements after tornado have been retired could result in a real jump in air hours being added to typhoon tranche 2-3 airframes , added to that possible decrease in the purchase price of f-35s in the future does leave the door open to future orders in my opinon.

As for The RAFs "operation Criteria " not sure if your taking the mick or not tbh , but anyway ,,,,,,, I used the term operation criteria in relation to the type of missions the RAF carries out , which duties its responsible for in uk defence , and which aircraft are most suitable to do the job , to me this comes under the RAFs operations Criteria. Maybe I'm wrong

but yes your right there has not been any confirmed reports of the RAF wanting the f-35A up to now , maybe that's because no one as really asked them , but in the future who knows .

I would of thought the F-35A which is lighter than the b , can carry more fuel than the b , better combat radius than the b , better range than the b , can carry more payload than the b , needs a lot less complicated maintence procedure than the b , carry more payload internally than the b , doesn't need any runway preparations , plus and maybe more importantly to the gov its purchase costs are less then the b , would be a more suitable aircraft for the RAF compared to the b .

Apologies, Lugzy.

I deleted my post before your response.

I agree that 48 is probably the actual total.

Maybe the Falkland Islanders can bale out our economy with some of that lovely oil revenue?

Maybe...

No problem sir , i did reply rather quick there , and I do jump the gun a lot at times

I agree Some extra oil revenue would be nice ,

[Lugzy]

I agree with jonas on this one. Absolutely no point in investing in a new variant that will be less flexible and increase the logistics.

Perhaps if have we have enough B's to saturate both carriers, plus attrition reserves, and then decide we want another 50 jets it may be with investing in the A variant, but that scenario seems very very unlikely.

The F35A would be a horrible typhoon replacement, I hope that never happens. I would guess that problem is close to 20 years away and I seriously hope we peruse another eurofighter.

Let's just say for example the gov as purchased over time 100 f-35b , how many of the RAFs squadrons are going to be made up of these aircraft ? , mr shark you say the f-35a would be a terrible typhoon replacement but the reality is a one version buy in the numbers suggested would probably mean typhoon being replaced by f-35bs anyway , which I wouldn't like to see tbh for reasons I mentioned in my last post.

I'm all for giving the aircraft carrier a credible airwing , but both ?? I think planning for both carriers to be fully manned and a operational with air wings at the same time would be classed as a luxury , and a luxury the gov as no intention of paying for right now , not with out cost to other services and planned projects .

Another mistake would be the uk getting involved in another bottomless money pit eurofighter project , we must of learnt our lesson by now , I'd wait and see in 15 yrs time what a factory fresh f-35 looks like and costs before going that way , but your right there's a long way To go , maybe two decades before any decision on that needs to be made , and by then technology might of jumped again with very capable UCAV being developed .

[shark bait]

Let's just say for example the gov as purchased over time 100 f-35b , how many of the RAFs squadrons are going to be made up of these aircraft ? , mr shark you say the f-35a would be a terrible typhoon replacement but the reality is a one version buy in the numbers suggested would probably mean typhoon being replaced by f-35bs anyway , which I wouldn't like to see tbh for reasons I mentioned in my last post.
.

Doesn't matter which squadrons wear an RAF badge, they are all fleet air arm. I don't think it's a good idea to purchase a less flexible asset, they should all be able to deploy on a carrier if nessesary. Let's not forget the B's are still a fantastic replacement for tornado, one the RAF should be pleaded with.

Another mistake would be the uk getting involved in another bottomless money pit eurofighter project , we must of learnt our lesson by now , .

Learnt our lesson by developing the world best swing role fighter and stimulating the second largest aerospace industry in the world?

(also the F35 project is something of a bigger bottom less money pit)

[seaspear]

I might be wrong but I would of thought having the F35a with its longer range operating alongside the Eurofighter ,would be able to increase the effectiveness of that fighter with its "networking"ability and prolonging the efffectiveness and use by date of the Eurofighter before it to has to be replaced which of course wont be cheap .

[Jdam]

Are the A's really that much cheaper? If its the range that its most impressive feature what about some C's also have the plus if we ever go cat and traps we have some airframes for the carriers.

Personally it seems like a bit of a slippery slop to start buy A's and B's

[arfah]

...................

[The Armchair Soldier]

138 F-35s will be ordered according to Sky News.

The Prime Minister's push for airstrikes comes as the Chancellor plans to announce that Britain is purchasing 138 stealth fighter jets in a £12bn deal.

In an interview with The Sunday Times, George Osborne said the investment will ensure the UK has the world's second most potent carrier strike force after the United States, with the resources to tackle IS and other extremist groups for a generation.

The purchase, which goes far beyond what military experts expected, is reportedly the centrepiece of the Government's strategic defence review, to be published on Monday.

http://news.sky.com/story/1591964/pm-wa ... -two-weeks

[shark bait]

Are the A's really that much cheaper?

That is my thinking, current unit prices are less than 5 million cheaper, what that cost actually includes. It doesn't include engines, but I don't know if it includes the lift fan, I suspect it doesn't.

You may save a little on the purchase price, add a little on the logistical costs, and loose some flexibility. Doesn't seem wroth it to me.

I would also like to add if in the 30's we do want to replace typhoon with the F35A, it will likely be a 20 year old aircraft by then. Is that what we would want for our world class air force?