F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Contains threads on Joint Service equipment of the past, present and future.
SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

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

Post by SW1 »

But this is better than all the rest, that’s why we’re doing the buy American thing across the board there much better at this, it was the plane that would do things differently the last manned fighter. The deployment numbers from aircraft in fleet will be totally different to anything that’s gone before it’s been quoted across this board and further afield repeatedly especially in connections with planes on boats and yet it isn’t any different and in some cases worse.

A very hefty dose of reality is needed on this plane.

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:hefty dose of reality is needed on this plane.
They are getting cheaper to buy
... and more expensive to run. I have not seen any numbers, promised for ALIS-NXT :?: Only what a fine programming effort it will be
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: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

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

Post by SW1 »

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/lockhe ... xec-141511

Lockheed Martin Corp. expects it will take around 15 to 20 years to bring the cost per flight hour of the F-35 below fourth-generation fighter jets such as the F-16, the head of the F-35 program said on Feb. 27.

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

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

Post by RetroSicotte »

Image

Seem to be getting there nicely...

Makes it clear that maintenance is only one part of the puzzle, and that there are massive improvements in other ways.

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

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

Post by Timmymagic »

SW1 wrote:Lockheed Martin Corp. expects it will take around 15 to 20 years to bring the cost per flight hour of the F-35 below fourth-generation fighter jets such as the F-16, the head of the F-35 program said on Feb. 27.
For the UK that might not be that bad. We haven't run a cheap fighter bomber since the retirement of Jaguar. Typhoon was eye-wateringly expensive until the very recent partnership with BAE to reduce costs. If F-35's are marginally more expensive that F-16C/D to run, that means they're massively cheaper than Typhoon is/was.

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

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

Post by SW1 »

Well that depends what you’ve assumed your support cost to be when you costed the capability and if you need to find more from somewhere to meet the difference when there isn’t any.

Of course the SAR figures assumes the US will do a full buy of 2600 odd a/c... yet just this year the USAF said they need support costs to reduce by 40% from what they current are to what was forecast.

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:yet just this year the USAF said they need support costs to reduce by 40% from what they current are to what was forecast.
Isn't the referenced Typhoon prgrm target -30%
= same ball park. The biggest significance of that being that the two have been independently (and both together with industry) assessed... so might even be achievable
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
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

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

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Cheap slots, released by a buyer whose deposit was 'not accepted'?
"Washington is considering expanding F-35 sales to five new countries including Romania, Greece, and Poland, a Pentagon official said yesterday [Thursday]"
- India can have the carriers&harriers rerun: emals ; or rather "Bs"? for their "propper" carriers
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: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

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

Post by SW1 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Cheap slots, released by a buyer whose deposit was 'not accepted'?
"Washington is considering expanding F-35 sales to five new countries including Romania, Greece, and Poland, a Pentagon official said yesterday [Thursday]"
- India can have the carriers&harriers rerun: emals ; or rather "Bs"? for their "propper" carriers
The India’s operate Russian equipment so f35 unlikely given the Turkish stance

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:India’s operate Russian equipment so f35 unlikely
I don't think you have read the bilateral agreements for sharing know-how/ hard tech
- it is all in place between Pentagon/ USN/ India
- no decisions... such normally flow from a fairly advanced design (=advanced enough to be costed)
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: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

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

Post by SW1 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
SW1 wrote:India’s operate Russian equipment so f35 unlikely
I don't think you have read the bilateral agreements for sharing know-how/ hard tech
- it is all in place between Pentagon/ USN/ India
- no decisions... such normally flow from a fairly advanced design (=advanced enough to be costed)
The Indians are buying s-400, I haven’t read your document but does it explain why they won’t sell it to a nato member acquiring said system while they will sell it to a non nato member with the same system not to mention many other Russian radar systems.

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: expanding F-35 sales to five new countries including Romania, Greece, and Poland
Greece has s-300.
- they are on Crete, though

- originally they were destined not to Greece, but to the almost Greek 2/3s of Cyprus... would have changed the balance, and a big-power compromise (w/o loss of face, nor cash) was brokered
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)

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

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

Post by Lord Jim »

The S-300 were ordered and paid for by the Greek Cypriot Government for its own military which is separate form the main Greek Military. As pointed out after Turkey kicking up a fuss a deal was done and these were swapped with the S-300s were exchanges with the Greek Military for I believe Russian SA-8b which they had already bought. I am surprised Greece hasn't been more vocal about the Turkish purchase of the S-400, given it range and ability to cover a large area of Greek airspace.

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3955
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

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

Post by Poiuytrewq »


Phil Sayers
Member
Posts: 365
Joined: 03 May 2015, 13:56

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

Post by Phil Sayers »

Certainly going to learn a lot training there what with an ongoing war nearby, an aggressive Russian airforce presence based scarcely 100 miles away and a couple of very sophisticated SAM systems continually attempting to track them from the moment they take off to the moment they touch down again. I suppose that training opportunity is some kind of silver lining to Russia significantly altering the military balance of power in the Middle East leaving the West with no response save for a weary shrug of the shoulders.

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

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

Post by Lord Jim »

They will probably follow US practice and make the planes less stealthy so anyone watching will not get to see they F-35s true capabilities.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7248
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

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

Post by Ron5 »

I expect the RAF to say they've done their one away deployment and are too tired to go on QE until they've had a couple years rest at the local.

:-)

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

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

Post by Lord Jim »

The navy needs to bring back the "Press Gang", to get the RAF aircrew on to the carrier and keep them 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 »

Poiuytrewq wrote:https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-l ... first-time
Phil Sayers wrote:Certainly going to learn a lot training there what with an ongoing war nearby, an aggressive Russian airforce presence based scarcely 100 miles away and a couple of very sophisticated SAM systems continually attempting to track them
There could be even more opportunities if they are mistaken for Israeli Adirs. This https://greece.greekreporter.com/2018/0 ... -dogfight/ happened in January but a few years back was going on between Israeli and Turkish jets to the South of Cyprus (where Turkey is/ was trying to bully the offshore gas development efforts and Israeli interests are participants).
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)

NickC
Donator
Posts: 1432
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
United Kingdom

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

Post by NickC »

USN and Marines planning on slowing down procurement of F-35Bs and F-35Cs, only planning to buy 10 Bs and 20 Cs in next five years between FY2020 and FY2024, partially to fund Block 4 / Continuous Capabilities Development and Delivery, C2D2 will cost the Department of the Navy $806.6M in RDT&E just in FY2020, not mentioned were the C2D2 follow-on costs to FY2024.

“Quite frankly, some of the reduction in aircraft were to pay bills. Some of them were to get wholeness in certain weapons systems: F-35 C2D2 Block 4, it came with a bill we had to pay” Rear Adm. Scott Conn, the air warfare director on the chief of naval operations’ staff (OPNAV N98).

From <https://news.usni.org/2019/04/11/f-35-s ... more-43642>

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

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

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

NickC wrote: F-35 C2D2 Block 4
Certainly kept quiet as for how much the bill for us will be
- well, at least the first two dozen are pretty 'safe' from all that?
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
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

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

Post by Gabriele »

10 B and 20 C are the purchase for 2020 alone; someone on that site screwed up badly on the figure. There was a reduction from earlier plans over the 5 years, but it is something like 14 aircraft in total that get deferred, plus some Super Hornets as well. C2D2 played a part, but buying more ships, including 10 unmanned Corvette added at the last moment, has the most responsibility for that.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

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

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

Post by seaspear »

https://news.usni.org/2019/04/23/marine ... ng-concept
This is an interesting article of the U.S.M.C plans for the F35B it may be something the U.K will consider in its own plans for this model of the 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 »

The comments below the article are very enlightening. The USMC is worried the proliferation of AShMs and other systems aimed at area denial will make their traditional doctrines unworkable in a future conflict, and seem to think Island hopping is a viable option as you cannot sink and island. However 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.

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

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

Post by SW1 »

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

The F-35 fleet is also suffering from mismatched parts. The DoD purchases certain sets of F-35 parts years ahead of time to support aircraft on deployments, including on US Navy (USN) aircraft carriers and US Marine Corps (USMC) amphibious assault ships. But the parts do not fully match the military services' needs because F-35 aircraft have been modified over time, says the GAO.

“For example, 44% of purchased parts were incompatible with aircraft the Marine Corps took on a recent deployment,” says the GAO. “Without a process to modify the sets of parts for deployments, DoD may be unable to meet the services' operational needs.”

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.”

What’s more, the DoD’s re-supply network for moving F-35 parts around the world is immature, says the accountability agency.

Overseas F-35 customers have experienced long wait times for parts needed to repair aircraft,” says GAO. “Without a detailed plan for the network, DoD may not be ready to support an expanding fleet.”

Ultimately, GAO concludes promises to do better next time will likely again fall short.

“While DoD is taking various actions to improve F-35 spare parts availability so that aircraft can fly and perform their missions, it will likely continue to struggle to meet warfighter requirements—due to how it is planning for and allocating spare parts,” it says.
“Overseas F-35 customers have experienced long wait times for parts needed to repair aircraft,” says GAO. “Without a detailed plan for the network, DoD may not be ready to support an expanding fleet.”

Post Reply