F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

[sunstersun]

https://insidedefense.com/insider/uk-me ... ustainment

[sunstersun]

[seaspear]

The f35 can be expected to be over its lifetime be subject to continual development , whether programming or new capabilities future funding would surely be required ,those upgrades should always be justifiable for its activities

[Lord Jim]

If the SPEAR programme does deliver all that is promised the UK's F-35s are going to have a pretty effective list of options as to what to deliver to targets. The Paveway IV is already a good weapon. Whether we choose to use the Gun pod will be interesting, it is probably under the "Nice to have", column.

[abc123]

If the SPEAR programme does deliver all that is promised the UK's F-35s are going to have a pretty effective list of options as to what to deliver to targets. The Paveway IV is already a good weapon. Whether we choose to use the Gun pod will be interesting, it is probably under the "Nice to have", column.

About gun pod, what do you think, will the F-35 be a "pig" in conditions where you can use the gun? B-version maybe not, because of partially vectored thrust. Because if yes, I wouldn't bother with gun pod, Vietnam or not Vietnam...

[NickC]

USAF Gen. David Goldfein said it does not plan to cut its planned purchase of 1,763 F-35As, in fact, it’s not even not considering doing so, but is pushing hard to bring down the sustainment costs, would like to see the F-35 cost about the same to operate as it costs for an F-16 or an F-18. USAF Secretary Heather Wilson said in January the F-35 was unaffordable at current sustainment cost levels, follows the USAF analysis that found the service would have to cut 590, one third of its planned buy, of the F-35A fleet because of its stubbornly high operations and maintenance costs. Air Force unhappy with Lockheed over its negotiating tactics and its lack of transparency on cost, under the original 2001 contract with Lockheed they own the F-35 data rights. LOL.

Stephen Lovegrove, MoD Permanent Secretary in Washington said there was “a degree of uncertainty” about sustainment costs.

March 29th
https://breakingdefense.com/2018/03/not ... -goldfein/

[benny14]

About gun pod, what do you think, will the F-35 be a "pig" in conditions where you can use the gun? B-version maybe not, because of partially vectored thrust. Because if yes, I wouldn't bother with gun pod, Vietnam or not Vietnam...

If the F35 is in a situation where it is alone and in a dogfight then we are definitely screwed.

[WhiteWhale]

If the SPEAR programme does deliver all that is promised the UK's F-35s are going to have a pretty effective list of options as to what to deliver to targets. The Paveway IV is already a good weapon. .

The Paveway IV may be excellent but it does require being significantly 'over' the target, the lack of weapons for the F-35B, especially internal ones that are capable of 'reaching out' is a bit of concern, especially in terms of anti-ship missiles.

[Ron5]

If the SPEAR programme does deliver all that is promised the UK's F-35s are going to have a pretty effective list of options as to what to deliver to targets. The Paveway IV is already a good weapon. .

The Paveway IV may be excellent but it does require being significantly 'over' the target, the lack of weapons for the F-35B, especially internal ones that are capable of 'reaching out' is a bit of concern, especially in terms of anti-ship missiles.

UK F35's will have Spear 3 & the Storm Shadow follow on. Plenty of "reach out".

[WhiteWhale]

If the SPEAR programme does deliver all that is promised the UK's F-35s are going to have a pretty effective list of options as to what to deliver to targets. The Paveway IV is already a good weapon. .

The Paveway IV may be excellent but it does require being significantly 'over' the target, the lack of weapons for the F-35B, especially internal ones that are capable of 'reaching out' is a bit of concern, especially in terms of anti-ship missiles.

UK F35's will have Spear 3 & the Storm Shadow follow on. Plenty of "reach out".

Last I heard storm shadow had been dropped and while the Spear 3 may be a very useful beast It could take quite a few 100kg missiles to take out a standard Frigate sized threat. Three 150kg Sea Skuas couldn't take out a 800t tug so being reliant on a munition with so little punch against a large threat is a worry.

[Caribbean]

Last I heard storm shadow had been dropped

Really? I thought this was the plan
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/typhoon ... r-in-2018/
Likewise, in March 2017

Minister for Defence Procurement Harriett Baldwin has today announced a £146 million contract with MBDA to regenerate an air-launched missile, alongside her French counterpart Laurent Collet-Billon. The shared deal with MDBA will see the UK’s Storm Shadow and France’s SCALP missiles updated so they remain fit for purpose and ready for operational use. During an inward visit by Laurent Collet-Billon, the Minister confirmed the strong partnership with France in a series of meetings at Lancaster House. The collaboration is providing a £50 million saving for both sides. The contract will keep the missile in service for the next decade and beyond and help to sustain around 60 UK jobs. Storm Shadow is a combat-proven, long-range, precision cruise missile, already in service with RAF Tornados, deployed recently against Daesh in Iraq.

It's supposed to get a "refurbishment" under the Spear 4 project, gaining an anti-shipping capability

Has this all changed?

[Ron5]

He means that the integration of Storm Shadow on F-35 was cancelled. It was. However, the replacement for Storm Shadow, being developed with the French, will be integrated.

Until then, the unstealthy Typhoon can hit targets from long range with SS and the stealthy F-35 can sneak in and hit them with Spear3 & PW IV.

Not sure why anyone would be unhappy with this plan. Seems reasonable given the lack of UK defense money.

[Lord Jim]

Mind you if the F-35s are being tasked with anti-ship strikes in a peer to peer conflict something has gone wrong. I theory the Rn could adopt the NSM or whatever it is called these days if it will fit in the smaller bay of the F-35B, bit I can see the jets role first and foremost being the defence of the carrier and that is the problem the UK is going to have going forward. It simply cannot afford to lose the carrier and will struggle to have enough F-35s embarked to do more than self defence. It seem strange that the QE will be ideal for conducting operations like those the UK has carrier out since the 1990s when peer to peer was not on the table but then again the majority of UK procurement and planning also seem ideal for this rather than the threats we could actually be fighting in the future.

[benny14]

The Paveway IV may be excellent but it does require being significantly 'over' the target, the lack of weapons for the F-35B, especially internal ones that are capable of 'reaching out' is a bit of concern, especially in terms of anti-ship missiles.

I would say an F35 carrying eight Spear 3 and two Meteor missiles internally is plenty of reaching out. Both capable of going out far beyond 100km.

Although Spear 3 is supposed to be capable of anti-shipping, it is in no way a heavy weight ASM. This will most likely come in the form of whatever ASM missile we choose to replace harpoon on our escorts, which might also equip our P8s and F35s.

[shark bait]

Spear has plenty of reach, perfect for disabling radar sites to let the aircraft with big dirty missiles on the wing through.

The other option a low observably F35 providing mid course guidance to a big missile launched by platform beyond stand off range.

This looks like a pretty solid start to me;

[indeid]

He means that the integration of Storm Shadow on F-35 was cancelled. It was. However, the replacement for Storm Shadow, being developed with the French, will be integrated.

Until then, the unstealthy Typhoon can hit targets from long range with SS and the stealthy F-35 can sneak in and hit them with Spear3 & PW IV.

Not sure why anyone would be unhappy with this plan. Seems reasonable given the lack of UK defense money.

I’d go along with that. Interesting thing is the increasing challenge modern SHORAD gives the munition, not just the launch platform. As seen with SA22 guarding SA21 some element of saturation may be needed against certain targets, opposed to a larger, but more vulnerable, SS type weapon.

Longer range weapons are good, but carrying more but smaller missiles may be the way to go, clearing the way for a heavier warhead for hardened targets.

Sounds like it might work well and be a complementary capability. It’s got no chance.....

[RetroSicotte]

I do remain very cautious of F-35 having no long range strike for the better part of a decade, personally. I'd be very intrigued to see a timescale on how quickly the RAF/FAA could purchase, acquire, train for and utilise things like LRASM and JASSM should it be required. Modern munitions have extremely complicated operating envelopes and cockpit/shipboard preparations these days, can't imagine it's too quick to get pilots trained on.

It's a steathy aircraft sure, but it feels like its "Oh we have this so we don't need this" all over again, when that difficult to spot nature is best utilised with long range munitions that amplify that advantage significantly.

For anti-ship and SEAD/DEAD especially, more than just land attack.

[NickC]

He means that the integration of Storm Shadow on F-35 was cancelled. It was. However, the replacement for Storm Shadow, being developed with the French, will be integrated.

Until then, the unstealthy Typhoon can hit targets from long range with SS and the stealthy F-35 can sneak in and hit them with Spear3 & PW IV.

Not sure why anyone would be unhappy with this plan. Seems reasonable given the lack of UK defense money.

I’d go along with that. Interesting thing is the increasing challenge modern SHORAD gives the munition, not just the launch platform. As seen with SA22 guarding SA21 some element of saturation may be needed against certain targets, opposed to a larger, but more vulnerable, SS type weapon.

Longer range weapons are good, but carrying more but smaller missiles may be the way to go, clearing the way for a heavier warhead for hardened targets.

Sounds like it might work well and be a complementary capability. It’s got no chance.....

That will only be viable if all missiles/bombs carried in the limited payload/space of the F-35B weapons bay, stealth will be seriously compromised if carried externally (ASRAAM can only be carried externally and the Kongsberg JSM will be too big as sized specifically to fit the larger weapons bay of the F-35A).

That presupposes that stealth works, Lockheed have stated that ex-works its impossible to achieve the theoretical stealth capability claimed due to imperfections in manufacture, we still don't known after every day frontline service wear and tear to what degree further degradation will further compromise its stealth capabilities.

[shark bait]

I do remain very cautious of F-35 having no long range strike for the better part of a decade

Its not great, but as long as Typhoon does its ok.

[RetroSicotte]

I do remain very cautious of F-35 having no long range strike for the better part of a decade

Its not great, but as long as Typhoon does its ok.

The Typhoon doesn't have a long range anti-ship or SEAD missile either, is more what I was meaning. Sorry if I was a bit vague.

[shark bait]

anti-ship is clearly a gap, the simplest solution being mid course guidance of a Tomahawk?

[indeid]

That will only be viable if all missiles/bombs carried in the limited payload/space of the F-35B weapons bay, stealth will be seriously compromised if carried externally (ASRAAM can only be carried externally and the Kongsberg JSM will be too big as sized specifically to fit the larger weapons bay of the F-35A).

That presupposes that stealth works, Lockheed have stated that ex-works its impossible to achieve the theoretical stealth capability claimed due to imperfections in manufacture, we still don't known after every day frontline service wear and tear to what degree further degradation will further compromise its stealth capabilities.

Nothing is that binary, and it is very rare for one capability to operate in complete independence. That goes for the F35, let alone Carrier Air in general, they will be part of the answer, not usually the answer.

A high end enemy is not attacked on a single axis, and even if some F35 have to fly ‘dirty’ there will ways of getting them in alongside the others. Sequencing an attack, especially an initial break in, is the key element.

Agree about stealth, although even having a LO platform available can alter an enemies behaviour. Same with weapon types, the more available the more to consider when defending.

I imagine only a select few will understand completely what the F35 brings to the party. A bit like the F22 pilots nodding sagely in flag debriefs as enthusiastic foreigners claim kills against them, before disappearing grinning into their US only discussion.

[RetroSicotte]

anti-ship is clearly a gap, the simplest solution being mid course guidance of a Tomahawk?

The only platform using them is the submarines, and that must be husbanded for land strike. Tomahawk is a theoretical ASM, but not a dedicated one, and with very few in RN inventory.

From T26, sure, maybe. But unlikely. I feel it's very unlikely we'll ever seen land attack missiles on those ships, which is a massive missed opportunity, and hands over another major capability holding to a peer above the UK (France's FREMMs have land attack SCALPs for 1,000km range or something). The Rafales on the Charles de Gaulle also possess this ability, for both long range ASM and land attack, albeit not SEAD. (Something the F-35 with Spear will be vastly better equipped for)

To bring this back to the F-35, it begs the question of how the RN with its larger budget cannot find a way to maintain even some ASM and land attack outside the submarines. But its a gap that is very crucial to close, I feel. The 2030+ missile has its own concerns. Can it be launched from Astutes in a 1,800km range land attack? Somehow I think not. Can it go over 1,000km from a vertical ship launch? Maybe?

It's definitely not the answer to everything.

There's two distinct timeframes here. Pre-2030 and Post-2030. Currently we're looking at:

Pre-2030
F-35:
ASM: 100km small missiles
Land Attack: 100km small missiles

Type 26:
ASM: Nothing
Land Attack: Nothing

Astute:
ASM: Nothing/ 54km Spearfish
Land Attack: 1,800km tomahawk

Post-2030
F-35:
ASM: FG/ASW (Range estimates between 300-500km?)
Land Attack: FG/ASW

Type 26:
ASM: FG/ASW
Land Attack: FG/ASW (Extended booster version since French may want to match SCALP ability?)

Astute:
ASM: Nothing/ 54km Spearfish
Land Attack: Nothing (Tomahawk isn't lasting forever)

I can't be the only one who sees Type 26 gaining land attack as a reason for them to cut submarine land attack because they can then still "say" they have the capability. (Checkbox military strikes again). But Pre-2030 there is a huge issue with the ships, and with the aircraft for long range.

Post-2030, there is a huge issue with VERY long range, as tomahawk seems to have no clear replacement to match that range, and indeed no clear replacement at all. How the US Navy solves this will be interesting, but they have the stockpile to wait it out. The UK doesn't.

France's approach may also matter as they want FG/ASW to replace SCALP, but they may just keep SCALP Naval running for the FREMM and Barracuda without a direct replacement. Thus shutting the UK out, even if not intended as a malicious method.

The mythical FG/ASW program I do not see as the answer to all problems. It leaves a massive gap in capability for a decade, and then possibly even creates one later in.

Personally, that's why I've advocated the F-35 to have a small stock of the already to be integrated JASSM to last the UK until FG/ASW, and to look into NSM for covering the ASM gap. Those two purchases covers everything needed until FG/ASW and whatever the Tomahawk replacement is.

The lack of land attack on T26 due to this is concerning, but I'm trying to keep it as "simple solution" as possible. TLAMs for it would be the best option straight out, and would give the UK a loooong stick to have diplomatic clout with. F-35s with deep strike ability only aids that, it's unbelievable the threat envelop that puts out on an area from a carrier equipped with stealth jets using those things.

[Lord Jim]

The above makes perfect sense, but that is something the MoD and Government seem to lack as a core capability that has been gapped for decades.

[Ron5]

How would the UK get targeting information for long range land attack?