Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Air Force & Aviation

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence


F-35B/C - Naval Air Discussions (USN & USMC)

This is a discussion on F-35B/C - Naval Air Discussions (USN & USMC) within the Air Force & Aviation forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; At the moment I thought that the drop tanks had been removed from the program due to limited benefit (extra ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average.
Old April 23rd, 2017   #346
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 207
Threads:
At the moment I thought that the drop tanks had been removed from the program due to limited benefit (extra weight and drag = higher fuel burn = negligible benefit)

Keep in mind that even the F35B will have something like 14.5klb of internal fuel. That is approx the same as a 2 tank FA18A. The A model with 18k internal has more than a 3 tank FA18A.
south is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 23rd, 2017   #347
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 2,735
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stampede View Post
Drop tanks are a given for all variants WHEN needed.
Just trying to look outside the square as otherwise we are destined to have 4 to 5 CTOL fast air squadrons which I don't see as a good long term fit for the ADF.
One of the big criticism of the F35B has being it's lack of range which I don't particularly have a problem with as for me the benefits out way the limitations. However if the F35B could be reconfigured to be a de facto F35A it may be a benefit for a country that needs VTOL / STOL flexibility across its platforms and Squadrons.

In effect I'm trying to have my cake and also eat it at the same time.

Would it not be a good thing if the F35B could be reconfigured to have an internal fuel load close to it's F35A stable-mate.

Regards S

I actually see your point, but It just seems so counter intuitive to me, if RAAF get the F35B there use will revolve around a defined concept of operation, if for whatever reason that we may have to extend its range the ADF has other enablers will be on hand to enhance it wether it be disposable drop tanks AAR or a mobile airfield for ferry operations.
t68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2017   #348
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 282
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by t68 View Post
I actually see your point, but It just seems so counter intuitive to me, if RAAF get the F35B there use will revolve around a defined concept of operation, if for whatever reason that we may have to extend its range the ADF has other enablers will be on hand to enhance it wether it be disposable drop tanks AAR or a mobile airfield for ferry operations.
Thanks t68.

I would see this capability as a compliment to AAR and drop tanks.
In other words another trick up the sleeve making a good aircraft even better.

For all three variants of the F35 I have not seen any figures as to the range extension provided by drop tanks. Are there any figures out there in the for public viewing.
While I appreciate the stealth attributes of the aircraft and the benefits of internal fuel storage I can also envisage once the first day of war time has passed that the F35 A,B and C will be doing the long distance bomb truck / ISR role where distance and perseverance employing drop tanks will be more important than a clean airframe.

Regards S
Stampede is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2017   #349
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
SpazSinbad's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 243
Threads:
As one may imagine after all this time a lot of detail about the performance of the F-35 variants is not public knowledge. A long time ago now - when drop tanks for the F-35 were dropped (maybe picked up by Israelis/LM again as mentioned earlier) the figures for 'range extension' with drop tanks were guesstimates at best. Anyway I recall F-35B & F-35C graphics from a very old USN? / LM Boss PowerPoint Briefing had an indication; however without supporting details they are a bit meaningless. I'll check..... This 2016 LM brief for Israel has 760nm Combat radius with internal A/A load: http://i.imgur.com/jMDocjY.png

I'm having trouble minimising the PDF file size of the B model however the F-35C graphic PDF is now attached - probably I'll make a graphic out of the B pdf?.... Perhaps the original PDF may be found by searching: Welcome - Naval Postgraduate School
Attached Files
File Type: pdf F-35B&CmissionFuelRangeProfilesprnC.pdf (67.3 KB, 23 views)
File Type: pdf F-35B&CmissionFuelRangeProfilesprnBscaled.pdf (92.5 KB, 15 views)

Last edited by SpazSinbad; April 25th, 2017 at 11:58 PM. Reason: add 2 page PDF
SpazSinbad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 26th, 2017
Trauma269
This message has been deleted by gf0012-aust. Reason: off topic again
Old April 26th, 2017   #350
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 2,735
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trauma269 View Post
Use the f35 platform introduce dual engines and use this plane as a fighter capable of competing with the f22. Forward swept wing design of the f35x increases maneuverability but the dual engine eliminates vertical takeoff/landing capabilities. I'm not an expert but my best understanding is the f35 is good at most things and elite at nothing specializing the package with already having the infrastructure in place seems like the most effective solution to me...thoughts?
I'm not an expert in aeronautical engineering, but I think you just designed a new clean sheet plane.
t68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 26th, 2017
Trauma269
This message has been deleted by gf0012-aust. Reason: Off topic by any measure
Old April 26th, 2017   #351
Grumpy Old Man
General
gf0012-aust's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,997
Threads:
Can we NOT turn the thread into a circus and avoid the "designer jet" inserts

those kinds of threads can go elswhere, not in what is intended to be a factual thread

One now and then is OK, but then all of you who have been here a while will know that it degenerates into wally world really quickly once everyone starts piling or chiming in

the serious threads need to be preserved so as to not degrade the overall quality

FCA loud thoughts can get placed in a brand new thread where people can pile in to their hearts content and not disrupt the serious debates/discussions


________________
A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
http://cofda.wordpress.com/

gf a.k.a. ROBOPIMP T5C
gf0012-aust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 26th, 2017   #352
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,420
Threads:
I think many people miss the point that rather than being a jack of all trades and master of none the F-35 is like the P-51 Mustang was in WWII, outstanding, or at least above average, at pretty much everything, while also being capable of doing somethings that few, if any others types could. A few other types were faster, a few more manoeuvrable, some were more heavily armed, a few even had its long range, but none could do everything it could do, nor were they so much better at the one or two things they had an edge on to make them better or more effective overall than the Mustang.

No tactical fighter can penetrate a high threat environment like the F-35 can, no combat aircraft has its situational awareness, while almost none have its LO or counter air capabilities, and those that do are on the same team and complement it.

Who cares if the F-22 is better at air superiority, that the B-2 is better at deep penetration, or that the SU-XX is more maneuverable at low speed, or even that other types can carry more ordinance, when these are not critical requirements? So long ad the F-35 can penetrate and hits the targets it needs to hit, can overmatch the opposition it is likely to face and carry the ordinance it needs to for the first two, then it is fit for purpose. The fact that even having expended its own ordinance, it can stay in the fight as a battlespace manage my and sensor node alone makes it more useful than anything else. It may have fired its AMRAAMs but it can still add to the tactical picture, designate and hand of targets as well as actively jam and spoof opposition sensors.
Volkodav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2017   #353
Grumpy Old Man
General
gf0012-aust's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,997
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volkodav View Post
Who cares if the F-22 is better at air superiority, that the B-2 is better at deep penetration, or that the SU-XX is more maneuverable at low speed, or even that other types can carry more ordinance, when these are not critical requirements? So long ad the F-35 can penetrate and hits the targets it needs to hit, can overmatch the opposition it is likely to face and carry the ordinance it needs to for the first two, then it is fit for purpose. The fact that even having expended its own ordinance, it can stay in the fight as a battlespace manage my and sensor node alone makes it more useful than anything else. It may have fired its AMRAAMs but it can still add to the tactical picture, designate and hand of targets as well as actively jam and spoof opposition sensors.
yep - and the planes effectiveness and advantages are as good as the rest of the enablers in that combat and common operating picture network

its a systems fight - not a platform fight

as an analogy, its like asking someone to go and do research using their funk and wagnell - and putting them up against someone else with an acoustic modem, and another person using a FO node netted to FO servers

the warfighting differences at the information exchange level are a golden mile away from how things have been done before.- and thats before anyone talks about who is the shooter
________________
A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
http://cofda.wordpress.com/

gf a.k.a. ROBOPIMP T5C
gf0012-aust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2017   #354
Moderator
General
ngatimozart's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 4,203
Threads:
The first Italian F-35B has rolled off the final assembly and check out (FACO) facility 5 May in Cameri, Italy. This is the first F-35B assembled outside of the US.
________________
"There is one immutable truth we cannot prevent; war is coming, we just don’t know when or where." Brigadier Andrew Harrison DSO MBE
ngatimozart is online now   Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2017   #355
Junior Member
Private First Class
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Out and about
Posts: 57
Threads:
4FTS in UK has pumped-out its first ab initio F-35B pilots, now due at MCAS Beaufort. Course there starts in September. First embarked trials in the QE slated for late second half of next year (no fixed date yet).

Some happy scenes here - https://youtu.be/2xLz4Sg4N5I

Worth noting that while the UK elements at MCAS began to detach last year, most of their work is still part of what amounts to just a giant, single US/UK set-up. Much teaching and trial and error to and from both camps even as they separate.

BZ to all on that longest of long and winding roads.

Last edited by DaveS124; July 12th, 2017 at 01:36 PM.
DaveS124 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2017   #356
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
SpazSinbad's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 243
Threads:
F-35Cs Back at Sea Tests & CarQuals

OBOGS 'fixed' along with catapult pilot/HMDS vibration problem & 'green glow' OLED.
Quote:
"...The program’s adjusted the helmet display, Winter said. It’s also retrained pilots and made minor adjustments to fix the intense vibration during catapult take-offs (“cat stroke”). There’s no need for a costly and time-consuming redesign of the aircraft’s nose landing gear, as some had thought..." JPO Fixing F-35 Oxygen, Carrier Landing, Software Glitches: VADM Winter « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary
SpazSinbad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2017   #357
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
SpazSinbad's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 243
Threads:
Excerpts Videos re F-35B/Cs for the USofA info from TAILHOOK 2017 recently:

Tailhook 2017 Symposium - Update on F-35C testing from LM test pilot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSIzWFxznvM

Tailhook 2017 Symposium - USMC / USN panel talks about F-35B and F-35C progress
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApgPWpx0Msw
SpazSinbad is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:30 AM.