DoD Might Kill the F-35A JSF, WHY?

[Bort]

It appears that acting deputy secretary of defense Gordon England would like to kill of the Air Force's lighter F-35A variant of the Joint Strike Fighter and make everbody pick between the F-35B VSTOL variant and F-35C carrier variant of the JSF. Stupid in many ways, that this article points out-
http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_aerospacedaily_story.jsp?id=news/JSAF11215.xml

So once again the United States pisses off all of our friends and allies. Way to go, Department of Defense! :damn:

[PeriscopeDepth]

A few reasons I think it is not stupid:
1) Cuts costs. With the GWOT, Katrina, Iraq, and all our other problems I could care less if the USAF or Denmark doesn't get their F-35As. (no offense intended, Denmark :))
2) I believe the F-35C is longer ranged than the A. Making it more useful as a bomb truck, which IS what the F-35 will be after the first day of the air campaign.
3) Perhaps the armed forces will do someting REAL novel. Like experimenting with true "joint" capabilities. Leave those arresting hooks on the USAF's F-35Cs...You know the AF will be tempted to try landing them on carriers. Yes, a pipedream I know. But it would save tons of money if someone followed through on the idea.
4) I hope that foreign customers will pull out of the program. I really do. I do not support "made for export" stealth technology. Even if Norway did pay for 1.67% of the R&D. (again, no offense intended Norwegians)
5) The USAF will not be loosing any capability. Yes, they may not get a gun. But frankly I think putting a gun on a $50-60 million dollar jet invites the pilot to take risks with the machine that aren't worth its loss.

[XabbaRus]

Well considering that having 3 different versions is daft when 2 will do fine. One VSTOL and one Conventional.

Also I don't get your being against exporting stealth. Its not like it is a big secret or that other countries don't have the expertise. China has stolen it. The UK has developed it too, sure with help for the US but BAe had an independent program, I think to prove that we could do it.

I think that the UK should scrap the VSTOL idea, fit the CVF with cats and go for the F-35C

[tycho102]

Part of the issue is airfields. There's a lot of contention in countries about allowing the US to use their airfields. Part of that is fear that the Muslim population will "protest" with car-bombs.

Carriers have always had a role as first-responders, and in these future "wars", the first 24 hours of bombing missions will make all the difference. We're not going to have the luxury of airfields in the future, so Airforce boys may very well have to learn carrier landings, or they'll have to use ACLS (Automatic Carrier Landing System).

The Marines would be using the VSTOL for their inland operations. Can't carry as much ammo, but having a shooter on-site in minutes can save a platoon. We pulled the gun out of the 18E/F because it's not a close-support aircraft. It *has* some capability, because it can designate it's own IR targets. It's that ten seconds of 20mm rounds, a load of flares, and a high-drag 500lb to light up the enemy that really makes the difference. And that is exactly what the Marines/Army needs in a close-support strike.

The Airforce will be running precision strikes from the nearest airbase, and the close-support role will shift entirely to the Navy and Marines. Future "wars" will be decided by quick-reaction forces. You'll still need the Army and Airforce to secure the area, afterwards, so they're not going to be out of a job or anything like that.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Well considering that having 3 different versions is daft when 2 will do fine. One VSTOL and one Conventional.

I agree with you to a point, as I consider the whole program to be daft. :)



Also I don't get your being against exporting stealth. Its not like it is a big secret or that other countries don't have the expertise. China has stolen it. The UK has developed it too, sure with help for the US but BAe had an independent program, I think to prove that we could do it.

The UK is the only country I wouldn't have a problem giving stealth too.

Fine. The Chinese may have stolen it, but let's see them build it. Exporting JSF to some questionable countries will make it that much easier for the Chinese.

[PeriscopeDepth]

The Airforce will be running precision strikes from the nearest airbase, and the close-support role will shift entirely to the Navy and Marines. Future "wars" will be decided by quick-reaction forces. You'll still need the Army and Airforce to secure the area, afterwards, so they're not going to be out of a job or anything like that.

Dunno about that. In a crisis situation, if the AF hasn't forward deployed already I it'll be up to the USN and its cruise missiles. And the only way for the AF to get in on it will be with a tail hook, a bomber, or heavy support aircraft. What's the most important role the AF played in in OEF?

[Bort]

Okay, let me clear something up-
The more JSF's are sold, the less they will cost, which with the financial fix the US is in right now might be the only way this program gets off the ground is with big sales numbers, and that means allies buying it, not to mention the money they've alrady put into the development pot. I don't have any concern about selling the JSF to NATO countries or some of our friends that we've sold F-16's and F/A-18's to in the past (although the US should be more selective when it comes to costomers than it was with the Falcon or Hornet). The simple fact is that these allies want the F-35A, not the complex F-35B or the heavier and more expensive F-35C. The Air Force doesn't want the C either and I don't blame them, it's got alot of stuff that just adds cost and wieght that just isn't neccesarry if you aren't using a carrier. I'm not so worried about the stealth concerns because honestly, If we don't sell our friends the best technology fighters, than someone like russia will develop the technology, sell it to our allies, who might not be so cozy with us anymore because of our selectiveness, and we loose out on the market as well. It just seems like common sense to me. :know:
also
We pulled the gun out of the 18E/F because it's not a close-support aircraft.
This is incorrect.
All F/A-18E/F's have a vulcan cannon, some Marine F/A-18D's used for night attack can have their cannon removed and replaced with a camera system for recon, but the cannon can easily be put back.

[Kiwi Zero Six]

The guns are THE most important weapon on a combat aircraft.

Too close for missiles? Go to guns.

The reasons an aircraft needs a gun are limitless.

[XabbaRus]

Thing is you can make a good carrier fighter into a good landbased fighter. Not the other way roud.

Look at the F-111.

Look at the F-14, pure carrier fighter but great off land and could take on an F-15 no probs. Imagine if they took and F-15 and started beefing it up for carrier ops.

I'd take a C version of the F-35 any day. Also you'd save money in spares. These things are crazy, you have 3 different types of the same plane but they might only have 50 - 60% commonality in spares. Ok that might eb an exaggeration but look at the Tornado F.3 and GR-4, same plane, different radar but commonality ZIP.

[tycho102]

* Bort]
This is incorrect.
All F/A-18E/F's have a vulcan cannon

Pardon me. You're right. I could have swore I read somewhere, years ago, they'd swapped it out for avionics. I forget, but I think that thing + 500 rounds of ammo runs close to 4000 pounds. On A/B/C/D's, that's 16% of it's empty weight.

The 18 has been sold to lots of other countries, true. It's avionics are customized for that country, as well as the firmwares. They don't get all the ECCM and identification stuff, along with the crypto and a few other things. The airframe might be the same (with minor differences), but the computers are inferior. The Israelis might actually get some superior stuff on the ECM side (they use jammers rather than the fleet deceptors), but everything else is custom. "Stealth" is a whole other issue. Exporting the technology is one thing, tooling up your plants and economy to actually produce the damn things are something else completely.

As far as I know, the Airforce runs B-2's for precision strikes, and some reconnisance. B-2's can launch from Louisiana and refuel, in-flight, but that is an expensive mission. Which is why we've been using Dubai and Saudi Arabia/Kuwait. Certainly Diego Garcia for the first few days when it was open bombing season out in the desert.