Page 8 of 130 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 1942

Thread: What is up with the F-35? Part II

  1. #106
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by gf0012-aust View Post
    thats oversiimplifying by some margin.

    the old harrier was also just a triangle on your track management software - ie a friendly on your screen.

    JSF on any gven day is not just a dot on C2PC or GCCS, its a force enabler.
    Yes, I know all that, but... nine doors, all working in unison?!

    The tech-support-guy in me cringes just thinking about it...

  2. #107
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    16 Nov 05
    Posts
    2,224
    The landing gear has something like 7 doors.

  3. #108
    Senior Contributor surfgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 09
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    1,797
    F-35 in Jeopardy, per Sec. Def.
    From 11/16/11 Aviation Week.
    By Jen DiMascio

    What does inaction by the U.S. Congress on the federal deficit mean? According to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, it means no more Joint Strike Fighter. No new bomber. No Littoral Combat Ships and no Ground Combat Vehicle program.

    The Budget Control Act in August set up a Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to find at least $1.2 trillion in deficit cuts. And if Congress fails to pass a deficit-reduction plan by Jan. 15, 2012, the defense budget would undergo $600 billion in automatic cuts over the next 10 years.

    Since August, lawmakers have been calling on the Pentagon to provide details about exactly what a reduction of that magnitude would mean. Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) recently wrote a letter to Panetta asking him to lay out the parameters. The senators plan to sponsor a bill that would remove the $600 billion penalty.

    And McCain says President Barack Obama, who has threatened to veto a deficit reduction bill that fails to include tax increases, should listen to Panetta. “[Obama’s] secretary of defense just wrote us a letter saying [sequestration] would have the most devastating effects on our national security,” McCain says. “I hope he would listen to his secretary of defense.”

    On Nov. 14, Panetta laid out $200 billion in kills or delays to major programs in the long term that would result from Congress’ failure to act. The F-35, the bomber, the Littoral Combat Ship, Ground Combat Vehicles and the next-generation ballistic missile submarine would all fall by the wayside.

    And those aren’t the only programs that the process known as sequestration would relegate to the scrap heap. The U.S. could wave goodbye to Army helicopter modernization programs, “major space initiatives,” European missile defense, unmanned intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) systems and the missile leg of the nuclear triad, adding another $56 billion.

    When Panetta says cuts would be devastating, he means all that and more. The Defense Department would also have to scale back training and furlough civilian personnel. He reminded the senators that sequestration would apply cuts across the board in ways that don’t make sense.

    “A 23 percent cut in ship and military construction projects would render them unexecutable — you cannot buy three quarters of a building,” Panetta writes. “A 23 percent cut in [a] weapons program would drive up unit costs and lead to reductions in quantity of one-third or more.”

    The letter comes just more than a week before the so-called super committee has to make its recommendations to the rest of Congress for budget reductions.

    After the letter’s release, Robert Spigarn of Credit Suisse says even though the maximum penalty is “unlikely,” steep reductions are coming the Pentagon’s way. “We see limited longer-term sector upside due to continued incremental negative news flow and potential for further declines in consensus estimates,” he says in a note to investors.

    “Regardless of what is decided this year, we think fiscal reality will require further cuts later, leading to a “boiling frog” scenario where cuts are $1 [trillion or greater] over a longer period.”
    Panetta Details Budget Doomsday For Congress | AVIATION WEEK

  4. #109
    Global Moderator Defense Professional
    Join Date
    30 May 06
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,269
    well, this will be interesting as Obama has just indicated to the aust gov that US capability in the PACRIM will be embargoed from cuts....

  5. #110
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    16 Nov 05
    Posts
    2,224
    Panetta is the first SecDef during my career that actually appears to give a damn about capability. And he's the one I was most concerned about, lol.

  6. #111
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy View Post
    Panetta is the first SecDef during my career that actually appears to give a damn about capability. And he's the one I was most concerned about, lol.
    It's always the quiet ones?

  7. #112
    Patron
    Join Date
    10 Apr 09
    Posts
    222
    On one hand I read the F-35 program as a whole is plagued with problems, including a skyrocketing budget. On the other I read that the F-35 A and C are ahead of schedule and the fighter itself will be all lollipops and gumdrops (basically it will increase our warfighting capability, and that of our allies and be maintenance friendly).

    With massive military budget cuts on the table I can only see an overall reduction of the numbers bought of the f-35, and thus an overall increase to the cost of each individual jet. Can anyone tell me if the nearly 2,500 number for the US is still on the table, or if that will be cut significantly?

    I read of preserving its budget after this most recent failure of congress, but a numbers reduction is a number reduction and no doubt will decrease the capability of a country with global objectives.

  8. #113
    Senior Contributor surfgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 09
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    1,797
    I believe the Navy may get its allotment of F-35C's cut short and supplemented by improved F-18's as outline in this article.

    By David A. Fulghum

    ST. LOUIS, Mo. — Boeing is offering a line of upgrades for international variants of its F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and F-15C/Es that the U.S. military is likely to envy and may well adopt as defense budgets shrink.

    Even without budget cuts, the U.S. is facing a strike fighter shortage. But if deficit cutting takes a 25% slice out of defense spending, the Pentagon could lose its ability to transfer aircraft to some faraway battlefield in time to deter military adventurism in Asia, Africa or the Middle East. That lack of nearby assets already kept U.S. F-22 units on the East Coast from participating in the Libyan campaign.

    But stopgap measures could enable less stealthy, conventional aircraft such as the F-15, B-1, F/A-18E/F, F-16 and EA-18G to penetrate farther into a foe’s most lethal threat rings. To avoid making such a foray a suicide mission, those aircraft can combine reduced signatures, electronic attack, directed-energy weapons, cyberoperations and standoff missiles to increase their striking range and penetration capabilities without driving up risk.

    Among Boeing’s upgrade options for the Super Hornet is a stealthy weapons bay that can be attached to the aircraft’s exterior, says Mike Gibbons, Boeing’s F/A-18 and EA-18 programs vice president. Historically, any exterior payload — fuel tanks, weapons or sensors — damaged the stealth signature of an aircraft. This stealthy, 17.5-ft.-long weapons pod does not, he says.

    In fact, the uniquely shaped bay, hung under the aircraft between the engines, creates a trap that either deflects radar signals away from the enemy sensor or sends them bouncing around a series of treated surfaces on the nose, engine nacelles, belly and bay itself, according to stealth specialists. After as few as two bounces, the radar signals are rendered too weak to be useful.

    The weapon bay doors can open at speeds up to Mach 1.6, which, combined with high altitude, provides an increase in standoff range of 70-80% for some weapons. The low-drag, low-radar-cross-section weapons pod can carry four Amraam air-to-air missiles; six Small Diameter Bombs and two Amraams; or two 500-lb. bombs and two Amraams. Future options include a 2,000-lb. Blu-109 hard-target penetrator fitted with an extended-range wing kit as well as other weapons. Some of the weapons are attached to the weapon pod’s doors, but the layout ensures that no weapon is blocked by any other.

    The manually scanned radar dish on the initial Super Hornets created radar glints from the flat emitter face and movements of the radar. An active, electronically scanned array (AESA), long-range radar in the Block 2 Super Hornets eliminates both of those problems with an upward-slanting radar face and no moving parts, stealth specialists say.

    Conformal fuel tanks attached over the wing roots add 110 nm of combat radius, says Mark Gammon, program manager for the Super Hornet International Roadmap. Wind tunnel testing shows that at cruise and loiter speeds there is no performance penalty for the conformal tanks, and at Mach 0.6-0.75 there is actually improvement over baseline performance, he says.

    Yet another international option is General Electric’s enhanced-performance F414. A new compressor fan and core gives it 20% more thrust than the standard F404.Boeing Offers New Capabilities For F/A-18s | AVIATION WEEK

  9. #114
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    16 Nov 05
    Posts
    2,224
    I will be very surprised if the AF buys more than 3/4 of the current "plan." They're actively cutting people with combat experience and millions of dollars in training each (rated officers, people with 15+ years in). And I'm not talking about early retirement. I'm talking about 4 months' notice and a severance check of about 1 year's base pay.

  10. #115
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Chogy's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Apr 09
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,754
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy View Post
    I will be very surprised if the AF buys more than 3/4 of the current "plan." They're actively cutting people with combat experience and millions of dollars in training each (rated officers, people with 15+ years in). And I'm not talking about early retirement. I'm talking about 4 months' notice and a severance check of about 1 year's base pay.
    Brings back bad memories of "force shaping" and other events totally out of control of the individual.

    Manpower projections are driving this train. For example, ROTC scholarships are rapidly becoming VERY difficult to obtain. The U.S. Armed Services are reducing the number available to young people by a large percentage.

  11. #116
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    9,009
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy View Post
    I will be very surprised if the AF buys more than 3/4 of the current "plan." They're actively cutting people with combat experience and millions of dollars in training each (rated officers, people with 15+ years in). And I'm not talking about early retirement. I'm talking about 4 months' notice and a severance check of about 1 year's base pay.
    Weren't most of those cuts, 157, Twice passed over Majors with less than 18 years in? I don't think any of the other services ever let a 2p O-4 stay. And according to the AF times, thats has been the way the AF has always operated. Maybe thats one of the reasons you guys were way over the Congressionally mandated end strength.

    I think all the services will cut their numbers. We cannot afford not to.
    Human Scum. Proud Never Trumper

  12. #117
    Defense Professional ArtyEngineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    09 Dec 09
    Location
    Fayetteville NC
    Posts
    556

    Gun Grape

    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Grape View Post
    I think all the services will cut their numbers. We cannot afford not to.
    II MEF is losing 7000 Marines.

    See link: Lejeune faces widespread cuts in Marine Corps force reorganization plan | marine, force, corps - News Source for Jacksonville, North Carolina - jdnews.com

    Here is a breakdown of units:

    Local units listed for deactivation/realignment

    Camp Lejeune

    Deactivation

    Company E, 2nd AAV Battalion

    Company E, 2nd Tanks Battalion

    5th Battalion, 10th Marines (HQ 5/10, R, S, and T Batteries)

    HQ Battery, 3/10

    Truck Company B, 2nd Marine Division

    1st Battalion, 9th Marines

    2nd Battalion, 9th Marines

    3rd Battalion, 9th Marines

    8th Marines Regimental Headquarters (realignment of subordinate battalions to be determined)

    Company C, 2nd Reconnaissaince Battalion

    2nd Maintenance Battalion

    2nd Supply Battalion

    Realignment/Reorganization

    Military police (MP Company deactivation, Law Enforcement Battalion activation)

    Combat Logistics Battalion 2

    Combat Logistics Battalion 6

    Combat Logistics Battalion 24

    Combat Logistics Battalion 26

    2nd Medical Battalion

    2nd Dental Battalion

    2nd Marine Logistics Group HQ

    8th Engineer Support Battalion

    Activation

    Combat Logistics Battalion 251

    Combat Logistics Battalion 253



    2nd Marine Aircraft Wing

    Deactivation

    HMLA-567

    Det. HQ Marine Air Control Group 28

    Det. Marine Air Support Squadron 1

    Det. Marine Tactical Air Command Squadron 28

    Det. Marine Wing Communications Squadron 28

    Det. 2 Air Traffic Control, Marine Air Control Squadron-2

    HQ Marine Wing Support Group 27

    Marine Tactical Electronic Warfare Squadron 1

    Marine Tactical Electronic Warfare Squadron 2

    Marine Tactical Electronic Warfare Squadron 3

    Marine Tactical Electronic Warfare Squadron 4

    Reorganization/Realignment

    HMLA-Transition Training Unit Det. (activated FY 11, deactivated planned FY 14

    Pretty extensive dont you think?

    Regards

    Arty
    "Admit nothing, deny everything, make counter-accusations".- Motto of the Gun Crew who have just done something incredibly stupid!!!!

  13. #118
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    16 Nov 05
    Posts
    2,224
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Grape View Post
    Weren't most of those cuts, 157, Twice passed over Majors with less than 18 years in? I don't think any of the other services ever let a 2p O-4 stay. And according to the AF times, thats has been the way the AF has always operated. Maybe thats one of the reasons you guys were way over the Congressionally mandated end strength.

    I think all the services will cut their numbers. We cannot afford not to.
    No, several hundred captains and a few majors were notified last month that they'll be promoted to civilian 1 March. The AF Times is only slightly more reliable than the Weekly World News was. This was a RIF board, not the usual continuation/noncontinuation for 2 above-the-zone. And in practice continuation was usually offered-the DOD instruction even says that's the intent, but noncontinuation is an option under certain circumstances so that's how everyone should've been operating. Our end-strength has been getting cut for several years, that's why we're over.

    One of the many problems with the RIF was this was not the quality-based cut AFPC says it was. This was a glance for people who had anything negative in their records, regardless of AFSC, training value, replacement options, or any positives in their records. USAFWS grads were on this list. Senior F-22 pilots. Instructors. Almost half the non-retains were pilots, and most of them were from AMC (if there's one thing the US needs less of, it's AIRLIFT. HELLOOOOO). I know an ABM who got cut: 7 years in, instructor senior director, multiple air medals, probably close to 2k hours on the E-3, but he had a referral OPR a couple of years ago for a poorly-timed PT test failure. That same OPR had a #1 squadron strat, and his commander went to bat for him for the RIF. Apparently the squadron's best is in the bottom 5% of the AF. He laughs that he's getting the boot for a PT failure and when he leaves his final test score will be 92.

  14. #119
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    9,009
    Quote Originally Posted by ArtyEngineer View Post
    II MEF is losing 7000 Marines.

    See link: Lejeune faces widespread cuts in Marine Corps force reorganization plan | marine, force, corps - News Source for Jacksonville, North Carolina - jdnews.com

    Here is a breakdown of units:

    Pretty extensive dont you think?

    Regards

    Arty


    Extensive, but not excessive. Afghanistan is drawing down. The Corps will be out of that operation next year.

    I cannot speak for all the airwing stuff.

    On the ground side except for 4 units, they are all elements that have grown out of the expansion of the Corps in the last 10 years.

    The Units in question are Company C 2dRecon.

    They were the "Door Knocker" (Direct action) company back in the 1990s. Now that MarSOC has been stood up, they are a bit redundant.

    HQ 3/10- Where are their firing batteries? Would need more info to comment on that one.

    5/10- In the late 80s 5/10 was going to go away. They were, in the old force structure a MEF level asset. General Support Reinforcing.

    Instead 4/10 disbanded so that the Corps could field a Rocket battalion. Either MLRS or HIMARS. The Corps decided to place rockets in the reserves. 14th Marines. Then in the 90s they became the "UDP Bn". The writing has been on the wall for a while.

    8th Mar Regt- It looks like we are losing a Regt worth of Infantry Bns (9th)
    they were stood up in 07/08 to give each Regt 4 Bns.

    Are we doing away with one regt HQ and leaving the remaining Regts with 4 Bns each? Maybe that is whats happening with 3/10

    It looks like Maint, Eng and Supply Bn are becoming part of the Logistic Bns.

    I would love to see a copy of the Force Structure Review.
    Human Scum. Proud Never Trumper

  15. #120
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    9,009
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy View Post
    No, several hundred captains and a few majors were notified last month that they'll be promoted to civilian 1 March. The AF Times is only slightly more reliable than the Weekly World News was. This was a RIF board, not the usual continuation/noncontinuation for 2 above-the-zone. And in practice continuation was usually offered-the DOD instruction even says that's the intent, but noncontinuation is an option under certain circumstances so that's how everyone should've been operating. Our end-strength has been getting cut for several years, that's why we're over.

    One of the many problems with the RIF was this was not the quality-based cut AFPC says it was. This was a glance for people who had anything negative in their records, regardless of AFSC, training value, replacement options, or any positives in their records. USAFWS grads were on this list. Senior F-22 pilots. Instructors. Almost half the non-retains were pilots, and most of them were from AMC (if there's one thing the US needs less of, it's AIRLIFT. HELLOOOOO). I know an ABM who got cut: 7 years in, instructor senior director, multiple air medals, probably close to 2k hours on the E-3, but he had a referral OPR a couple of years ago for a poorly-timed PT test failure. That same OPR had a #1 squadron strat, and his commander went to bat for him for the RIF. Apparently the squadron's best is in the bottom 5% of the AF. He laughs that he's getting the boot for a PT failure and when he leaves his final test score will be 92.
    Same as the reductions in the late 80s and early 90s.

    Having done that manpower thing on a smaller level (Enlisted Career Planner) and getting the "Inside " view of manpower managment I will say for the ABM that had all the accomplishments but a PT failure, there was one that had the same but passed his PT test. That guy stayed.

    When the cuts were coming post Desert Storm we had Junior Officers (up to Capt) with combat experience that were shown the door. Not because they failed a PFT but because they scored low 1st class or 2d class.

    While in the military, we really are serving with a bunch of Alpha Dogs. All super competitive. So its the little things and one time bumps in the road that end careers.
    Human Scum. Proud Never Trumper

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Sig P250, Part 2
    By GraniteForge in forum Small Arms and Personal Weapons
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 26 Nov 08,, 01:04
  2. What part do you disagree with?
    By Roosveltrepub in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 22 Apr 08,, 16:52
  3. Who wants to be a part?
    By joey2 in forum International Politics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 22 Nov 06,, 01:31
  4. I did my part
    By bren in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08 Nov 06,, 11:49

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •