VSTOL JSF vs. Conventional JSF

[brd2881]

I wanted to get some valid discussion going on this. The Marines seem hard and fast on having an all-VSTOL fixed wing force with the onset of the JSF while the Navy is going to have the C-model or conventional boat version. I wonder if its really worth while with all the weight added or fuel consumed or whatever, to have the Marines completely buy into the all-VSTOL fixed wing or are they handicapping themselves without buying into a C-model to fly off carriers to replace the current FA-18Cs? The F-35C will have obvious weight additions to make it carrier capable as well. I don't know if the Navy is making any more amphibs to accomodate the upcoming Marine F-35Bs, so if they end operating from expeditionary airfields like the Air Force, what good does the VSTOL capability give us? It seems it would decrease range and payload capability among other things. Things seem to keep sliding with the JSF program but within the next 10 years, this aircraft should be at the front of our fighting force. Thoughts and elaborations?

 

[winger]

A thru C models are designed to have 90% parts and 100% tool commonality, essentially making their logistics footprints identical. Also, HQMC leadership is looking towards their vision of future conflicts, which is heavy on LHD-centered task forces vice full-blown ESG's, or CVBG's, or whatever they are called these days.

Marine commanders like the flexibility VSTOL gives them, with respect to CVN/LHD/LPD/FARP compatability.

Basically, the thing uses all the same parts as the A and C, carries the same (internal) loadout as the C, and can land on any flat-top or FARP. I got the chance to speak with Col Tomassetti, the Marine lead TP, a few years back at Pax River, and he was raving about its handling qualities. As a side note, the previous Commodore at NAS Whiting said "the F-35B is the best and most capable aircraft to emerge in all of naval aviation in a very long time." I'm not sure how he would know that, but there you go.

I'm looking forward to it.

 

[mmx1]

What's the plan for our Harriers on LHA's if the VSTOL model goes under as some are predicting? Drag the Harriers out as long as possible? Obtain some sort of Super Harrier like the Brits had considered for their new carrier?

The brits are ready to move to CTOL (Super Hornets or navalized Typhoon) if the B model goes under. I don't honestly see what we have lined up to replace the Harrier.

 

[gtxc2001]

I don't think the F-35B will go under. The senior Marine leadership is quite set on it. My girlfriend's dad recently retired as the Program Executive Officer for Aircraft Carriers, and the Marines were, according to him, on the offensive when it comes to the JSF. Their argument is that you could make a stripped down version of CVN-21 (CVN-21 light was what they dubbed it, but I think it would officially be an LHAR or something like that), save the cost of constructing the big carriers, and force the navy to take the F-35B. I doubt the Navy is going to eat that nuggett, but it indicates to me that the Marine Corps is willing to fight tooth and nail to keep it, just like the MV-22 a while back.

As far as capabilities go, the biggest issue is range. Now that the MArine Corps wants to skip the beach and be able to push 400 or more miles inland from the get go, information I've found indicates it could become difficult for the B to find the legs without refueling or carrying external fuel. I guess the flexibility of operating off unimproved areas outweighs this concern. As far as reduced weight of ordnance, I'm not sure that that is so much of a concern. With all of the precision guided munitions we are using, most missions, including CAS, are being completed with a single piece of ordnance. It was one of my gripes with the advent of internal weapons bays, but it appears that the days of A-1 Skyraiders or F-15E's with countless bombs slung under the wings are no more.

 

[theblakeness]

I was under the impression that the Marines would be picking up both B and C models.

thoughts?

 

[WEGL]

Why do the marines even need a VSTOL capable aircraft? I understand its theoretical application, but has the VSTOL ability of the harrier ever been useful/utilized in a real combat arena?

 

[mmx1]

Why do the marines even need a VSTOL capable aircraft? I understand its theoretical application, but has the VSTOL ability of the harrier ever been useful/utilized in a real combat arena?

Can't take off or land from a LHA/LHD without at least STOL, and I don't see them adding cables and catapults like the Brits might for their new carriers.

 

[Lawman]

Why do the marines even need a VSTOL capable aircraft? I understand its theoretical application, but has the VSTOL ability of the harrier ever been useful/utilized in a real combat arena?

Yes on several occasions. One that comes to mind was during the 91 Gulf War when Harriers used a Soccer Statium as a FARP.

Ask Squeeze, hes the resident Harrier guy. Also a couple other Jump Jet drivers floating around, Im sure they will have something to chip in.

 

[FA-18 Mousse]

Harriers also used VSTOL capability during OIF '03 by launching from USS Boat in P-Gulf, expending full loadout, VSTOL landing into Southern Iraq, refuel/reload, on call alert to more CAS, RTB to USS Boat. No question the capability to stay close to the action is reason "#1" that the Marines are requiring a VSTOL bird.

 

[WEGL]

I understand the CAS role that it fills, but if you're working that close to the action what's wrong with using the Cobra? And, if you're in a constant need for CAS just keep Hornets in the area... I'm not knockin' the Harrier; I think it's an awesome aircraft, but on a cost/benefit analysis, I don't see it being worth it.... but I'm speaking from absolutely no real experience of course, and I'm likely missing something important... 'cause Congress and the DOD would never waste the taxpayers' money right?

And about the LHA/D's... I don't think a helo would have much trouble using them. Seriously though, they could be used as helo platforms and for the Osprey.

But it's all moot. The marines aren't going to give up their VSTOL aircraft.

 

[squeeze]

A bunch of sh-t that ignores previous posts and recent history

Perhaps RW CAS can't do everything FW CAS can.... no, that can't possibly be it. Also, I'm interested in hearing more about this aerial rearming procedure you seem to imply that Hornets are capable of.

 

[hendogg311]

Uh Cobras can only carry rockets, hellfires, TOWs, and 20mm cannon. I don't think they can do the damage a fully loaded hornet or harrier can. i.e. Mk-82,83,84, LGBs, CBUs, JDAM, JSOW. Also a harrier can go back FARP and be back on station while the hornet is flying back to the ship or airbase.

 

[Saladmander]

Do most FARPs have short runways? an F-35B cannot take off vertically fully loaded. Its 30,000lbs empty, full gas is 13,000lbs, so 43,000lbs with no weapons, and the max vertical thrust is only 39,500.

And isnt a hornet's maximum range on internal fuel only 700nm? the 35B is 900nm, better than the hornet and way better than the 500nm AV-8B

 

[squeeze]

Do most FARPs have short runways? an F-35B cannot take off vertically fully loaded. Its 30,000lbs empty, full gas is 13,000lbs, so 43,000lbs with no weapons, and the max vertical thrust is only 39,500.

Neither can the Harrier.

And isnt a hornet's maximum range on internal fuel only 700nm? the 35B is 900nm, better than the hornet and way better than the 500nm AV-8B

Both have IFR probes and plumbed pylons. Your point? You're that guy who argues with the pilots at airshows about their own aircraft, aren't you? Put down the copy of Janes.

 

[jarhead]

from the stuff i've seen, the JSF B will be the least capable of the three versions. it doesn't have an internal gun, but a strap-on gun, which will take away it's low RCS, but that won't matter because whatever low RCS it has will be nullified by the external fuel tanks it's going to need in order to give it any range. it carry's less internal gas than the C, and a lot less gas than the A. what else does external tanks & an external gun do to you? makes you draggy & slows you down, so while everybody else in your strike package is slick & supercruising, you in your JSF B will be bringing up tail-end charlie with your tanking asset, the Super Hornet, if it isn't outrunning you. it's currently overweight ... how do you make an aircraft weigh less? take away some of it's capabilities; i'll be interested in what they take away from the JSF B compared to the other JSFs to make it lighter. hmm, what else ... currently, it's 7G limited, compared to 7.5 (C) & 9 (A). so it's basically going to be a bomb truck, but only on the 3rd or 4th + day of the war because, as previousily mentioned, it won't be able to keep up with the other varients, speed or range, but it also won't be anywhere near the fight. why? wishful thinking for HQ/MC to think the Navy will give up the carrier for an all-amphib force with B's only. won't happen, the carrier is the Navy. the carrier is the "tip of the spear" and if the Marines want to be there, it needs to send a full squadron (12 jets) out to the carrier and be assigned to an AirWing, not the 4 to 6 VSTOL/CTOL jets that gets sent on an amphib and are assigned to a MEU CO.

VSTOL/CSTOL is a different capability, though rarely used in it's 30 some odd year existance, but it's what the Corps is banking on to justify its need for fixed wing aircraft for the next 20-30 years in these times of tight budgets.

all that being said, i suppose given the chance, i'd fly it ... it's new and at least at the start of the flight schedule we'd be looking at 12 up jets vice the 4-6 up jets we are getting now.

my 2¢

I wanted to get some valid discussion going on this. The Marines seem hard and fast on having an all-VSTOL fixed wing force with the onset of the JSF while the Navy is going to have the C-model or conventional boat version. I wonder if its really worth while with all the weight added or fuel consumed or whatever, to have the Marines completely buy into the all-VSTOL fixed wing or are they handicapping themselves without buying into a C-model to fly off carriers to replace the current FA-18Cs? The F-35C will have obvious weight additions to make it carrier capable as well. I don't know if the Navy is making any more amphibs to accomodate the upcoming Marine F-35Bs, so if they end operating from expeditionary airfields like the Air Force, what good does the VSTOL capability give us? It seems it would decrease range and payload capability among other things. Things seem to keep sliding with the JSF program but within the next 10 years, this aircraft should be at the front of our fighting force. Thoughts and elaborations?