"Latest report - F-35 not suitable for carrier ops." Topic

Latest evaluation of F-35 program from Operational Test & Evaluation, Office of the Secretary of Defense

dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2016/pdf/dod/2016f35jsf.pdf

Fleet pilots don't consider the F-35C carrier version suitable for carrier operations (page 64):

-- Excessive vertical oscillations during catapult launches make the F-35C operationally unsuitable for carrier operations, according to fleet pilots who conducted training onboard USS George Washington during the latest set of ship trials. Although numerous deficiencies have been written against the F-35C catapult launch – starting with the initial set of F-35C ship trials (DT‑I) in November 2014 – the deficiencies were considered acceptable for continuing developmental testing. Fleet pilots reported that the oscillations were so severe that they could not read flight critical data, an unacceptable and unsafe situation during a critical phase of flight. Most of the pilots locked their harness during the catapult shot which made emergency switches hard to reach, again creating, in their opinion, an unacceptable and unsafe situation. The U.S. Navy has informed the Program Office that it considers this deficiency to be a "must fix" deficiency. The program should address the deficiency of excessive vertical oscillations during catapult launches within SDD to ensure catapult operations can be conducted safely during IOT&E and during operational carrier deployments…."

Some other notes:

- F-35B currently only 135 pounds under maximum allowable weight. Next configuration will add 350 pounds which will push it over weight threshold.

Some earlier build F-35s won't be able to be upgraded because they already are on weight threshold.

- Tailhook on conventional take off/landing version wears out quickly (sometimes are 1 trap) and requires potential redesign.

- Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) inferior to those on current jets.

- Limited night vision capability

- Still resolving issues with pilot weight

- Plane keeps melting its horizontal tail at higher speeds – this is old news but no resolution has been found

My own armchair general take on the issue is that the F-35A/B will provide USAF/USMC with what they want.

But the Navy has been lukewarm on the F-35C and has already massively slashed their planned buy and are delaying others. The C model has been downgraded in terms of performance considerably.

The Navy are also trying to get their "6th gen" F/A-XX program underway, with recent comments stating this would be an unmanned jet.

The Navy has also said joint programs are not the way to go.

Perhaps, if they hire 100 pound jockeys for pilots…….

Or teenagers

Shades of Ender's Game…

Senator McCain also recently stated the obvious, the USAF's plan to acquire 1,763 F-35As by 2040 is completely unrealistic:

politico.com/story/2017/01/john-mccain-defense-budget-233645

"This goal is unrealistic and requires reevaluation, and likely a reduction, of the ultimate size of the F-35 buy,"

aviationweek.com/blog/air-force-f-35-production-rate-doubt

defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/air-force/2016/02/12/f-35-production-drop-20-but-air-force-officials-downplay-price-impact/80239400

The USAF goal of 1,763 jets has been doubted for a long time as it required a production rate of 80 F-35A pa whereas funding only maximises production at 48 a year and planning only assumes 60 a year.

And take into account that combined US deliveries to 2021 will be 404 aircraft for all 3 services.

It also assumes it's sane to keep ordering manned F-35s in the 2030s. As stated USN is now saying F/A-XX is going to be unmanned. Europe has already been investigating high performance UCAVs for sometime.

If they cut numbers, the price is going to soar.

Better to cut losses, and use the tech and research for these, and the F-22 and F-23 to design a super 6th gen. fighter instead.

Buy a fleet of upgraded drones, with much more ordnance carrying capabilities to do the ground-pounding.

Maybe they can order some buggy whips while they are at it.

Well, at least the Monicas would almost certainly have had worse problems with carrier suitability …

Is that a bright side?

What a mess.

If they cut numbers, the price is going to soar.

So they maintain the illusion of buying 1,763 when current plans do not provide for that number.

And everyone knows that unless there's some serious changes to procurement planning, that number is pure fiction.

In other news Poland's considering buying a further 96 old F-16A/Bs (they already operate 48 F-16C/D)s and modernising them to C/D standard.

They had stated an interest in F-35 but it appears they've realised they can't afford to buy them in any numbers.