"US carriers struggle to handle F-35C" Topic
6 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please use the Complaint button (!) to report problems on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Modern Aviation Discussion (1946-2011) Message Board Back to the Modern Naval Discussion (1946 to 2013) Message Board Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2014-present) Message Board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Workbench ArticleTwo of Hasslefree's Adventurers venture to Serbia...
Featured Profile ArticleThe Editor is invited to tour the factory of Simtac, a U.S. manufacturer of figures in nearly all periods, scales, and genres.
Featured Book Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
arealdeadone | 03 Dec 2020 3:54 p.m. PST |
Ok so this is astounding. link
Turns out US carriers can't handle new F-35C stealth fighter. This includes the brand new Gerald Ford which still hasn't even been commissioned. Apparently the carriers: lack the communications, data integration, and maintenance facilities to fully utilize the supposed capabilities of the F-35. The other new issue is the USN cannot air deliver F-35 engines to a carrier other than at very short distances (the longer range C-2 Greyhound is being retired and replaced by shorter ranged CMV-22 Ospreys).
With regards to F-35B STOVL version, only 4 LHAs out of 33 can handle them as they need to be modified with heat resistant materials and then only a two selected spots are covered with the material.
F-35B is meant to be the future of USMC aviation but the Commander is reviewing this and has stated that issues of sustainment might mean reducing F-35B numbers. He is already ordering a reduction in squadron size from 16 aircraft to 10. |
StoneMtnMinis | 03 Dec 2020 4:56 p.m. PST |
It appears that these issues can be addressed and brought up to snuff. |
arealdeadone | 03 Dec 2020 7:26 p.m. PST |
Assuming you cough up the coin to do so. |
Dn Jackson | 03 Dec 2020 10:53 p.m. PST |
You're quoting a blog spot that uses a website as its reference. While all new weapons systems have teething problems I'm going to trust that the professionals in the Navy know what they're doing. Reminds me of stories I read 30 years ago about what a disaster the: Tomahawk, Osprey, CIWS, B1, etc. was. |
Tgerritsen | 04 Dec 2020 3:02 a.m. PST |
The linked article is an opinion article written by someone with little operational knowledge of actual F35 deployment. The first F35C squadron is being deployed to the Carl Vinson. They are jus starting the process of learning how to field the C. Other squadrons will deploy later as they come online. link The B has been deployed for some time to various LHA ships. Here's an article from 2019 of a test deployment of the Lightning Carrier concept with 13 F35Bs deployed at once. link This is just an angry blog by someone with an agenda and little actual info. |
Thresher01 | 04 Dec 2020 6:47 p.m. PST |
ALL of the concerns identified in the article ARE valid ones, AND it wouldn't surprise me to learn that ALL ARE still issues today, even though some were identified years ago. "While all new weapons systems have teething problems I'm going to trust that the professionals in the Navy know what they're doing". I, being more cynical, pragmatic, and realistic I suppose am not, especially given the boondoggles that are the LCS (Little Crappy Ships) that are an enormous waste of money, ARE very underarmed, don't work, AND cost far too much, not to mention this issues with the Ford class of carriers. The latter is apparently still having issues with the catapults, and last I read they still don't work, and some thought was given to replacing them with standard steam catapults, though I think I read that is really a non-starter due to the complexity of doing that, which I'm not sure is even possible at all. The jet engines do cause damage to the standard carrier decks, even to the point of destroying them, IIRC, so they need to be upgraded. The gun issue is still a major flaw of the F-35s too, and this isn't even against moving aerial targets: link link "The testing office cites the lack of spare parts as the single biggest reason for the low readiness rates, with maintenance breakdowns and aircraft in the depots waiting for modifications as additional drivers. Sources told POGO the full mission capable rates remain close to the most recent publicly available figures. Those figures date back to an April 2019 Government Accountability Office report on F-35 sustainment, which included a chart that showed the entire U.S. fleet of F-35s, across all the services, averaging a 26.8% full mission capable rate". |
|