First Navy JSF to be finished this summer

R

rock45

Active member
First Navy JSF to be finished this summer



By Andrew Tilghman - Staff writer
Posted : Thursday May 7, 2009 12:14:43 EDT
The first F-35C, the Navy carrier variant of the Joint Strike Fighter, is expected to roll off the production line this summer, a Navy official said.
The first aircraft will conduct a test flight in December near its Lockheed Martin production facility in Fort Worth, Texas, said Capt. Wade Knudson, the Navy’s F-35 program manager.
Knudson laid out the timeline for the aircraft Tuesday morning at the Navy League’s annual Sea-Air-Space Exposition outside Washington.
The urgent need for the aircraft was underscored in April when Defense Secretary Robert Gates signaled that the Navy would scale back its purchase of F/A-18 Super Hornets and focus attention on the development of the F-35 Lightning II.
The timeline for development of the F-35C — with an initial operational capacity targeted for 2015 — has not changed since Gates’ remarks, Knudson said.
The first carrier-based stealth aircraft, the F-35 will eventually replace the F/A-18 Hornet.
Navy officials have been warning of a so-called strike “fighter gap,” when the legacy Hornets will wear out faster then the F-35s can be produced to replace them.
Estimates of the fighter gap range as high as 200 aircraft — or about 20 percent of the fighter fleet — starting in 2016 and extending for several years.
The F-35 will potentially reduce the size of flight deck crews by digitizing some maintenance tasks.
The system is designed to monitor the planes software and hardware for potential problems and wirelessly transmit that information to the flight deck before the plane lands, giving the crew additional time to prepare for any needed repairs, Knudson said.
Each aircraft is designed to conduct three sorties a day, Knudson said.
The Navy’s version of the F-35 will be the third and final model to become operational, after the Air Force and Marine Corps versions.
Link

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2009/05/navy_jsf_050509w/


 
I think Defense Secretary Gates is telling Lockheed Martin to hurry the hell up and perhaps stop dicking around with gadgets for a plane not even in service yet.
 
You maybe right US fighter fleet is getting up their age and things only cost more over time so getting this project going faster is the correct route to go.

The US needs tankers almost as much as crazy as that sounds.
 
rock45 said:
You maybe right US fighter fleet is getting up their age and things only cost more over time so getting this project going faster is the correct route to go.

The US needs tankers almost as much as crazy as that sounds.
Click to expand...

Ours isn't that bad - Super Hornets are less than ten years old, and we're building more. I had the pleasure of being the first to sit in a shiny new Rhino this past summer.

The Air Force needs new equipment more than we do, and the Marines desperately need to replace the Harriers before they start falling out of the sky. And if the AF would stop dicking around with the tanker program, they'd have had them years ago.
 
I'm have become a F/A-18 fan in general and really like the Super Hornet. I think the USN is wise buying more until the F-35s come online. Know any good Super Hornet web sites?

Thanks

PS: How did you get a chance to sit in one?
icon14.gif
 
Awesome!

Although I am very sad at the demise of the F-22 production line, it makes me proud, once again, to see one more set of beautiful birds climb into the skies.

I would sincerely like to see the A-10 production line open again, and see a new, more updated model of this ground pounding MONSTER take to the skies for the next generation of CAS.

I understand that the UAV is going to be the wave of the future, sure, but we still have a need for human pilots in the foreseeable horizon. I would like to see a "hybridization" of the piloted/pilotless airframes to bridge the gap. One concept I heard that makes a lot of sense is a "Shepherd/Killer Sheep" concept with one "mother" aircraft surrounded by six UAVs, providing a single crew with the firepower of seven aircraft. Even a stealthy control ship tasking several "arsenal" aircraft would be a real force multiplier. This aircraft could stay back outside enemy airspace and send in the "Killer Sheep" for air-to-air combat or SEAD, and further reduce the potential danger faced by our pilots.

Would this concept seem workable to you air warriors who REALLY know "something" from Shineola when it comes to air ops?
 
The A-10s are currently undergoing some pretty major upgrades to the A-10C standard, and are supposed to remain in service until around 2030. Even at that time, given the current nature of our military engagements, I'd expect to see a good deal of thought given towards either keeping them, or finding a replacement that isn't the F-35.

The "mothership" concept that you speak of has a major flaw that I think I should mention:

Airframe. You're either going to have a one- or two-seat fighter controlling these UAVs, which is going to be hard on the aircrew and take away from their role in flying the aircraft, or you're going to put the controllers in a P-8A or E-6 type craft, which is a bear to defend should it come under attack (and, given the currently lacking capabilities of CUAVs, it's likely that an enemy could "skip" the UAVs and fly straight to the mothership).
 
Well, if the "mothership" were the size as well as the stealth level of a B-2, for instance, a large enough crew to have the "mothership" flight crew concentrating on her, then several crew controlling the UAVs, that might be a good arrangement.

Now, how feasible would it be, with the proper communications links, to have one manned fighter on-station and the "killer sheep" controlled from joystickers back at Nellis, with the fighter pilot (Shepherd) having operational command of the flock?
 
I agree, 13th, problem is trying to get the USAF/USN to agree to all-UAV air fleets, that's why I suggested the interim hybrid solution. I do think that all-robotic will be the way we will go eventually, but still a lot of resistance to taking that final step.
 
bropous said:
Well, if the "mothership" were the size as well as the stealth level of a B-2...
Click to expand...

B-2s are a roughly $3 billion dollar aircraft, mostly due to their stealth capabilities. I personally would rather buy fifteen Raptors for the same price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top