Incorrect. The AV-8A achieved IOC with the Marine Corps in 1971 with VMA-513; VMA-231, assigned to CVW-19, embarked aboard CV-42 from June 1976 to April 1977 for a Med cruise. The AV-8B achieved IOC in 1985 with VMA-331.
Posted on 11/28/2010 8:53:12 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
Ping
The F35B STOVL variant, IMO, gives the F35 one more “trick” that the other 4th gen planes lack which is good; unfortunately, it sacrifices a lot of fuel and overall integrity to be able to perform the trick so I think the F35 is probably the better plane for most applications. I think the Marines would benefit from having some of both planes actually. It’s just hard to deny the usefulness of STOVL. The F35 has a lot of competition now among other advanced European nations who have produced very capable planes and who are very reluctant to “buy American”. The day is going to come when the F35 will have to prove itself alongside Gripens, Typhoons, and Dassault Rafales as well as Sukhois and MIGs and it had better do so or we’re gonna lose more than reputation. It’s not going to outmaneuver these planes so, hopefully, it will have the BVR and stealth advantage and will prove itself worthy. I’m losing faith however.
It's quite easy, actually.
It adds complexity, cost, weight, reduces stealth all while gaining the dubious asset of vertical landing.
A STOL version would make some sense, but not much beyond ability to base on small carriers, such as favored in Europe.
This program was a pig-in-a-poke from the beginning, and has become an embarrasement to the entire US procurement program.
It should be allowed to die.
This program was a pig-in-a-poke from the beginning, and has become an embarrasement to the entire US procurement program. It should be allowed to die.
scrap the whole F35 program? I sometimes feel that way myself but I come to my senses. it's too late for that. We have too much riding on it at this point. I think much of the bad press being generated about this plane results from the aforementioned Europeans who would dearly love to see the F35 fail miserably. Aside from the fact that they hate Americans, they can not stand the thought of anything made in America being superior or even equal to their own engineering. They are very prideful that way. As I said, the F35 is going to have to prove itself and it has to do it alongside a lot of excellent 4th/4.5 generation fighters. It's too late to back out of this race. We have to see it through to whatever end. I sincerely hope this jet kicks ass. It is important to remember that this aircraft WILL fulfill multiple roles across multiple US armed services and that it does have a hell of a lot going for it. It isn't the sexiest plane I've ever seen but it looks like it's going to have it where it counts. I think we may all be pleasantly surprised in the end.
Marine STOVL was tail that wagged the F35 program. It will stay in the program and rightfully so.
The F35 works pretty well as it sits. Perhaps a lower cost, upgradeable MK1 version would be worth considering as opposed to buying more older generation aircraft or upgrading existing aging airframes.
A lower cost F35 could also appeal to partners who are having budgetary problems and with a little more time some systems could be designed to upgrade and retrofit the F22
One thing is for sure, the last 20 years have put a lot of wear and tear on our existing aircraft and they are wearing out.
At the same time, other competing aircraft have closed the performance and technology gap to a point where we can no longer rely on a decisive qualitative advantage with our existing fleet.
The F15, F16 and F18 are great aircraft to this day but the basic airframes are 40 year old designs and they have been the performance benchmark that the other guys have been working to beat and they have had a full generation to reverse engineer the technology in these planes
F-35B, C, or G... no matter. All of ‘em are too costly and fragile, primarily because of the pilot. The mega-tech, giga-priced, fifth-gen, human-piloted, air-superiority fighter is little more than a magnificent anachronism, a Noble Steed for today’s Chivalrous, Frivolous Knight of the Air. Ready, willing, and able to re-win World War II all over again, should we ever find ourselves re-fighting WWII all over again, but, at up to $200,000,000 a copy, too expensive, valuable, vulnerable, and rare to actually forward-deploy to the same continent that my National Guard daughter often inhabits.
Only to a neophyte.
Incorrect. The AV-8A achieved IOC with the Marine Corps in 1971 with VMA-513; VMA-231, assigned to CVW-19, embarked aboard CV-42 from June 1976 to April 1977 for a Med cruise. The AV-8B achieved IOC in 1985 with VMA-331.
You’re a broken record that’s long on emotion and short on facts.
ping
Click on pic for past Navair pings.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
The STOVL mission is in question because of the excessive heat the F-35B generates during VL, requiring it to land on thermally protected landing pads. Furhter, the F-35B IPP (APU) exhaust is also hotter than legacy aircraft, and will damage tarmac, causing the F-35 (all variants) to stop only on concrete when practical.
The ability of the F-35B to operate from austere basing at all is in question due to these heating issues, leaving only amphibious assault operations as justification for the -B in lieu of the -A or -C. And those operations are in question due to excessive deck heating that could cause premature deck bulkhead failure.
I support the STOVL F-35, but with the RN pulling out of the F-35B program there might not be an F-35B if any other major development problems crop up.
The Army doesn’t have a vertical takeoff fixed wing airplane, why can’t the Marines use helicopters, too?
If they make any further improvements, will it be the AH-1ZA?
short on facts? Fact is, Mr. C, a broken record’s still right twice a day. Just as we apparently (obviously) can’t afford manned space flight these days, so we are also technologic-ing ourselves out of combat aircraft. Look at it like wheeled vehicles, maybe. Which would you rather have for you and your contracting crew, one all-wheel-drive Bugatti Veyron for $2,000,000 or a Jeep, a Porsche, an SUV/cross-over, and a coupla 5/4 ton extended cab pickups, and money left over? Choice is yours.
Accepting your conclusion arguendo, does it follow, then, that the Harrier should be extended in service and follow-on models run out to succeed the GR9's and USMC AV-8B's?
Being able to park a close-support fast mover on an LHA, the fantail of a cruiser, or an LZ of cramped dimensions has its attractions. If the F-35B isn't going to do that mission, then should the Harrier soldier on?
Updating existing Harriers is feasible, and is the only option I see as viable for those who insist on such a capability.
The constant pursuit of advanced weaponry to please every military type has resulted in programs that get so bloated that they are ALWAYS over-budget, overweight, late, seldom capable of envisioned capabilities, seldom what the frontline warriors need most.
One can envision myriad Star Wars type weapons that would allow a single warrior to take on entire armies by himself with no risk to himself or any bystanders. Budget be damned, let's build 'em.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.