Aircraft Carriers III

Obi Wan Russell

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master
VIP Professional
TerraN_EmpirE said:
F35 is unlikely to be tasked with such a mission by the US, As that will more likely fall to US Bombers. off the list of Nuclear powers who have F35 I think that's nly the US and UK both tend to give the mission to other systems the US Silos, SSBN, B1, B2, B21, B52, F15E. The UK, SSBN.
Click to expand...
Indeed the UK retired all Nuclear weapons other than the SSBN launched warheads back in the 90s. Even if we wanted to task the F-35Bs with Nuclear strike we have nothing for them to drop.
 
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
TerraN_EmpirE said:
F35 is unlikely to be tasked with such a mission by the US, As that will more likely fall to US Bombers. off the list of Nuclear powers who have F35 I think that's nly the US and UK both tend to give the mission to other systems the US Silos, SSBN, B1, B2, B21, B52, F15E. The UK SSBN.
Click to expand...
But yes Budd Block 4 armed with B61-12 also for 4 Europeans countries for Rafale yes but we had also single seater with nuclears bombs Jaguar and Mirage IIIE existed 2 seaters but only for training.

For Ford soem interesting number : distance in average beetween magazines and fighters 140 m vs 337 for Nimitz, 11 elev for ammos vs about 5 and eventualy for a day up to 270 sorties ! vs 200 for Nimitz
P-A.PNG
 
Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
Jura said:
yeah, instead of dreaming I wait for the new DOT&E report on how F-35 is doing
Click to expand...
coming:
Why the Pentagon Isn’t Happy With the F-35
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


  • Costliest weapons system reviewed by Pentagon’s testing chief
  • ‘No significant improvement’ in aircraft available in years

Efforts to improve the reliability of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.’s F-35 are “stagnant,” undercut by problems such as aircraft sitting idle over the last year awaiting spare parts from the contractor, according to the Pentagon’s testing office.

The availability of the fighter jet for missions when needed -- a key metric -- remains “around 50 percent, a condition that has existed with no significant improvement since October 2014, despite the increasing number of aircraft,” Robert Behler, the Defense Department’s new director of operational testing, said in an annual report delivered Tuesday to senior Pentagon leaders and congressional committees.

The F-35 section, obtained by Bloomberg News, outlined the status of the costliest U.S. weapons system as it’s scheduled to end its 16-year-old development phase this year. Starting in September, the program is supposed to proceed to intense combat testing that’s likely to take a year, an exercise that’s at least 12 months late already. Combat testing is necessary before the plane is approved for full-rate production -- the most profitable phase for Lockheed.

Pentagon officials including Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan and chief weapons buyer Ellen Lord have highlighted the need to reduce the F-35’s $406.5 billion projected acquisition cost and its estimated $1.2 trillion price tag for long-term operations and support through 2070. Still, the Defense Department is moving to accelerate contracting and production for the fighter despite the persistence of technical and reliability issues disclosed in the current phase of development testing.

Flawed Software
A final version of the plane’s complex software has gone through 31 iterations and has yet to be deployed because of “key remaining deficiencies,” the report found. The troubles also include more mundane issues, such as tires on the Marine Corps version of the plane, the F-35B, that are proving less than durable.

The upcoming testing, “which provides the most credible means to predict combat performance, likely will not be completed until” December 2019, according to the testing office.

By the end of the testing needed to demonstrate that the F-35 is operationally effective and suitable for its missions more than 600 aircraft already will have been built. That’s about 25 percent of a planned 2,456 U.S. jets; 265 have been delivered to date.

Joe DellaVedova, spokesman for the Pentagon’s F-35 program office, and Lockheed spokeswoman Carolyn Nelson did not respond to requests for comment on the new testing office report.

In an earlier statement, Nelson said Lockheed’s 66 F-35 deliveries in 2017 represented “more than a 40 percent increase from 2016, and the F-35 enterprise is prepared to increase production volume year-over-year to hit full rate of approximately 160 aircraft in 2023.”

Host of Issues
Behler’s report lists a host of unresolved issues that will carry over into the F-35’s combat testing unless they’re resolved before its planned start in September:

  • About 1,000 unresolved deficiencies with the aircraft, the latest version of its software, and the primary flight-maintenance system known as ALIS that’s crucial to keep the aircraft flying “will likely have a cumulative effect” on the aircraft’s capacity during the combat testing.
  • The final version of the software known as 3F is likely to have “shortfalls in the capabilities the F-35 needs in combat against current threats.”
  • Aerial refueling will be restricted for the Marines’ F-35B and the Navy’s carrier-based F-35C model.
  • The pilot’s helmet display that depicts vital flight and and targeting information is flawed.
  • Classified “key technical deficiencies” affect the firing of AIM-120 air-to-air missiles, and “system-related deficiencies” mar the dropping of air-to-ground weapons to support ground troops
  • It will be late 2019 before developing, testing, verifying and deployment is complete for all the needed on-board electronic files, or “mission data loads,” that identify the types of Chinese, Russian, Syrian or Iranian radar and air defense systems an F-35 pilot may encounter.
  • The problem of planes waiting for replacement parts is exacerbated by an immature diagnostic system that detects “failures” that “actually have not failed.” The misdiagnosed parts are sent back to the original manufacturer then “returned to the supply chain,” adding to the backlog in “an already overloaded repair system.”
Click to expand...
 
Gloire_bb

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
TerraN_EmpirE said:
The main use of 2 seaters is transitional training moving from one fighter to another, Somewhere along the lines the powers that be decided to go single seater only.
Click to expand...
It's stuff of the past in many ways.
Practice has shown, what teo seaters to perform missions in more difficult conditions better, and wise-versa. Hornet squadrons are a good example.
TerraN_EmpirE said:
F35 is unlikely to be tasked with such a mission by the US, As that will more likely fall to US Bombers. off the list of Nuclear powers who have F35 I think that's nly the US and UK both tend to give the mission to other systems the US Silos, SSBN, B1, B2, B21, B52, F15E. The UK SSBN.
Click to expand...
Tacair is Tacair, global command is global command.
f-35 nuclear capability is a necessity...
 
Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
A new push to move an aircraft carrier to Florida
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

oops, haven't heard of this initiative before
Florida’s lawmakers are appealing to President Donald Trump in a renewed effort to get the Navy to home-port a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier at the Mayport Naval Station.

It’s a move that the Navy has long said it wants to make, but has said for the past eight years that it can’t afford.

So now,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, are appealing further up the chain of command. The pair co-authored the Jan. 25 letter in an effort to get Trump to put money in next year’s defense budget, due out in February, to start the upgrades needed for a carrier to make the move.

“We urge you to include funding in the Fiscal Year 2019 Presidential Budget to support a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier at Naval Station Mayport,” the letter said. “The security, availability and redundancy of our aircraft carrier fleet is critical to our national security in light of increased global security threats.”

Mayport has home-ported multiple aircraft carriers over the years, and as many as two at a time through the 1990s. But the northeastern Florida base has been without a carrier since the Navy decommissioned the conventional aircraft carrier John F. Kennedy in 2007.

The letter notes that the Navy’s official position since a 2009 is to eventually home-port a carrier in Mayport. And Navy leaders have reiterated that stance over the years, but saying they just can’t afford the cost, yet.

The base can currently host nuclear carriers for visits of up to a month, but does not have the facilities to allow Navy’s largest ships as permanent residents. The price tag to upgrade Mayport to support a nuclear-powered carrier was projected in 2009 as costing between $500 million to $1 billion.

Some improvements were started in 2011, but since then no funding has been allocated to the effort to make the base a nuclear homeport, which could take as many as three to five years to accomplish.

Years ago, a carrier move was was initially announced by the Navy to happen in 2015 but was then put off, first to 2019, and then the move was postponed indefinitely because of budget cuts. Instead, the Navy moved three amphibious ships to the base in in 2013 and 2014. It also has made the base the East Coast home for littoral combat ships.

The justification for moving a carrier to Florida is what is called “strategic dispersal.”

It is how the Navy avoids keeping all of its eggs in one basket. Attack Norfolk, or somehow disable the ships or their ability to leave the base, and you’ve taken out the entire East Coast carrier fleet. Natural disasters also pose a threat.

Such is the case on the West coast where the Navy bases carriers in both San Diego and Bremerton, Washington.

“Strategic dispersal of our capital ships is a long held Navy requirement and only prudent considering the cost and strategic value to our national defense,” the lawmakers wrote. “The urgency of dispersing our East Coast fleet should not be underestimated.”
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top