What will the Government buy if the F35 is cancelled?

[LotusOmega375D]

aeropilot said:

Marham is an RAF base so all the electrics are UK 240v......... all the US bases in the UK are wired for US style 110v with US sockets and everything.
OK for a couple of weeks temp detachment on exercise, but not for a full time basing, or long term deployment.

[eccles]

aeropilot said:

There isn't the room at LN for two more.....one more at a pinch.

Seems the Americans disagree with you.....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-6200...

[Tony1963]

There’s always a way of housing more aircraft, Rubb hangars being an example. Lakenheath is big enough.

[ecsrobin]

Yep don’t need a HAS to store them.

[aeropilot]

ecsrobin said:

Yep don’t need a HAS to store them.

The USA F-35A bases have all had these things erected on the bases, needed because of the stealth paint or something IIRC, and they've built similar on the south-eastern pan at LN for the F-35A.

[IanH755]

ecsrobin said:

Yep don’t need a HAS to store them.

As 617Sqn have found out its actually a negative for a variety of "this should have been obvious" 5th Gen reasons.

[ecsrobin]

aeropilot said:

ecsrobin said:

Yep don’t need a HAS to store them.

The USA F-35A bases have all had these things erected on the bases, needed because of the stealth paint or something IIRC, and they've built similar on the south-eastern pan at LN for the F-35A.

RAF Coningsby has 11 of them.

[LotusOmega375D]

Do the UK’s F-35Bs at RAF Marham use the runway to take-off and land in an orthodox fashion (i.e. without using the lift fan), or is it always STOVL, or a mixture of both? Just curious.

[ecsrobin]

LotusOmega375D said:

Do the UK’s F-35Bs at RAF Marham use the runway to take-off and land in an orthodox fashion (i.e. without using the lift fan), or is it always STOVL, or a mixture of both? Just curious.

I’d go with a mixture of both if it’s anything like the harriers when in service.

[LotusOmega375D]

OK, so can they potentially carry a heavier payload if they use orthodox runway take-offs and landings?

[ecsrobin]

LotusOmega375D said:

OK, so can they potentially carry a heavier payload if they use orthodox runway take-offs and landings?

I guess so, although the B can’t carry as much as the A and C variant due to design.

I suspect taking off from the carrier isn’t the issue with load it will be the landing if you haven’t used them.

[Evanivitch]

ecsrobin said:

LotusOmega375D said:

OK, so can they potentially carry a heavier payload if they use orthodox runway take-offs and landings?

I guess so, although the B can’t carry as much as the A and C variant due to design.

I suspect taking off from the carrier isn’t the issue with load it will be the landing if you haven’t used them.

PoW mishap meant rolling vertical landings got delayed. Yanks are happy just to dump $m of munitions before landing.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/f-35b-rolling-land...

[aeropilot]

This doesn't make good reading.......so basically the engine is not fit for purpose

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/f-35-engine-...

[Teddy Lop]

aeropilot said:

This doesn't make good reading.......so basically the engine is not fit for purpose

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/f-35-engine-...

Time to get rolls to dust off the F136 plans?

[IanH755]

Just for clarity, Block 4 also comes with a few modifications to the PTMS* which expands the cooling capacity of the system allowing Block 4 to operate correctly but it's still going to be running the engine hotter than initially scoped for to do so. The ECU programme will have an effect on this in the short term but, with every later Block change potentially adding more thermal stress (especially the new AN/APG-85 with its GaN tech), it's not the long term answer.

At some point though, AETP (or an equivalent) will need to be brought in, costing quite a lot of time/money, as ECU is more of a band-aid rather than a permanent fix.

*PTMS - This is the F-35 project name for the combination of a traditional APU and ECS system. However they've added an "Air Cycle Machine" functionality to the APU so that, once the engine is started, the APU isn't switched off as with traditional jets and instead after APU fuel is cut it is kept spinning by passing engine bleed air over the APU turbine, allowing the APU compressor to provide the air used to cool down the engine bleed air (via air/air heat exchangers) which is used by the ECS for equipment cooling, pressurisation, OBOGS, OBIGGS etc.

Edited by IanH755 on Saturday 1st April 00:41

[Evanivitch]

aeropilot said:

This doesn't make good reading.......so basically the engine is not fit for purpose

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/f-35-engine-...

Reads like the engine is doing what it should do, but there's been growth in other systems and the engine hasn't been upgraded accordingly, but they know that and have simply increased planned maintenance. Sounds... Normal.

[tuffer]

eccles said:

aeropilot said:

There isn't the room at LN for two more.....one more at a pinch.

Seems the Americans disagree with you.....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-6200...

But isnt that just a replacement of the F15's currently there rather than additional airframes? It says its the Reapers upgrading to F35's.

[Ash_]

tuffer said:

eccles said:

aeropilot said:

There isn't the room at LN for two more.....one more at a pinch.

Seems the Americans disagree with you.....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-6200...

But isnt that just a replacement of the F15's currently there rather than additional airframes? It says its the Reapers upgrading to F35's.

tuffer you're correct, the F-35's at LN will replace the F-15's.

[Teddy Lop]

MTOW for the F-35B is listed as 27t, 4.5t shy of the A + C variants.

I'm guessing this must be for a vertical lift, and presumably the jet could carry the same as the others with a conventional take off? Does using the ski jump increase the MTOW over VTO?

(I'm idly speculating if one could power a small transport using the F-135, MOTW of say a C-27 is around 32t)

[LotusOmega375D]

The whole point of the ski jump was to allow the Sea Harrier to carry more weight. Here’s a little video

https://youtu.be/V1t4dIn-YQs

I still haven’t had a definitive answer on whether the UK’s F35Bs take off and land in an orthodox fashion at airfields to allow higher TOW if deployed to land bases around the world. Has anyone been to Marham to watch?