RAF to get F-35A.

[Tikka]

Hi.
In the next procurement batch of 12 aircraft, the UK is to buy F-35A instead of F-35B. A shame the word "instead" was used, i am not sure if this leaves the UK short of aircraft for the two carriers. A fifth generation aircraft capable of delivering a nuclear weapon was part of the decision it seems.

Media reports that the F35-A has performed well with Israeli forces and also as part of the US strike package on Iran.

https://www.joint-forces.com/uk-new... NATO’s dual capable aircraft nuclear mission.

 

[I<3oil]

Yeah they are

 

[burbguy82]

Media reports that the F35-A has performed well with Israeli forces and also as part of the US strike package on Iran.

And this means what?

 

[Danno]

And this means what?

Battle proven, building the resume.

 

[97prizm]

Supposedly Morocco has been rumored to be interested in purchasing the F-35 not sure which variant as Algeria has supposedly ordered the new SU-57. No word on if and when or how many. I'm curious if other countries adopt the F-35 will they be able to integrate their own weapons platforms?

 

[IndyFan]

I remember when the media blasted the F-15 Eagle in the 1970´s claiming it was too big, was at a huge disadvantage in a dog fight, etc.... They claimed a large number of F-5´s would defeat a small number of F-15´s. We see how that turned out. Fast forward to the F-35 and the same song and dance played out until the thing got into combat and kicked ass.

Every pilot I´ve seen who transitioned from another jet (F-15, F-16, F-18) has said that without a doubt, if they went to war today, they´d choose the F-35. I have not seen anything from an F-15EX pilot, though. I don´t know if any of them came from the F-35, or not.

If Europe follows through with jumping to 5% GDP for defense, you´ll see lots more F-35 orders.

The Rafale appears to have crapped out against Pakistan. Not sure it is a fair judgement, but it is taking a massive hit in the marketplace. US weapons are where it´s at, thanks to Iran. BUT....I think the Eurofighter is picking up some orders.

 

[Pew]

Every pilot I´ve seen who transitioned from another jet (F-15, F-16, F-18) has said that without a doubt, if they went to war today, they´d choose the F-35. I have not seen anything from an F-15EX pilot, though. I don´t know if any of them came from the F-35, or not.

Those are the type of people who suggest corollas for warzone transportation.

 

[GON]

Those are the type of people who suggest corollas for warzone transportation.

I am that guy who suggested Corollas for warzone transportation. And I still do and fully stand by that recommendation.

WIth drones and the like, the Corolla has become the greatest defense against drones.

 

[Astro14]

Hi.
In the next procurement batch of 12 aircraft, the UK is to buy F-35A instead of F-35B. A shame the word "instead" was used, i am not sure if this leaves the UK short of aircraft for the two carriers. A fifth generation aircraft capable of delivering a nuclear weapon was part of the decision it seems.

Media reports that the F35-A has performed well with Israeli forces and also as part of the US strike package on Iran.

https://www.joint-forces.com/uk-news/83424-uk-to-purchase-f-35a-and-join-nato-nuclear-mission#:~:text=The UK will purchase 12 new F-35A fighter,and join NATO’s dual capable aircraft nuclear mission.

RN made the decision to go F-35B about 20 years ago. The 2004 Defence White Paper outlined the way ahead for the carriers as VSTOL.

The concern was this: if the EMALS system had problems, then the Prince of Wales and Queen Elizabeth would be white elephants. F-35C offered more range, payload and simpler maintenance, but the all electric architecture of the ships required EMALS to work, and it was still in development at the time.

So, the decision by the RN was for VSTOL, and F-35B. No EMALS needed. Further, if the Airplane slipped in delivery date (and it did, just a bit) then RAF Harrier GR-9s would fill the “gap” (mind the gap…) between the retirement of the RN Harriers and the delivery of the F-35B.

Ultimately, the GR-9s were retired early, too, and there was a gap, but the RN is very happy with the current performance of F-35B.

Unless the RAF has a stealth multi-role fighter, they fall behind other NATO nations and the RN.

That simply won’t do. So, this isn’t “instead of” anything, it is the RAF keeping up.

 

[IndyFan]

I am not sure I wouldn't prefer the F-35C with its longer range and apparently higher payload. I'm sure there might be a slight performance disadvantage, though, in terms of speed?

The C also has probe/drogue refuelling as a standard feature. Does the A offer the option of probe/drogue?

I also think the C does not have the gun. I know this will get flamed, but I think for this fighter, the gun is a lot of weight for not much return. I'd never strafe with an F-35. Leave that to gen 4 airplanes.

Ideally, an A without the gun would have the best performance/payload combo, I would imagine.

I'm wondering about the actual utility of the gun. It has very few rounds and again, lots of weight and it adds complexity. It'd be nice to replace it with more fuel capacity that can be traded off for payload.

 

[Snagglefoot]

Those are the type of people who suggest corollas for warzone transportation.

Never drive in the Land Cruiser in the front. Ride in one of the Hilux pickups in the middle.

 

[Pew]

I am that guy who suggested Corollas for warzone transportation. And I still do and fully stand by that recommendation.

WIth drones and the like, the Corolla has become the greatest defense against drones.

A few other folks suggested the same. I don't know why people think you're going to sneak around a warzone in a corolla like Jason Bourne. You're in an active warzone, everything is a target. Having a corolla just means you have zero cargo space and limited yourself to roads that are already cratered. There's a reason we used 4x4 or 6x6 trucks with lockable diffs all around and added armor that weigh as much as a corolla. Maybe the drone operator would be laughing too hard at somebody bringing a corolla?

Never drive in the Land Cruiser in the front. Ride in one of the Hilux pickups in the middle.

That's very true, the front and last vehicle are usually the ones to get hit first.

 

[Astro14]

I am not sure I wouldn't prefer the F-35C with its longer range and apparently higher payload. I'm sure there might be a slight performance disadvantage, though, in terms of speed?

The C also has probe/drogue refuelling as a standard feature. Does the A offer the option of probe/drogue?

I also think the C does not have the gun. I know this will get flamed, but I think for this fighter, the gun is a lot of weight for not much return. I'd never strafe with an F-35. Leave that to gen 4 airplanes.

Ideally, an A without the gun would have the best performance/payload combo, I would imagine.

I'm wondering about the actual utility of the gun. It has very few rounds and again, lots of weight and it adds complexity. It'd be nice to replace it with more fuel capacity that can be traded off for payload.

For the RAF? I would go F-35C as well - greater fuel capacity, longer range.

But the F-35C is limited to 7.5G. The F-35A is a 9G airplane. Air Forces “need” 9G so that the pilots can brag about it in the club…

J/K - but since the USAF went F-35A, it makes sense that NATO and the RAF followed suit.

Fitting a probe to an A should be easy. Most of the airplane is common.

 

[GON]

A few other folks suggested the same. I don't know why people think you're going to sneak around a warzone in a corolla like Jason Bourne. You're in an active warzone, everything is a target. Having a corolla just means you have zero cargo space and limited yourself to roads that are already cratered. There's a reason we used 4x4 or 6x6 trucks with lockable diffs all around and added armor that weigh as much as a corolla. Maybe the drone operator would be laughing too hard at somebody bringing a corolla?



That's very true, the front and last vehicle are usually the ones to get hit first.

You might not know what you talk of..... just saying..... IEDs are out of fashion on a macro basis. Much cheaper, significantly higher success rate, and much more accessible methods available.

What you experienced or were taught twenty years ago is obsolete today. Want to get yourself up to date/ up to speed, become a scholar of this conflict, where decades of defensive preparations became obsolete by very inexpensive technology.

2023 Azerbaijani Offensive:
Following a blockade, Azerbaijan launched a military offensive that led to the collapse of the Republic of Artsakh and the exodus of most of its Armenian population.

​

 

[Pew]

You might not know what you talk of..... just saying..... IEDs are out of fashion on a macro basis. Much cheaper, significantly higher success rate, and much more accessible methods available.

I was infantry in a weapons company in the Marine Corps. You're a civilian. We studied, a lot, about the use of civilian vehicles as transportation or VBIEDs. Four military aged males in a corolla, with it's suspension bottoming out because of the weight, is a prime target.

 

[IndyFan]

For the RAF? I would go F-35C as well - greater fuel capacity, longer range.

But the F-35C is limited to 7.5G. The F-35A is a 9G airplane. Air Forces “need” 9G so that the pilots can brag about it in the club…

J/K - but since the USAF went F-35A, it makes sense that NATO and the RAF followed suit.

Fitting a probe to an A should be easy. Most of the airplane is common.

Dare I say it....at the risk of flames....The F-35, and really the F-22, F-15EX, etc has now fulfilled the concept around which the F-4 was envisioned...no guns necessary for air to air because the missiles are now reliable. There is an asterisk, though....The F-4 was more of a down and dirty mud mover, so the gun for strafing attacks makes sense, along with its air to air role to compensate for the unreliable missiles of the day. F-35 moves mud from a much greater distance.

I do think the gun still has a role in the gen 4 aircraft, though. More likely to perforate ground targets with an F-16.

 

[slo town]

I remember when the media blasted the F-15 Eagle in the 1970´s claiming it was too big, was at a huge disadvantage in a dog fight, etc.... They claimed a large number of F-5´s would defeat a small number of F-15´s.

It was the media and some politicians. But, yes, you are correct. I vividly remember this "argument" being made.

Scott

 

[slo town]

But the F-35C is limited to 7.5G. The F-35A is a 9G airplane. Air Forces “need” 9G so that the pilots can brag about it in the club…

My F-14 Tomcat flying Navy friend (we met in first grade!) got into a temporary exchange program with the Air Force. He flew F-15s out of McChord AFB for several months. He loved the experience. During some kind of war game exercise he spiked one of the sensors on the Eagle's airframe to 9Gs. He got in trouble for it.

Scott

 

[edyvw]

You might not know what you talk of..... just saying..... IEDs are out of fashion on a macro basis. Much cheaper, significantly higher success rate, and much more accessible methods available.

What you experienced or were taught twenty years ago is obsolete today. Want to get yourself up to date/ up to speed, become a scholar of this conflict, where decades of defensive preparations became obsolete by very inexpensive technology.

2023 Azerbaijani Offensive:
Following a blockade, Azerbaijan launched a military offensive that led to the collapse of the Republic of Artsakh and the exodus of most of its Armenian population.

​

What tactics enemies are going to use depends on theater. Just because IED is of no use in one conflict, doesn’t mean it won’t be primary opponents weapon in another.
It was like yesterday that people argued artillery is of no use, and now it is like most lucrative business, especially self-propelled howitzers.

 

[Tikka]

RN made the decision to go F-35B about 20 years ago. The 2004 Defence White Paper outlined the way ahead for the carriers as VSTOL.

The concern was this: if the EMALS system had problems, then the Prince of Wales and Queen Elizabeth would be white elephants. F-35C offered more range, payload and simpler maintenance, but the all electric architecture of the ships required EMALS to work, and it was still in development at the time.

So, the decision by the RN was for VSTOL, and F-35B. No EMALS needed. Further, if the Airplane slipped in delivery date (and it did, just a bit) then RAF Harrier GR-9s would fill the “gap” (mind the gap…) between the retirement of the RN Harriers and the delivery of the F-35B.

Ultimately, the GR-9s were retired early, too, and there was a gap, but the RN is very happy with the current performance of F-35B.

Unless the RAF has a stealth multi-role fighter, they fall behind other NATO nations and the RN.

That simply won’t do. So, this isn’t “instead of” anything, it is

Hi Astro.
Thank you.

The British F-35-B are jointly operated by the RAF and RN. They are based at RAF Marham. 617 Squadron - Dambusters - uses them.

I once expressed that i was disappointed that the UK had not opted for the catobar for its new carriers. You gave a very inciteful explanation as to why this did not happen. I will try find it.

A few questions if i may.

Do you think a Gun is needed on any of the F-35 variants?

Am i correct in thinking that all the all the variants would be already equipped for in flight refueling?

The RN, to the best of my knowledge, has no capacity for in-flight refueling of its F35-B when at sea. I have seen them refueling from RAF tankers and even USN FA-18 tankers. What happens when these are not available or in an emergency?

Thanks.