A question for the aviation experts...

I've been playing catch-up on my reading and I keep running into conflicting, confusing and what I believe is misleading information.

Exhibit #1 is this post by Winslow Wheeler from Huffinton Post back in 2009.

If the latest iteration of "beyond visual range" turns out to be yet another chimera, the F-35 will have to operate as a close-in dogfighter, but in that regime it is a disaster. If one accepts every aerodynamic promise Lockheed currently makes for it, the F-35 will be overweight and underpowered. At 49,500 pounds in air-to-air take-off weight with an engine rated at 42,000 pounds of thrust, it will be a significant step backward in thrust-to-weight and acceleration for a new fighter. In fact, at that weight and with just 460 square feet of wing area for the Air Force and Marine Corps versions, the F-35's small wings will be loaded with 108 pounds for every square foot, one third worse than the F-16A. (Wings that are large relative to weight are crucial for maneuvering and surviving in combat.) The F-35 is, in fact, considerably less maneuverable than the appallingly vulnerable F-105 "Lead Sled," a fighter that proved helpless in dogfights against MiGs over North Vietnam. (A chilling note: most of the Air Force's fleet of F-105s was lost in four years of bombing; one hundred pilots were lost in just six months.)
Nor is the F-35 a first class bomber for all that cost: in its stealthy mode it carries only a 4,000 pound payload, one third the 12,000 pounds carried by the "Lead Sled."

The question I have is this...

If bigger wings confer greater agility then why isn't the F-35C more agile than the F-35A.

Yes its a simple question.

But this type of thing has gained traction and is repeated by many...its even a pronouncement that I've seen on a site where the authors claim to be aviation experts and when challenged on any of the claims that they make "insist on comparing  resumes"...the comparison to the F-105 is also a much repeated phrase that I see popping up all over the internet.

So I'm asking the guys that might fly by this blog to give me the real deal...is it that cut and dry or am I being deceived?

Latest F-35 Vids

F-35A Compilation Vid



F-35B Compilation Vid


F-35C Compilation Vid

The UK's Huge Helicopter Carrier.

DoD Buzz (Phillip Ewing wrote another great article) has a story on the UK's carrier misery.

The Royal Navy’s pending class of two aircraft carriers, the Queen Elizabeth and the Prince of Wales, could end up costing more than double what government officials initially projected, according to a BBC report today. It underscores how big a deal it was for the U.K. to decide to buy F-35C Lightning IIs, as opposed to the delayed B version.  When the Brits shifted to the Cs last fall, it was read in Washington as just another blow against the B, but many Americans may not have realized the consequences it would also have in today’s Austerity Britain. The Royal Navy now needs to redesign one or both carriers to accommodate the conventional C models, and that could raise the cost of the ships from £5.2 billion — or about $8.7 billion — to £7 billion, or about  $11.7 billion.
Or it could be worse — although there’s a light at the end of the tunnel, wrote the BBC’s Robert Peston:

One defence industry veteran said the final bill was bound to be nearer £10 billion, though a government official insisted that was way over the top. The Ministry of Defence and the Treasury believe that total final costs could be nearer £6bn, if only one of the carriers is reconfigured to take the preferred version of America’s Joint Strike Fighter aircraft. An MoD official said no final decision had been taken on whether the first carrier to be built, the Queen Elizabeth, or the second carrier, the Prince of Wales, or both would be reconfigured. He said it would probably be the case that changing the design specification for the Prince of Wales would be the cheapest option.

But if that happened, it is not clear when — if ever — the Queen Elizabeth, due to enter service in 2019, would actually be able to accommodate jets (as opposed to helicopters). Whatever happens, the increase in the bill will be substantial — and is only regarded by the Treasury as affordable because the increment is likely to be incurred later than 2014/15, when the expenditure constraints put in place by the Chancellor’s spending review come to an end.

The Royal Navy likes to look on the bright side: It argues that the F-35C will end up being a more capable aircraft (longer range, more payload) and cheaper to buy per bird. And it will make the Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales — or whichever one is the full-fledged carrier — an equal partner with the U.S. in a potential future conflict, launching first-day-of-the-war sorties with the same aircraft that the Americans will be flying. Assuming, of course, that Britons are willing to continue paying what it costs to field carriers and air wings.

I never considered that part of the story when it was first announced.

The British leadership must be drinking/smoking something illegal.

In an attempt to cut costs, they might have instead raised them, gotten little in the way of commonality with the US Navy (they'll operate almost the same number of F-35C's that the Marines will) and have in essence thrown away one of the good news stories in regards to their attempt to field joint forces (having the F-35B continue in the role that the Joint Harrier Force occupied).

The decision to retire the Harriers, scrap the Nimrods, cancel the Sentinel project and switch to the F-35C all add up to some very disturbing trends.

The UK MoD has made some very serious miscalculations.

Unless they're lucky, they'll be cleaning up this mess for decades.

Note:

I believe the C version will be capable, but will lack the basing flexibility of the B model.  For the USMC and to a lesser extent the Royal Navy but perhaps more importantly the Royal Air Force (if they were still operating in the Desert Storm mode) this flexibility is extremely important.

Perhaps the best thing to come out of this is the fact that the F-35C will save Royal Navy Aviation...unless the Royal Air Force pulls a modern day "Buccaneer" on them.

The US Army's M4 Carbine Conundrum.

Paul over at Ares has an article on the Army's upcoming competition to upgrade its M4 carbine.

The US Army has a conundrum.  Either it keeps the current M4, upgrades it or replaces it all together.  Those would seem to be the choices.

But this isn't really an issue.  If the US Army and Marines want a compact RIFLE...then look no farther than the TAVOR.

I blogged about this recurring issue in 2009 (read it here).  The Tavor has an 18 inch barrel, keeping the 5.56mm bullets hitting power at long range.  Has integrated electronic sights.  Has attachment points for lasers etc...all in a package no bigger than the M4.

Win-win.

Riverine Factsheet.

Lee sent me this factsheet on the Riverine Forces.

Simple question...why isn't a module being designed for the LCS for these forces?  We talk about using Marines on those ships, we're even making room for Army Aviation, but this under utilized force seems to be ignored again.  Use it or lose it.  Time to get the Riverine Forces into the fight...whether against pirates or in the Pacific, its past time to get these forces involved.

Riverine Factsheet

Downed F-15E Crew Talk About The Incident. This is what its all about. How did I forget that?

via CNN

After the ejection, Harney -- "Meso" to his fellow fliers -- and "Mask" Stark became separated. "When you find yourself alone, and you're isolated, in a country where there's hostiles, you are scared," said Harney, a veteran of both the Afghan and Iraq wars.
Stark was found by Libyan civilians who protected him from possible retaliation by forces loyal to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, and eventually he was taken safely back to Europe. Details of how he was taken out of Libya have yet to be disclosed.
Harney's rescue came more quickly. He stayed in communications with another F-15 pilot still in the air over Libya. Eventually an MV-22 Osprey carrying Marines who were part of a Tactical Recovery of Aircraft and Personnel, or TRAP, team landed near his position.

"As that back door opened, I see a group of young Marine recon units jump out, and that was probably the best feeling I've ever felt in my entire life," Harney said. He was flown to the USS Kearsarge for a quick medical check then a short time later sent home with Stark to RAF Lakenheath, where friends and family welcomed them with hugs and a rendition of "God Bless America."

Read the whole story at CNN but it details the recovery of these two men.  I didn't hear the story, only read it, but I can imagine the emotion behind the series of events.  First you lose your engine, are forced to bail out, land and you're separated from members of your flight crew...

You don't give a damn if its US Army, Navy, Air Force or Marines.


You just want to get out of that bad situation.


I'm glad they did.

F-35 tie down...

NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. – The F-35B moved another step forward to shipboard testing on board USS Wasp (LHD-1) this year, as F-35 integrated test force personnel used weights to simulate shipboard padeyes during an evaluation of chain down procedures on F-35B test aircraft BF-1. The team observed no points of interference and identified ways to optimize aircraft jacking techniques. Padeyes are used on ships to secure equipment to the deck during various sea states. The F-35B and F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter variants are undergoing test and evaluation at Naval Air Station Patuxent River prior to eventual delivery to the fleet. Photo courtesy of Lockheed Martin.

"Fly Navy" Book.

 I usually don't shill for the Marine Corps Association but this book has me intrigued and I thought some of you might find it interesting...

UH-1Y on the firing range.

F-35 News....

Lockheed Martin test pilot David Nelson put F-35B BF-3 into STOVL mode for the first time on Flight 101 on 25 April 2011. The flight took place at NAS Patuxent River, Maryland.

The fourth F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing jet, BF-4, descends to its first vertical landing on 27 April 2011 at NAS Patuxent River, Maryland. Marine Lt. Col. Fred Schenk piloted the aircraft during the flight, which was the forty-seventh for BF-4.

Lockheed Martin test pilot Bill Gigliotti takes the F-35C CF-2 on its first taxi test in Fort Worth on 21 April 2011.

Collars on the RCB-X?

Does anyone know what the purpose of these "optional" collars on the Navy's RCB-X are for?

Who makes these charts????

I was cruising the web and happened across ELP's site.

God, ELP, tell me that someone gave you this chart!  Please tell me that you didn't come up with this rating yourself!  If you did, please tell me that you were in some drug induced haze which gave you "a total indifference to what is real!"

This is the most amazing thing I've seen in a long time ---- The F-35 is more at risk against legacy surface to air than gen 4 aircraft????

In air to air combat (vs 4th gen) the F-35 will be more vulnerable than the Gripen, Rafale and Typhoon?  What makes this even more laughable is the fact that with the exception of cost, he rates the Super Hornet inferior to every other airplane being made...except the Silent Eagle...which is still just a concept.

Wow.

Why are we letting Sailors perform Marine Missions?

Sorry Leesea, but the very fact that RIVRONs have to train with foreign forces Marines is a good indication of mission creep.  One other sad fact is that Marines are currently performing this mission forward deployed.  I would love for one of the boat guys to get me up to speed on their current mission set and their deployment schedule...or if possible...where they deploy.

Photos by Petty Officer 2nd Class Paul D. Williams

Sailors with Riverine Squadron 3 and marines with the Royal Netherlands Marine Corps practice formation drills using Riverine Assault Boats, March 23. Sailors from RIVRON 3 and Marines from the Royal Netherlands Marine Corps participated in a three-week cross-training exercise exchanging tactics and refining their skills as combat boat crewman.

Kajaki Foot Patrol.

Growler Internally Transportable Vehicle Stat Sheets.

While I was dozing the Marine Corps type classified the Growler ITV.  Below are the tech sheets.

m1161_and_1163_pd

And it would appear that American Growler has come out of hiding...

Agi Capabilities Statement

SAS facing recruiting difficulties. Is Special Operations so special anymore?

Real quick thoughts on this one guys.  Just a heads up...you'll probably disagree.

Via DefenseNews.com

LONDON - Britain's elite SAS is facing a recruitment crisis because the army is so overstretched that soldiers do not have time to prepare for the grueling selection process, a senior officer warned April 25.
Brig. Richard Dennis said that the high "operational tempo" of the armed forces and the "unrelentingly demanding" operations in Afghanistan meant that servicemen were being discouraged from joining the special forces unit.

In a letter leaked to the Daily Telegraph newspaper, Dennis, head of infantry, said the pressures affecting the forces were combining to "mitigate against Special Forces recruitment."

The US Army is already facing this issue with its Ranger School.  At one time I remember talking to a guy in the 82nd and he basically told me (before the wars) that in order to get promoted in the US Army Infantry, you had to have your tab (Ranger Tab that is) or else you'd better be a friend of the Battalion Commander.

Long story short, Special Operations has become so specialized (raids, raids and more raids) that conventional infantry is picking up the slack on missions that they once performed.

You have Marine Infantry training African troops in Partnership Missions.  US Army and Marines serving as trainers and advisors to the Afghan National Army....

You have MEU's performing TRAP missions that are suppose to be pure-dee Special Ops...

The question I have for you is this.  If we are using our Special Operations forces for almost nothing but raids now (nothing wrong with that but it is a limited mission set) then do we really need a separate command for them?

US Army Special Forces isn't training host or insurgent forces anymore...that belongs to the CIA or conventional forces...

Rangers are being used to back up the other Special Ops forces instead of performing their bread and butter raid missions solo...

Navy Seals are doing nothing but raids and deeeeeeep recon....but its the same mission set as Marine Special Operations....

USAF Special Operations has Para-Rescue but every Special Ops team has medical personnel that are trained to the standards of the teams that they accompany...as far as aircraft are concerned, with the exception of C-130's the US Army Night Stalkers are suppose to be as good ....

So say it out loud...is Special Operations so special now...or can they stand to be downsized too?

Dedicated Marine Air for Marine Special Operations Command?

Below you'll see an article written by a Marine Major arguing for *gasp* a dedicated Marine Air Group to be tasked to support Marine Special Operations Command. Personally, I think this is a terrible idea. But read his paper and see what you think. Epton-AY06-9816 Oh and Major. The debate on Marine Forces in Special Operations Command is not over. With expected reductions in personnel, I think you'll see this revisited.

ARH-70...I mean Block II's first flight...

Just a note to Bell Helicopter. I don't know who it is in your video studio that thinks the little "artsy" trash they stick on these vids is worthwhile but no one cares and it just gets in the way. We want to see your hardware, not a bunch of questionable graphics. Give us a sharp, clean video...you can even dump the music, just let us see the helicopter.

Hideaki Akaiwa -Bad Ass of the Week (a couple of weeks ago)

I've been watching whats going on in Japan but not posting much on it because I couldn't find what I was looking for.  In incredible horror like that.....with all the pain and suffering...somewhere there had to be a hero.  Here he is courtesy of the website Bad Ass of the Week.  Make sure you read the whole thing.  Its worth it!

USMC/Special Operations unhappy with current design of JLTV.

Jonathan actually sent me two articles on the JLTV (thanks again guy!)...both articles are from National Defense Magazine.org and both give the same story...

1.  The US Army and Marine Corps are having issues arriving at a common vehicle to satisfy there requirements...and...

2.  Special Operations Command is voicing similar concerns to the Marine Corps.  The vehicle as currently configured is just too darn heavy.

With news that the Army and Marines are both sending Request For Information to industry on the viability of upgrading existing HUMVEES and with the looming budget cuts just around the corner, this is a program that is probably on life support.

Prediction.  This program will be killed before August.

UPDATE:

It occurred to me that the 'future of combat' as the DoD sees it will be told if this program survives or not.  If the USMC and SOCOM are successful then we will see this program shelved, the Marines going with upgraded HUMVEES and SOCOM going with unique solutions or piggybacking on the Marine program.

What goes unsaid is that the US Army has several light fighting organizations which will also balk at the heavy weight of the JLTV...the 82nd certainly wouldn't have a use for it and neither would the 101st.

10th Mountain is still to remain light fighters (not sure but I believe so) and so are elements of the 25th.  So you will have 4 Army divisions that will welcome a lighter vehicle.  With the other forces being Stryker Brigades, I don't see why they can't simply exist with the legacy but upgraded HUMVEE.  The focus is definitely on the wrong thing here.  Power generation and fuel economy should be the focus---right along with superior off road handling.  Its beyond time to get back to being maneuver forces and not fighting along MSR's.