Royal Navy

[Rob52240]

Wikipedia says that the F-35 project was placed on probation for 2 years in january 2010 due to cost.

I want to say that I've read somewhere that there were issues with Japanese and English variants not getting good enough avionics in the ones they wanted to order.

[MachFly]

Wikipedia says that the F-35 project was placed on probation for 2 years in january 2010 due to cost.

I want to say that I've read somewhere that there were issues with Japanese and English variants not getting good enough avionics in the ones they wanted to order.

DoD wants better performance from the F-35, it also ended up being 3 times more expensive than planned. DoD gave Lockheed 2 years to make it better and cheaper (which I don't see happening).

Take a look at the 2 links in my previous post.

I want to say that I've read somewhere that there were issues with Japanese and English variants not getting good enough avionics in the ones they wanted to order.

As far as I know avionics is one thing they got right in the F-35.

[RTHolmes]

the issue was that lockheed refused to let us have the source code, which effectively turns the deal into a lease rather than a purchase (or co-development project in fact). now resolved I believe, so we can fix things ourself if required. we've had similar issues with the upgraded chinooks. we are getting the F-35C btw, not the B any more.

Ive always wondered what the deal is with Trident source code, if the US has its own control code in the Tridents we lease it doesnt really make it an independent deterrent. we have other delivery options for nooks but its the Trident ICBM that makes it a real MAD deterrent.

[MachFly]

we are getting the F-35C btw, not the B any more.

How come?

[RTHolmes]

greater range and payload means we need fewer for the same effectiveness (since air warfare these days is all about moving mud, not fighter supremacy). simpler, cheaper propulsion systems too. all adds up to 25% less cost for the same capability, including the catobar mods to the QE carriers

[Vulcan]

Poms want these

[MachFly]

greater range and payload means we need fewer for the same effectiveness (since air warfare these days is all about moving mud, not fighter supremacy). simpler, cheaper propulsion systems too. all adds up to 25% less cost for the same capability, including the catobar mods to the QE carriers

Why did FAA originally order a V/STOL aircraft (Harrier)? I their priority was to have fighters use minimum space for T/O, therefore not requiring larger carriers. How will they manage with a non-V/STOL aircraft now without getting larger ships?

[MachFly]

Poms want these

(Image removed from quote.)

Really?
That's French, not saying that it's bad but since when do Brits buy French planes?

[dedalos]

choppers, F-35's VTOL version are in order to replace the harriers. I don't believe the royal navy has an active carrier now does it? The Ark Royal was decommissioned last year so it seems the RN only has small helicopter tenders active atm.

Someone tell Germany.  You know what they say about third time 

[TinmanX]

no navy fighters since the sea harrier was retired in 2006, we were supposed to get F35s in 2012. looks closer to 2018 now

The Harrier itself was not retired until 2010.
In 2004 The Sea Harrier was retired and replaced by the Harrier GR9 and the squadrons of the FAA were re-designated to the Naval Strike Wing.

[AKH]

Why did FAA originally order a V/STOL aircraft (Harrier)? I their priority was to have fighters use minimum space for T/O, therefore not requiring larger carriers. How will they manage with a non-V/STOL aircraft now without getting larger ships?

Because the government decided that the navy didn't need aircraft carriers.  This led to the use of the 'through-deck cruiser' which was incapable of launching and recovering any fixed wing aircraft other than VTOL and then STOVL when the 'ski-jump' was added.

[jollyFE]

That did not pass the prototype stage either, I know brits are planing to buy it but it wont be ready any time soon.

I was watching the vtol version flying around last week.

[MachFly]

I was watching the vtol version flying around last week.

I'm not saying it can't fly, I'm saying it's performance did not meat the requirements therefore it is still in development.


Just out of curiosity, where did you see it fly?

[MachFly]

Because the government decided that the navy didn't need aircraft carriers.  This led to the use of the 'through-deck cruiser' which was incapable of launching and recovering any fixed wing aircraft other than VTOL and then STOVL when the 'ski-jump' was added.

Right, so now home come they are getting F-35C (not B)? It will require larger ships which I believe the Navy does not have.

[Kazaa]

What Navy...