4 ms·

Was this because of the VTOL system or it's requirement? If so, is VTOL really necessary for the Navy? I know they want smaller carriers but they should have m

by dm2 12y ago

Was this because of the VTOL system or it's requirement? If so, is VTOL really necessary for the Navy? I know they want smaller carriers but they should have modified the plane afterwards rather than potentially screw up the entire very important project by requiring this feature. The US Navy already has a huge fleet of super-carriers, there is no need for VTOL in my opinion. Why can't this super expensive aircraft be remotely piloted or have a sophisticated autopilot to automatically land at one of many predetermined places in the event of an accident?

JabavuAdams 12y ago
VTOL was a Marine requirement, not Navy.
- falsestprophet 12y ago
  Also a requirement of the Royal Navy and Italian Navy and any export target nations interested in maritime operations from smaller-than-supercarrier aircraft carriers like Singapore, Spain, Australia and Turkey. Still possibly very stupid though.
- dmurdoch 12y ago
  Indeed, and it isn't new either, having been introduced in 1971. It still remains a mainstay of their combined arms doctrine (apparently). It will continue to be demanded for a while, and for good reason.
daviding 12y ago
On my (amateur) level of reading about the selection of the F-35 it seems that the VTOL was a requirement put in by the Marines so that they wouldn't always have to rely on the Navy for operations. This is a tradition that goes back to the WWII and Guadalcanal, where some felt they could never again rely on another arm of service (long story). Others in the Marines basically feel that there mission is different enough to justify their smaller Wasp amphibious carriers (which require VTOL). So what you have then are two contradictory requirements (which those in software will recognize as common when coming from above): (1) Make a single common airframe that serves the Airforce, Navy and Marines. (2) Make that airframe fit the particular requirements of each arm of the services. The F-35 is relatively wide-bodied to accommodate the lift fan on the F-35B (the VTOL variant). This means that weight and size then impact the Airforce and Navy variants (the F-35A and C). The Airforce get a slow, heavy fighter, the Navy get a thirsty lower-ranged aircraft and the Marines get a more expensive and fragile VTOL, but at the expense of everyone else.
InclinedPlane 12y ago
There are three variants. F-35C is the Navy version, based on CATOBAR operations like other Navy aircraft. F-35A is the land based variant. F-35B is the VTOL variant which the USMC intends to replace their Harriers and which many nations without CATOBAR carriers intend to operate at sea.
hbharadwaj 12y ago
This article specifically talks about the unruly requirements - https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fd-how-the-u-s-and-its-allies-got-stuck-with-the-worlds-worst-new-warplane-5c95d45f86a5 https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fd-how-the-u-s-and-its-alli...

by dm2 12y ago

JabavuAdams 12y ago

VTOL was a Marine requirement, not Navy.

falsestprophet 12y ago
Also a requirement of the Royal Navy and Italian Navy and any export target nations interested in maritime operations from smaller-than-supercarrier aircraft carriers like Singapore, Spain, Australia and Turkey. Still possibly very stupid though.
dmurdoch 12y ago
Indeed, and it isn't new either, having been introduced in 1971. It still remains a mainstay of their combined arms doctrine (apparently). It will continue to be demanded for a while, and for good reason.

daviding 12y ago

On my (amateur) level of reading about the selection of the F-35 it seems that the VTOL was a requirement put in by the Marines so that they wouldn't always have to rely on the Navy for operations. This is a tradition that goes back to the WWII and Guadalcanal, where some felt they could never again rely on another arm of service (long story). Others in the Marines basically feel that there mission is different enough to justify their smaller Wasp amphibious carriers (which require VTOL). So what you have then are two contradictory requirements (which those in software will recognize as common when coming from above): (1) Make a single common airframe that serves the Airforce, Navy and Marines. (2) Make that airframe fit the particular requirements of each arm of the services. The F-35 is relatively wide-bodied to accommodate the lift fan on the F-35B (the VTOL variant). This means that weight and size then impact the Airforce and Navy variants (the F-35A and C). The Airforce get a slow, heavy fighter, the Navy get a thirsty lower-ranged aircraft and the Marines get a more expensive and fragile VTOL, but at the expense of everyone else.

InclinedPlane 12y ago

There are three variants. F-35C is the Navy version, based on CATOBAR operations like other Navy aircraft. F-35A is the land based variant. F-35B is the VTOL variant which the USMC intends to replace their Harriers and which many nations without CATOBAR carriers intend to operate at sea.

hbharadwaj 12y ago

This article specifically talks about the unruly requirements - https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fd-how-the-u-s-and-its-allies-got-stuck-with-the-worlds-worst-new-warplane-5c95d45f86a5 https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fd-how-the-u-s-and-its-alli...