As the Marine Corps prepares to take possession of their first few squadrons of F-35B’s over the next two years, debates rage once again over what the overall role of the F-35 should be and what models should go where.
As you probably know, the F-35 Lightning II is being manufactured in three different models for use by the Air Force, Navy, & Marines for each services’ needs.
The conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) F-35A will start replacing F-16 squadrons starting in 2013 and A-10 squadrons in 2028. The short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) F-35B- meant for the Marine Corps- is already set for delivery at Marine bases in California, Arizona, North Carolina, and South Carolina.
Finally, the carrier-borne F-35C will be the last to arrive, with no date yet set, but now it looks like they will have less than the 150 F-35C that they had originally called for.
Some of the higher-ups in the Pentagon believe that the F-35B would actually be better suited for carrier operations than the F-35C would be (The British Navy is buying F-35B for their carrier squadrons), but Navy admirals are now arguing that the Marines would actually be better off buying F-35C’s for their carrier-based squadrons.
There seem to be no easy answers to this question. There are good and bad points either way we go. The F-35B would undoubtedly be safer to operate on carriers, but the F-35C has the advantage of long-range tanks.
How do you think the Navy and Marines could handle this issue? Do you think that perhaps they could compromise and both services buy some of each model? What complications do you foresee with this kind of compromise?
Anonymous says
Ed,
Have any of the Admirals actually flown a plane recently? Have they ever? Have they flown the F-35?
Why not ask the guys & gals who will be flying the new planes what they want? They understand the needs, benefits and limitations of hardware more than anyone.
Although I understand the need for seeing the big picture strategically, I thought the “top-down” model dictating how things are done was tossed out long ago…
Bob Stambovsky says
Negative. That’s like the infant dictates the formula-Nobody but factory test and a few AF/USN test pilots have flown them.There are only two protyotypes (As) here at Edwards, and Pax River has one.
The “B” is a mechanical nightmare with a PTO shaft driving a fan plum in the middle. Will be mucho $$$ to maintain. That said, alternate design for Short approach; best for the boat.
Marines occassionally work off the boat , but mainly beach-based,need range (and carry ordnance). Navy has no long range refueling right now.
I say, simple, effective, reliable is best. Go back having a RIO to reduce the need for all that black magic and pilot workload.
Stambo, USMC (ret), Secy of nobodies navy
Anonymous says
‘…The F-35C, designed for the US Navy, features larger wings to carry more fuel and provide better low-speed landing approach characteristics to an aircraft carrier….’
as an armchair carrier Capt., i’d choose the variant
which can land more safely most of the time.
Trey says
Hi Ed,
Anything you could add on with China’s upcoming J-20? News circulating on the capabilities of the J-20s overruling the superiority of the Raptors and Lightinings
Barry says
Hello Ed,
I feel that they should stick to the plan. As you mentioned earlier, they both have their strengths and weaknesses. If both the navy and marine corps buy both F-35B models, then both forces would have “short legs” and that wouldn’t be good for the overall effectiveness of both forces. If both forces bought F-35C, they would have the advantage range but there will be greater dangers involving operations around the carrier, especially at night time.
However, getting a combination of B and C models (for both forces) may offer some versatility. But I can imagine it could be more expensive. Sticking to the plan probably may well be the best way to go. When it comes down to it, if there is a situation that calls for long range, why not send a navy squadron? If there is a situation where extreme care around the ship takes priority over range (i.e bad wether and night time landing), why not send a marine squadron?
With that in mind, remember that I am just a person whose knowledge is limited to articles I’ve read and documentaries I’ve seen. I am not a fighter pilot and I believe that the real answers can only come from those who live in the fast-paced and dangerous world of fighters pilots. They are the ones with the experience, and only they can provide the best answers.
Cassidy says
I have done a good bit of research regarding this topic. I have written several papers and have talked to many pilots and officers in the Navy and Marine Corps regarding this issue. I have also spoken with several engineers that are directly involved with the F-35 program at Lockheed Martin. However, I will admit that my knowledge is limited. I am currently a civilian pilot trying to pursue a career in military aviation. With that being said, I have no military experience. My perspective is purely based on the knowledge I have gained from speaking with individuals and by doing research about the topic. What I am sharing is my own personal insight, and I admit that it may be flawed; I am not an expert.
However, the F-35 program is a very important issue to me, and I take it extremely seriously. With my desire to become a naval aviator in the near future and my love for my country, I only want the best decisions to be made concerning the United State’s F-35 purchases.
The F-35A is an absolute perfect fit for the USAF to replace aging jets. I believe they are basically on track production wise with this being the simplest of the three variants. The USAF also has the money to make the purchases; I’m sure we will see many F-35As replacing older jets in the near future. Also, the F-35A, being a conventional aircraft, is the cheapest of the three variants. I look forward to seeing the F-35A excel as a very valuable aircraft for the USAF and for Israel with the F-35I.
Almost everything that I have heard from pilots, mechanics, and engineers is that the F-35B is and “will” be a mechanical nightmare. (Big emphasis on the “will”) The F-35B is a complicated machine, and was the primary platform for the JSF to begin with. The F-35B has contributed to the rising cost of the overall F-35 program. The plane will not be as cheap as initially predicted and new problems are arising almost every day (or so it seems). The last I’ve heard regarding the U.K.’s F-35 purchases is that they have abandoned the F-35B and have decided to go with the F-35C. This means that all F-35B production will only be for the United States Marine Corps. Now as I said, I am not a pilot in the military, and I have no military experience. However, from what information I have gathered, and for the cost that it will take to make the STOVL version happen, I do not believe that the USMC truly needs the F-35B. I understand that the Harriers are getting old (as well as the Hornets and Prowlers), but the F-35B just doesn’t seem like the smart route to go with. I only want what it is best for my country. From what I know, the Harrier has never been operated from remote locations as it was intended for during war times. It has been operated from the smaller carriers and at normal bases – that is all. The F-35B is also a bigger jet than the AV-8B, I remember hearing that there may be some issues regarding their ability to operate efficiently from the smaller carriers. If we do keep putting the time and money into the F-35B I’m afraid that we will eventually end up with a few operational aircraft, but only a fraction of the “fraction” that we are asking for. Money is being poured into the program and I believe that there may be an alternate solution to the problem.
I believe that the United States Marine Corps should go with the F-35C. If the jets are needed at sea, this would allow Marines to operate from the larger Nimitz and Ford class carriers. It is true that they would not be able to operate from the carriers that the Harriers currently operate from, but with extended range, supersonic capabilities, simplicity, cheaper costs than the F-35B and ease of maintenance; I feel that the F-35C would be an excellent replacement for the F-35B. The F-35C can carry more fuel and also has a larger wingspan and has the ability to carry 2 additional wing payloads. The larger wingspan also allows the F-35C to operate at slower speeds used for carrier landings, as opposed to the CTOL F-35A and STOVL F-35B. This could also be used to the advantage of the USMC. Given a somewhat modified configuration, the F-35C could possibly act as a STOL (short take-off and landing) aircraft for situations where the aircraft may need to be based in remote locations at shorter or damaged airfields. This could be achieved by carrying equivalent fuel loads and weapon payloads compared to that of the F-35B during normal operations. Remember, the F-35B is not a VTOL aircraft; it will always need to perform a short takeoff when loaded out. The additional wing payloads on the F-35C that the F-35B does not have could also be used to accommodate the jamming pods (such as the ALQ-99s) that the EA-6B uses. Filling the role of electronic warfare for the aging Prowlers is something the USMC is also looking into. The F-35C could carry more fuel and more jamming pods than the F-35B.
Operating the F-35B on larger Nimitz and Ford carriers doesn’t seem like a great idea. Those carriers are designed specifically for CATOBAR aircraft. I believe that the F-35B would intervene with fixed wing traffic patterns and deck operations with these carriers and would never be approved by the Navy. I believe the USMC and USN could truly benefit from both going with the F-35C. The F-35B was attempted, but it just doesn’t seem right to keep throwing money into the program when alternatives exist. Don’t get me wrong, it looks really REALLY cool! But is it practical? Is it really what we need right now? Or should we simply focus on getting the F-35Cs into mass production and save some money and start replacing these old jets with something that isn’t overly complicated; something that won’t be incredibly costly and won’t cause an abundance of mechanical problems in the future. The F-35C is cheaper and in many ways is more capable than the F-35B. The decision to go with the F-35C could get the ball rolling for the USN, USMC, and U.K. to get some great, new, much needed aircraft to fill many different roles.
As stated above, this is only my personal perspective on the matter. It is a point of view that I have come up with by doing research, keeping up with the news, and talking to many, many people.