No gunpod for UK F-35 Lightnings.

[AltcarBoB]

I thought the stealth part of modern aircraft had been made obsolete by modern radars and increased computer power. If it can be spotted by a modern military what use is a gazillion pound/dollar bomber.

 

As someone who thinks all aircraft should have a propeller I am not very knowledgeable about it though.

[Blimpyboy]

8 minutes ago, AltcarBoB said:

 

As someone who thinks all aircraft should have a propeller I am not very knowledgeable about it though.

I wouldn’t sweat it - just be confident...

Edited June 12, 2020 by Blimpyboy

[PLC1966]

11 hours ago, ChocolateCrisps said:

But the problem then becomes launching the Apache off a carrier!

Not sure that is too much of a problem, that or the AAC Apachies over Libya must have had some serious Long Range Tanks fitted to get there from Suffolk....

[Latinbear]

5 minutes ago, Blimpyboy said:

I wouldn’t sweat it - just be confident...

One of my favourite films and actors! 

[PLC1966]

11 minutes ago, AltcarBoB said:

I thought the stealth part of modern aircraft had been made obsolete by modern radars and increased computer power. If it can be spotted by a modern military what use is a gazillion pound/dollar bomber.

 

As someone who thinks all aircraft should have a propeller I am not very knowledgeable about it though.

I think there is no cloak of invisibility on any jet as yet.  Aircraft with reduced RCS do work but they are just another club in the Golf bag to use dependent on circumstances. 

[junglierating]

1 hour ago, Rumblestripe said:

Drones.

 

Low cost, no risk to pilot. Endurance far beyond any piloted aircraft.

Indeed Drones have their place and their roles are increasing but again they are slow yes they can standoff and throw ordanace .....im not an expert but im not sure about situational awareness and then there is the effect of jet noise to keep peoples heads down.I suspect this is all being considered up at Northwood etc we can only comment within the limitations of our  knowledge.

[junglierating]

1 hour ago, Blimpyboy said:

I s’pose.

 

There’s always the option of pushing the Super Hornets and Eurofighters out front to do the air-to-air, I guess. It clears up some of the airspace so the F-35s can play as well.

That kinda defeats the object of a steathy aircraft when you have a forward party of not so stealthy aircraft does it not 🤔

[PLC1966]

On 6/10/2020 at 6:56 PM, Des said:

Also in a similarly money wasting vein but for different reasons there was money spent in the failed attempt to replace the US built GAU-12 gun system for the second-generation Harriers with the Aden 25 which resulted in the UK operated aircraft not having any gun capability whatsoever.

Wasn't that more to do with Vibration pulling apart the man made parts of the fuselage around where the guns were mounted.  Didn't the jet end up with a single gun rather then none.

[AltcarBoB]

29 minutes ago, Blimpyboy said:

I wouldn’t sweat it - just be confident...

How did you find my picture you're an absolute stinker 🤣

[Blimpyboy]

27 minutes ago, junglierating said:

That kinda defeats the object of a steathy aircraft when you have a forward party of not so stealthy aircraft does it not

Yeah, it does, so you wouldn't structure your strike that way if remaining low observable was a primary requirement.

You'd probably only do it if you knew there'd be resistance from many aspects (land-based and airborne radars, SAMs and fighters at multiple bearings, etc,). In some instances, you may only need the F-35's to be low observable for a specific target set, meaning other elements could still be tracked.

 

In most instances, the fact that AEW&C and EW platforms are present kind of gives the game away and lets the baddies know that something's afoot - they just may not be able to hit the big stick strikers!

Stealth's not meant to render the aircraft invisible, just to let it get close enough to do what it needs to do with a modicum of safety.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Blimpyboy

[Blimpyboy]

16 minutes ago, AltcarBoB said:

you're an absolute stinker

Oh, nicely done!  🧐

[Major Eazy]

On ‎6‎/‎10‎/‎2020 at 5:31 PM, GMK said:

Sad to see that the UK’s F-35B fleet won’t be fitted with the gun pod. 
 

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/currently-no-plans-to-purchase-gun-pods-for-f-35b-jets/
 

Interestingly, and somewhat counterintuitively, the gun pod as carried by the F-35B & F-35C has proven more accurate than the forced gun of the F-35A. 

 

Does not mean the F-35Bs will never carry gun pods.

 

The future is not written in stone.

 

It could be possible that MOD, RAF, and FAA don't want the gun pods at the moment. Maybe they're busy training new pilots, still carrying out trails, stuff like that. It takes some time before they're 100% operational. Maybe for the time being, they feel missiles is just enough for whatever job they're likely to face.

 

It is possible that some years later, 5 years, 7 years, 10 years, 15 years, whatever. There may be a situation that cause the MOD, RAF, or FAA to make a decision to want the gun pods.

 

Military (from a civilian point of view) is like that. They don't need a specific piece of equipment, then something changed, the public is outraged at the Government, so the MOD decided to that piece of equipment. Or the government and the military themselves learn their lessons, and make U-Turns on their decisions.

 

An example would be, wasn't there some kind of story about a British soldier being killed because he did not have a flak jacket, as there weren't enough around. The wife was outraged, there was a lot of bad press towards the government, then the MOD decided to start trying to get more flak jackets and issue them to every soldiers?

 

Who knows, 10 years later, one of our F-35B got shot down in close quarters, public outrage, inquiry, decision made to have F-35Bs issued with gun pods.

 

There is no way of knowing if the "no plans" is forever, as they can change their mind later on.

[Rumblestripe]

35 minutes ago, junglierating said:

Indeed Drones have their place and their roles are increasing but again they are slow yes they can standoff and throw ordanace

Drones are becoming far more capable and ubiquitous. As recently as March the US informed us about the first successful flight of the "Valkyrie" drone. Designed to accompany manned aircraft at "high subsonic" speeds it is designed to be stealthy yet (relatively) cheap and disposable

 

Wiki summation of known details

 

BAE has the similar "Taranis" drone in development. I believe that the USAF recently announced that they would be putting a drone up against a Raptor in combat trials. It seems to me that the role of the manned military aircraft is going to change significantly in the next decade so a gun pod which can be retro fitted if deemed necessary is not really a cause for concern that it once was we need to be prepared to fight the NEXT war not the last one.

 

And this is the stuff we know about.

[Blimpyboy]

18 minutes ago, Rumblestripe said:

Drones are becoming far more capable

 

https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/loyal-wingman-to-take-australias-airpower-into-the-next-era/

[junglierating]

35 minutes ago, Rumblestripe said:

Drones are becoming far more capable and ubiquitous. As recently as March the US informed us about the first successful flight of the "Valkyrie" drone. Designed to accompany manned aircraft at "high subsonic" speeds it is designed to be stealthy yet (relatively) cheap and disposable

 

Wiki summation of known details

 

BAE has the similar "Taranis" drone in development. I believe that the USAF recently announced that they would be putting a drone up against a Raptor in combat trials. It seems to me that the role of the manned military aircraft is going to change significantly in the next decade so a gun pod which can be retro fitted if deemed necessary is not really a cause for concern that it once was we need to be prepared to fight the NEXT war not the last one.

 

And this is the stuff we know about.

Absolutely but it depends on your opponent if its like Afghan then that changes the response you dont need stealth when a troop is under SF you need HE and fast (ive seen it)and since Harriers and Tonka are no longer available you are left with Typhoon or F35 ....If you are up against someone techy thats different.

[EwenS]

13 hours ago, ChocolateCrisps said:

But the problem then becomes launching the Apache off a carrier!

Well 12 months ago they landed one on for deck handling trials. First step in getting them operational on the QE class.

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/apache-helicopter-begins-trials-onboard-hms-queen-elizabeth/

 

They operated successfully off HMS Ocean in 2011 off a much smaller deck.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13651736

 

Unless your air power, F-35B, Apache, UAV or whatever is airborne and on call near the ground action there will always be a delay in delivering the ordnance. Given how few of anything most air forces have these days some delay seems inevitable.

 

AIUI, CAS is now being delivered by fixed wing from altitude to avoid loss and damage to the aircraft from MANPADS (man portable air defence systems) using high tech targeting pods and smart missiles and bombs. It therefore doesn’t need to be down amongst the weeds. And that makes the gun for strafing unnecessary. And with the move to BVR in Air to air, backed up by IRST systems and missiles that were much more reliable than in the past I can see why the gun is not top of the weapons list any more.

 

The move from low level strikes to medium altitudes began back in Gulf War I in 1991. For the RAF it helped reduce Tornado losses of the first couple of days.

 

[Blimpyboy]

9 minutes ago, EwenS said:

AIUI, CAS is now being delivered by fixed wing from altitude to avoid loss and damage to the aircraft from MANPADS

That is true - to a degree. The move to higher altitudes is out of necessity rather than preference. A very low and slow platform can deliver fire much more accurately and with greater proportionality - it's just that the volume of AAA and SAMs forces CAS aircraft to higher altitudes (and not just CAS, pretty much all strike missions). I dare say most air forces would rather not spend billions on F-35s if they knew they could get away with A-10 style aircraft (or super long-range artillery) to get the job done.

 

Most air arms would love to have a mix of rotary wing, A-10-like and F-35-like platforms. It's predominantly cost that forces air arms to pick one platform over several.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Blimpyboy

[Des]

1 hour ago, PLC1966 said:

Wasn't that more to do with Vibration pulling apart the man made parts of the fuselage around where the guns were mounted.  Didn't the jet end up with a single gun rather then none.

To oversimplify the project the idea was to take the tried and tested 30mm ADEN cannon technology as carried on first generation Harriers , Sea Harriers and others with the intention of applying that to a new lighter gun with a faster rate of fire using a new standardised 25mm NATO round (although just how standardised that would be when the Tornado then in widespread use by the UK/Germany/Italy used 27mm was perhaps debatable) which presumably the whole world would want to buy and become yet another huge commercial success for the UK arms industry.

 

Instead it became a UK arms industry 'success' more typical of those times when it turned out that it was not quite as achievable as expected , took far longer , cost far more and the final nail in the coffin seems to have been that that the ammunition feed into the breech was at far too tight an angle to be reliable although it is reported in some sources that around 100 guns had been built before the project was cancelled but were never used operationally.

 

Second generation Harriers did carry the gun fairings at times in UK service but these were for aerodynamic reasons to form the sidewalls of an 'air dam' below the fuselage for which plain strakes were also available and often used instead.

[Rumblestripe]

1 hour ago, junglierating said:

Absolutely but it depends on your opponent if its like Afghan then that changes the response you dont need stealth when a troop is under SF you need HE and fast (ive seen it)and since Harriers and Tonka are no longer available you are left with Typhoon or F35 ....If you are up against someone techy thats different.

We already have CAS provided from drones, the Reaper/Predator can carry four Hellfire and two Paveway LGBs on a platform that can be overhead for just short of 24 hours (revised models reputed to have 40 hours plus flight duration) without putting an aircrew in danger of anything more serious than a little Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. Then you have the bit the bean counters like; Boeing AH-64 Apache, unit cost $20million, General Atomics MQ-1 Reaper/Predator, unit cost $4million.

 

I'm not saying that there is no point having manned aircraft, but for an increasing number of roles the drone offers a cost effective and risk averse solution. The morality, is of course another debate altogether.

[AltcarBoB]

With drones operated from the USA and flying over Asia are their any problems with the slight delay caused by the speed of the signal pinging off a satellite or two on its two ways transmission.

[PLC1966]

43 minutes ago, Rumblestripe said:

I'm not saying that there is no point having manned aircraft, but for an increasing number of roles the drone offers a cost effective and risk averse solution. The morality, is of course another debate altogether.

And every Politicians dream !!

 

Morality, something lacking in Politicians of all colours.

[junglierating]

41 minutes ago, Rumblestripe said:

We already have CAS provided from drones, the Reaper/Predator can carry four Hellfire and two Paveway LGBs on a platform that can be overhead for just short of 24 hours (revised models reputed to have 40 hours plus flight duration) without putting an aircrew in danger of anything more serious than a little Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. Then you have the bit the bean counters like; Boeing AH-64 Apache, unit cost $20million, General Atomics MQ-1 Reaper/Predator, unit cost $4million.

 

I'm not saying that there is no point having manned aircraft, but for an increasing number of roles the drone offers a cost effective and risk averse solution. The morality, is of course another debate altogether.

Ooh 24 hours ....not much good when theres incoming and you are on the ground you want HE and you want it fast.I think we are looking from different perspectives shipmate ...and besides its defo going of topic 😀👍

[PLC1966]

16 minutes ago, junglierating said:

Ooh 24 hours ....not much good when theres incoming and you are on the ground you want HE and you want it fast.I think we are looking from different perspectives shipmate ...and besides its defo going of topic 😀👍

But I do think the Typhoon, F-16, F-15E etc will provide CAS for sometime to come but fast moving drones will be the future.

[ChocolateCrisps]

2 hours ago, EwenS said:

Well 12 months ago they landed one on for deck handling trials. First step in getting them operational on the QE class.

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/apache-helicopter-begins-trials-onboard-hms-queen-elizabeth/

Oh, that's interesting, thanks! Somehow managed to miss that at the time. The problem then becomes both response time and range though - so surely there are still some situations where having the gunpod available for the F-35 would make life much simpler, even if it's not a regular occurence.

[NoSG0]

Times are changing quickly.  Autonomous drones will eventually handle things like SEAD and maybe even CAS.  They had better be 99.9% right on target ID.