F35 JSF for Marham and Lakenheath

[Malcolm]

I can see 2 typhooon sqdns at Lossie plus the F35 ocu. I can see 2 front line F35 sqdns at Marham and the 3 front line plus ocu phoon sqdns at Coningsby. I came to this conclusion on the basis LM provides the best local training environment for the mud movers reduced transit costs etc etc plus LM will likely lose the 2 front line tonka sqdns by end of 2013 making way for the Phoons and then 15 moving south 2019 making way for an F35 ocu with Marham keeping tonkas until 2025 while ramping up sqdns on F35 from 2021 through to 2025 . I could see 41 moving to Marham to spread things out a bit..

I'm with you on the all Tonkas down to Marham, 2 Tiffy squadrons and JSF OCU at LM. Not sure about 3 front line squadrons and an OCU at CGY though. Has CGY ever had 3 front line squadrons in recent years (F4, F3, Typhoon)?

But I doubt they'll split the JSF OCU from the main JSF front line squadrons for quite a few years. It would be a nightmare maintainance wise. You can do it with an old jet (like Jag and GR4) because you know what goes wrong and know how to fix it. But with a new jet, everything is new and when it breaks it can take ages to diagnose what is wrong and work out how to fix it. It's a learning process.

Also, the maintainance contract is likely to be privatised, just like for Tiffy and Tonka. Whoever wins that contract (presumably either LM or BAe) will set up a base somewhere to perform deep maintainace, and provide line support to the squadrons. If LM gets the first jets for the OCU, then I'll give you a pound to a penny that'll be where they set up the maintainace centre. If they then attempt to put the squadron jets into Marham (500 miles and a days travel away), you'll have to duplucate a lot of civvy support staff, and that will get expensive. You'd likely end up with only a handfull of servicable jets at Marham.

[Ronald Reagan]

I just hope the politicians are smart enough and take a long term view to have 2x Typhoon combat wings, the main one at Coningsby with 3, 11, 17 and 29, then another at Lossie with 1, 6 and ? (43). IF Lossie ends up a full Typhoon wing and we get more than 40x F-35s my money is on Marham being the main F-35 base. I could see it sitting empty for a year or two while upgraded for F-35 much like Coningsby was for Typhoon. How long was Coningsby without a fast jet fleet for post F-3/pre Typhoon?
In terms of numbers something like 50x Typhoons at Coningsby, 36x Typhoons at Lossie, 48x F-35s at Marham. This option would also give us the ability to expand the fast jet force at a later date with room for extra Typhoons at Lossie or in the real long term the possible end of Typhoon (2030s?) and replacement of say the Lossie wing with F-35!

[swingy]

Malcolm I see your point about two bases causing problems for maintenave but is that not exactly what we have now with the Tornados and Typhoons? If we wait for the Tornado force to be run down at Marham before we ramp up F35 there, are we not looking at an in service date with front line squadrons in about 10 or more years time? Putting that in perspective the USMC hope to have their first squadron stand up at Yuma later this year.

[Ronald Reagan]

In the Eastern Daily Press today:-

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/marham_all_ ... _1_1452585" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[the concerned]

I'm just asking why couldn't valley and st mawgan be considered for jsf basing

[Tronk 11]

I forgot Marham & LAKENHEATH. Would their be a plan to do maintenance at the base/bases they are VERY close. It would seem a logical answer, any chance of doing maintenance of the European F-35's?

[Malcolm]

Malcolm I see your point about two bases causing problems for maintenave but is that not exactly what we have now with the Tornados and Typhoons?

No

Tornado has been in service since the early 80's, and based in it's time at Larbruch, Bruggen, Cottesmore, Honington, Marham and Lossie. If they don't kow how to fix them now they never will.

The first RAF squadron of Typhoons was stood up at Warton in mid 2003, so it was close to the people who built them, and had the best chance of fixing them quickly.
17 Sqn first flights were in early 2004. 15 months later in April 2005 17Sqn moved to CGY and 29 (the OCU) stood up in May 2005. This co-incided with BAE opening their National Typhoon Support Centre at Coningsby, from where all RAF Typhoon support and maintainace is managed. There is also the Typhoon Training Facility building, and the TMF. These are all large new buildings on camp at CGY. The squadrons on the other hand get to use old hangars and HAS sites which haven't changed much since the days of the Phantoms. Infact, the hangars probably havent changed much since World War Two. Next time you're at CGY, visit the BBMF. Their hangar is virtually identical in design to the facilities available to 17 and 29 Sqn.

3Sqn formed in March 2006, and 11 Sqn in March 2007. Southern QRA was finally taken over by Typhoon in June 2007. Nothing much then happened for 2 years whilst they ironed out all (well most) of the problems with the Tranche 1 jets. Then in 2009 Tranche two jets started to arrive, bringing with them a whole bunch of new problems to sort out. Four jets were swiftly packed off out of the way to speak penguin in Sept 2009. 6 Sqn started training up (on Trance 2 jets) in early 2010 before officialy moving to Leuchars in Sept 2010. Virtually all the Tranche 2 jets have now been delivered, but there is still only one squadron flying them. I wonder why 6Sqn probably has more aircraft on strength than the OCU. Again I wonder why. Might it be to do with difficulties servicing Tranche 2 jets away from the BAE support ar CGY?

That's all a long winded way of saying it took from mid 2003 (first OEU) till Sept 2010 (6 Sqn at Leuchars) before the powers at be decided to risk moving Typhoons away from their primary servicing base. Thats over 7 years. And then another 2 years before enough of the Tranche 2 bugs had been ironed out tothink about a second squadron being stood up.

If that pattern follows for JSF, then there isn't any way they'll risk standing up operational squadrons away from the primary servicing facility and manufacturers support centre for at least 5 years, and probably more like 10. The press would have a field day if they found out that of the 25 odd jets allocated to our 2 front line squadrons, only half a dozen were servicable with the other robbed for spares, coz that's exactly what would happen.

If we wait for the Tornado force to be run down at Marham before we ramp up F35 there, are we not looking at an in service date with front line squadrons in about 10 or more years time? Putting that in perspective the USMC hope to have their first squadron stand up at Yuma later this year.

When do you think we'll be getting our first operational jets for an OEU/OCU? We won't be ordering them before the next election (2015). Then there will be another Strategic Defence reviw (AKA massive cuts to the military) so that'll put us into 2016. Assuming we then go ahead and order, (if we're lucky and the Yanks let us jump the queue and have a few earlier slots intended for the USMC) then the first few jets may arrive by 2018-19 to form an OEU, then a year later enough jets for an OCU(2019-2020). Initial Operational Capacity for the first front line squadron - my guess is 2022. So 6 years from now for an ISD, and 10 for an IOC - and that's being optomistic.

Can the RAF survive till 2022 with 5 Tonka and 5 Tiffy front line squadrons ? I doubt it.

[swingy]

Malcolm. I hear you. If we are to get the F35 then as you say the time line is too long and if it is too long then making Marham the main base does not work if we retain Tornadao at Marham until 2025. In 2020 we wont have 10 front line squadrons in fact in 2015 we wont have 10 front line squdrons as it has been widely suggested that both 12 and 617 will disband at the end of their next tours in Afghanistan and that leaves 5 Typhoon and 3 Tornado squdarons. 15 will be at Marham by 2019 according to the BBC. So assuming we keep 3 ornado squdrons plus the ocu at Marham plus the servicing facility it is going to be pretty busy to the point of making rampimg up with ~F35 and its support infrastructure and manufactureres facilites etc as you described more complex that either getting t#ornado out of marham or putting F35 somewhere else. Of courese this all assumes we just dont hand training and maintenance of our F35 crews and aircraft to the Americans saving the need for an ocu etc

[P-3K]

Article in this weeks Flight carries the following:

"Hammond also revealed that the Ministry of Defence currently favours the Royal Air Force’s Marham base in Norfolk to become the main operating site for its F-35B Lightning IIs, "but that no decision has yet been made"."

Link here : http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... ys-374552/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[welshandy]

I forgot Marham & LAKENHEATH. Would their be a plan to do maintenance at the base/bases they are VERY close. It would seem a logical answer, any chance of doing maintenance of the European F-35's?

From reading this thread and the links to the local media i assume that LN is getting F35's?

[gixrgill]

I was doing a bit of research for Defence estates land, when i came accross the prospective estates plan for 2025
It showed Lossie, Coningsby and Marham as active frontline stations. From reading up on bits and pieces I see Lossie and Coningsby as typhoon bases, with Marham as F35 base. from a female perspective

[romeo bravo]

The whole problem is that none of us have the elusive crystal ball. Those of us who were around in the 80s and 90s will remember the government/MOD were going to do this and that, and some of the other; and actually did not a lot.

I remember that the local area to Cottesmore got triple glazing, waiting for a noisy jet coming in; they got the Tornado, then the Harrier and now the Army!!

No one knows what's going to happen after the next SDSR in 2015, let alone after 2020.

So lets wait and see what happens.

[Jabba]

The plan originally mooted was to have the Typhoons from Leuchars starting to move to Lossie in 2013 but there now seems to be complete silence from anyone in authority on this. I hear the army do not want Leuchars and the RAF are putting up a very good argument to keep the Typhoons there. I predict that all the Tornados will end up at Lossiemouth until their end of service. Marham will be refitted for F-35 or whatever else we buy. Leuchars and Coningsby will retain the Typhoons.

A long time ago it was officially announced that the SAR helicopters of 202 squadron would be moving to RAF Kinloss to keep the SAR assets together. A big plan announced in all the papers, they are still at Lossie, the move never happened.

[Unknown74]

Quick get Phillip Schofield to quiz Phillip Hammond.

[the concerned]

I don't understand why we would want to base the jsf up in scotland thats alot of fuel and airframe hours wasted everytime these jets want to deploy to a cv thats why i said valley or st mawgan your near the carriers plus next to the whelsh training areas so less transitting between which equals less money to spend

[markranger]

The plan originally mooted was to have the Typhoons from Leuchars starting to move to Lossie in 2013 but there now seems to be complete silence from anyone in authority on this. I hear the army do not want Leuchars and the RAF are putting up a very good argument to keep the Typhoons there. I predict that all the Tornados will end up at Lossiemouth until their end of service. Marham will be refitted for F-35 or whatever else we buy. Leuchars and Coningsby will retain the Typhoons.

A long time ago it was officially announced that the SAR helicopters of 202 squadron would be moving to RAF Kinloss to keep the SAR assets together. A big plan announced in all the papers, they are still at Lossie, the move never happened.

My thoughts are that Lossiemouth and Leuchers will end up with Typhoons and Marham f35s.
Last I heard the RAF wanted 7 typhoons sqns.Can't see you fitting them in 2 bases.
Mark.

[Velvet Glove]

Top Pilot: Air Force Should Put Brakes on All-Stealth Arsenal

By David AxeEmail Author
November 8, 2012



The latest critic of the U.S. Air Force’s ambitious — and pricey — plan for an all-stealth fighter fleet is one of the flying branch’s top stealth pilots.

Writing in the Air Force Research Institute’s Air & Space Power Journal, Lt. Col. Christopher Niemi, a former F-22 test pilot who later commanded a frontline squadron of the radar-evading jets, says the Air Force is making a big mistake by buying only the most expensive stealth fighters — namely, the F-22 and the newer F-35.

“An all-stealth Air Force fighter fleet deserves reconsideration,” Niemi asserts (.pdf). ”Stealth technology demands significant trade-offs in range, security, weapons carriage, sortie generation, and adaptability. Stealth provides no advantage in conflicts such as those in Afghanistan or Iraq (since 2003), and (despite its obvious utility) it cannot guarantee success in future struggles with a near-peer adversary.”

“Most importantly,” Niemi adds, “the cost of F-22s and F-35s threatens to reduce the size of the Air Force’s fielded fighter fleet to dangerously small numbers, particularly in the current fiscal environment.”

The test-pilot-turned-commander is in good company. Three years ago Gen. Harry Wyatt, head of the Air National Guard, said the Pentagon should consider acquiring cheap, upgraded versions of older warplanes to keep his squadrons at full strength.

More recently, the editors of the influential trade publication Aviation Week, a once-stalwart defender of the F-22 and F-35 programs, reversed its pro-stealth position and called on the Pentagon to consider new purchases of old-model planes. “There must be a hedge against further problems.”

But for a decade it’s been the Air Force’s policy not to purchase any non-stealth fighters. The flying branch has bought only so-called “fifth-generation” F-22s and F-35s from Lockheed Martin even as the cost of those fighters steadily increased.

The 187 F-22s cost $377 million a pop. The total bill to develop, buy and operate nearly 2,500 F-35s — 1,763 of them for the Air Force — tops $1 trillion. Rising costs have driven down the total number of jets the flying branch can afford.

The result: fewer than planned new planes to replace the fleet of nearly 2,000 fourth-generation F-15s, F-16s and A-10s acquired in the 1970s, ’80s and ’90s. As a consequence older planes have had to stay in service far longer than intended. “The Air Force’s fighter fleet is wearing out,” Niemi warns.

But even the inexorable aging of the current arsenal hasn’t swayed the Air Force brass from its all-stealth position, even though upgraded F-15s and F-16s are still available from Boeing and Lockheed, respectively. Senior officials have “viewed additional fourth-generation fighter acquisition as a direct threat to fifth-generation fighter programs,” Niemi explains.

Air Force leadership maintains the older designs simply won’t be effective much longer. “Sinking money into brand-new fourth generation [fighters] is just dumb,” said Gen. Mike Hostage, the head of Air Combat Command.

Niemi disagrees. He praises the F-22 for its high speed, altitude and stealth but points out its lack of range and ground-attack prowess compared to older jets. “The F-22 remains inferior to older fourth-generation fighters in some scenarios.”

The F-35 is a better bomber than the F-22 but is still too expensive to fully replace older planes, Niemi adds. The flying branch “could have acquired additional fourth-generation aircraft to mitigate developmental risk with the F-35.”

It’s not too late to reverse the policy, the former F-22 squadron command argues. “The Air Force should reconsider its long-standing position that fifth-generation fighters are the only option.”

When a man who spent his career flying stealth fighters begins lobbying against them, maybe it’s time the Air Force pays attention.


Source: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11 ... lth-force/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ukmil]

Malcolm I see your point about two bases causing problems for maintenave but is that not exactly what we have now with the Tornados and Typhoons?

No

Tornado has been in service since the early 80's, and based in it's time at Larbruch, Bruggen, Cottesmore, Honington, Marham and Lossie. If they don't kow how to fix them now they never will.

The first RAF squadron of Typhoons was stood up at Warton in mid 2003, so it was close to the people who built them, and had the best chance of fixing them quickly.
17 Sqn first flights were in early 2004. 15 months later in April 2005 17Sqn moved to CGY and 29 (the OCU) stood up in May 2005. This co-incided with BAE opening their National Typhoon Support Centre at Coningsby, from where all RAF Typhoon support and maintainace is managed. There is also the Typhoon Training Facility building, and the TMF. These are all large new buildings on camp at CGY. The squadrons on the other hand get to use old hangars and HAS sites which haven't changed much since the days of the Phantoms. Infact, the hangars probably havent changed much since World War Two. Next time you're at CGY, visit the BBMF. Their hangar is virtually identical in design to the facilities available to 17 and 29 Sqn.

3Sqn formed in March 2006, and 11 Sqn in March 2007. Southern QRA was finally taken over by Typhoon in June 2007. Nothing much then happened for 2 years whilst they ironed out all (well most) of the problems with the Tranche 1 jets. Then in 2009 Tranche two jets started to arrive, bringing with them a whole bunch of new problems to sort out. Four jets were swiftly packed off out of the way to speak penguin in Sept 2009. 6 Sqn started training up (on Trance 2 jets) in early 2010 before officialy moving to Leuchars in Sept 2010. Virtually all the Tranche 2 jets have now been delivered, but there is still only one squadron flying them. I wonder why 6Sqn probably has more aircraft on strength than the OCU. Again I wonder why. Might it be to do with difficulties servicing Tranche 2 jets away from the BAE support ar CGY?

That's all a long winded way of saying it took from mid 2003 (first OEU) till Sept 2010 (6 Sqn at Leuchars) before the powers at be decided to risk moving Typhoons away from their primary servicing base. Thats over 7 years. And then another 2 years before enough of the Tranche 2 bugs had been ironed out tothink about a second squadron being stood up.

If that pattern follows for JSF, then there isn't any way they'll risk standing up operational squadrons away from the primary servicing facility and manufacturers support centre for at least 5 years, and probably more like 10. The press would have a field day if they found out that of the 25 odd jets allocated to our 2 front line squadrons, only half a dozen were servicable with the other robbed for spares, coz that's exactly what would happen.

If we wait for the Tornado force to be run down at Marham before we ramp up F35 there, are we not looking at an in service date with front line squadrons in about 10 or more years time? Putting that in perspective the USMC hope to have their first squadron stand up at Yuma later this year.

When do you think we'll be getting our first operational jets for an OEU/OCU? We won't be ordering them before the next election (2015). Then there will be another Strategic Defence reviw (AKA massive cuts to the military) so that'll put us into 2016. Assuming we then go ahead and order, (if we're lucky and the Yanks let us jump the queue and have a few earlier slots intended for the USMC) then the first few jets may arrive by 2018-19 to form an OEU, then a year later enough jets for an OCU(2019-2020). Initial Operational Capacity for the first front line squadron - my guess is 2022. So 6 years from now for an ISD, and 10 for an IOC - and that's being optomistic.

Can the RAF survive till 2022 with 5 Tonka and 5 Tiffy front line squadrons ? I doubt it.

Of course, everything you have 'assumed' by the events, is complete tosh