Why not use the F-22 to replace the F/A-18 and F-14?

"Woody Beal" wrote in message
...
Concur that it does not yield a concrete conclusion, but it does yield a
tendency based on several possible single point failures. If lift fan
doors
don't open, if lift rotor fails to engage properly, if engine fails during
transition to STOVL life gets tough at a very critical and low altitude
moment. These problems (though not identical) are similar to those
experienced in the AV-8B.

Actually, conversion is done at an altitude and speed that, if it fails,
you're still wing-borne. The airplane fails back to a regular engine. Just
pop the TVL forward and continue to fly conventional. THe diciest moment
for the lift-fan system is during clutch engagement, but you don't perform
that in a high-exposure kind of situation. Doors and all that aren't really
a problem, cuz you'll know there's a problem before you expose yourself.

Mechanical failures in the STOVL regime are unforgiving because of their
low
altitude locale.

Yup. But a lot of stuff in the engine/lift-fan system is monitored. Health
checking on the B model propulsion system is way beyond anything that has
been put into service to-date. THe problem here is that health monitoring
tech is really only good for known failure modes. It's the "gee we never
considered that" kind of problems that can get scary. Infant mortality. WIth
the lift-fan system, you'll typically know if you have a mechanical problem
before you go jet-borne. Once transitioning to jet-borne, you just gotta
watch all the critical temps (turbine inlet, exhaust gas....yadda yadda).

Also, much of the unforgiving nature of jet-borne flight has been addressed
through the inceptor mapping. Switching from rates to attitude commands
makes overcontrol type slip-ups much less likely. The F-35B will be much
more forgiving to exhausted pilots.

makes the jet more stable. The complexity of the F-35B when compared to
the
C or the A only gives it an additional option for landing--a complexity
with
several possible single point failures in a critical flight regime.

Keep in mind that the operational environment envisioned for the F-35B is
much more varied than what has been done with the Harrier. So, exposure to
hazards (thinking mainly weather) will be much greater.


Pete
(worked on the X-35B for a couple of years designing the yaw-axis control
laws).

guy- And how many layers of CAP are they going to have to get through before
they'd
even have the chance? That is, assuming we haven't destroyed every runway and
taxiway in the country first with cruise missiles or other weapons, and it's
pretty damned unlikely that we'd risk a B-1 or B-2 by day before we had air
supremacy. BRBR

Why don't you re-read your original post...something about how a B-1 or B-2
could do the job of a whole airwing of F-18s...or some such whizbangery.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

Pechs1 wrote:

guy- And how many layers of CAP are they going to have to get through before
they'd
even have the chance? That is, assuming we haven't destroyed every runway and
taxiway in the country first with cruise missiles or other weapons, and it's
pretty damned unlikely that we'd risk a B-1 or B-2 by day before we had air
supremacy. BRBR

Why don't you re-read your original post...something about how a B-1 or B-2
could do the job of a whole airwing of F-18s...or some such whizbangery.

First it wasn't my original post, and second, I was replying to your comment
below:

ice- (A trivia question -- how many CV sorties does it take to cover the
same number of DMPIs that ONE B-1 with a full load of SDBs can cover?
BRBR

One F-18, after the B-1 gets bagged....

I also pointed out that so far its been the f-18s that have gotten bagged.

Is there anywhere there where I intimate that a B-1 could do its (conventional,
limited war) job without air superiority/supremacy?

Guy

Which airfield? Sorry, I don't have the reference here at home. Its the
same place where the Army POWs were transferred to the KC-130 on TV.

"Guy Alcala" wrote in message
.. .
Frijoles wrote:

snip

On the warfighting side, if fighting an air war was simply a matter of
stacking jets somewhere, we could cover the entire battlespace with B-1s
or
B-2s. (A trivia question -- how many CV sorties does it take to cover
the
same number of DMPIs that ONE B-1 with a full load of SDBs can cover?)
And
if tanking isn't an "issue," what's up with all the bragging about what
a
great tanking capability the Navy's brand new STRIKE aircraft
provides...?

Especially since they had to send four more F-18Es to the theater during
the
war, to boost the navy's own tanker assets (and of course, taking away
airbridge
tanker assets from other jobs, to get them there).

45% of Marine CAS sorties during OIF were flown by Harriers -- that's
hardly
a trivial number, particularly if you're on the ground getting shot at,
or
facing the prospect of having to deal with massed armor and indirect
fires.
IIRC, about 1500 strike sorties were flown off L-class ships,
principally
Bataan and BHR which each operated 20-25 jets. A couple hundred were
flown
from a "recovered" airfield within 10 minutes of Baghdad.

snip

Would you happen to know which airfield? I've found one source that says
it was
"60nm south" of Baghdad, but no other details. Looking at a map,


http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middl...print_2003.jpg

Shayka Mazhar and Al Iskandariyah New appear to be too close to the city,
Salman
Pak East is too close and too far east (although the Marines did go by
there
IIRR). An Najaf New is due south of Baghdad and about the right distance,
but
AFAIK the marines weren't near there in any strength, having crossed the
Euphrates at Nasiriya before heading up between the rivers towards
Baghdad. The
Shaykh Hantush Highway Strip seems to be the closest match for distance
and
direction, but the marines also went through al Kut, which puts An
Numaniyah (I
know they took that) or Al Jarrah in the picture (although they're more SE
than
S), and possibly the fields south and/or east of Al Kut, altough they're a
bit
far and definitely southeast.

Guy

Frijoles wrote:

Which airfield? Sorry, I don't have the reference here at home. Its the
same place where the Army POWs were transferred to the KC-130 on TV.

Thanks. I think that was Tallil down near Nasiriyah, which seems a bit far from
Baghdad (a lot more than 60 nm), but I know there was a big hospital set up there,
as well as a FOB for A-10s.

Guy

Pooh Bear wrote in message ...
running with scissors wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote in message ...

Actually - you succeeded in diverting my attention from what I consider to be one of the more
intruiging aspects of this crash - notably a suggested compressor stall.


Graham

nope no comressor stall.

according to tarver, airbus's crash at the end of the runway because
its unknown and unmapped.

Scary concept ! Is it in the annals ?


Graham

its utter ********. like any of tarvers theories.

guy- ice- (A trivia question -- how many CV sorties does it take to cover
the
same number of DMPIs that ONE B-1 with a full load of SDBs can cover?
BRBR

I'm not 'ice', guess you aren't either..gotta love the ng....
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

Pechs1 wrote:

guy- ice- (A trivia question -- how many CV sorties does it take to cover
the
same number of DMPIs that ONE B-1 with a full load of SDBs can cover?
BRBR

I'm not 'ice', guess you aren't either..gotta love the ng....

I know you're not 'ice'. He posed the above question, you then replied "One F-18,
after the B-1 gets bagged....", and I replied to you "Don't see why . . . " etc..
Are we all clear now, about who was saying what to whom? ;-)

Guy

You're correct that the A-10 FOB was "near Nasiryah" -- but that was well
south of the location that the Marine Corps used. The Marine Corps wanted
something further north to support possible operations to the north (and
well north) of Baghdad.

"Guy Alcala" wrote in message
.. .
Frijoles wrote:

Which airfield? Sorry, I don't have the reference here at home. Its
the
same place where the Army POWs were transferred to the KC-130 on TV.

Thanks. I think that was Tallil down near Nasiriyah, which seems a bit
far from
Baghdad (a lot more than 60 nm), but I know there was a big hospital set
up there,
as well as a FOB for A-10s.

Guy

Frijoles wrote:

You're correct that the A-10 FOB was "near Nasiryah" -- but that was well
south of the location that the Marine Corps used.

That's what I thought. I finally found a news story that ID'ed the airfield
they were flown to by CH-46 as Numaniyah.

The Marine Corps wanted
something further north to support possible operations to the north (and
well north) of Baghdad.

Just found a news story that confirmed use of Numaniyah as a Harrier FARP:

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn20...F?opendocument

Guy