US Marine Corps begins to receive a decked version of the F-35C fighter

US Marine Corps begins to receive a decked version of the F-35C fighter

First Fighter US-F-35C


The US Marine Corps, for which it developed its own version of the fifth generation fighter F-35B, began to receive the deck version of the fighter - F-35C. As transmits "Warspot" citing the portal businessinsider.com, the first F-35C carrier-based fighter was launched by the VMFA-314 squadron.

Reportedly, the first F-35C received the Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 314 (Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA) 314), better known as the Black Knights ("Black Knights"). In service with the squadron until recently, F / A-18 Hornet fighters were located. The transition of the squadron to new aircraft was announced last summer, however, they began to receive the F-35C only now. The new F-35C Marine Corps will be based at Miramar California Airfield.

Previously, F-35C fighters were adopted by the U.S. Navy.

Recall that the US Marine Corps already has F-35B fighters in service, a modification specially designed for the KMP with short take-off and vertical landing. Version F-35C is a deck modification of the fighter, designed for takeoff using a catapult and landing using an aerofinisher. Compared to the classic F-35A, the F-35C has a larger wing area, an increased tail area, control surfaces and fuel tanks. It can carry a larger payload.
Photos used:
businessinsider.com
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

52 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. rocket757 24 January 2020 12: 27 New
    • 8
    • 7
    +1
    It can carry a larger payload.

    A big "invisibility" NOT ???
    Everything else is logical, necessary.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. figwam 24 January 2020 13: 13 New
      • 7
      • 14
      -7
      Quote: rocket757
      A big "invisibility" NOT ???

      It has the highest price, so no one buys.
      1. rocket757 24 January 2020 13: 39 New
        • 9
        • 1
        +8
        Quote: figvam
        It has the highest price, so no one buys.

        "Thing" is special and expensive, and the service on it is a separate song.
        Then, to realize the advantages of this "pepelats" infrastructure support, reconnaissance, management, you need an expensive, complex .... it is generally very few can afford.
        In general, a high level air force can do this.
        1. figwam 24 January 2020 13: 45 New
          • 6
          • 13
          -7
          Quote: rocket757
          "Thing" is special and expensive

          Not a single country, including those participating in the F-35 program, ordered the F-35C.
          1. rocket757 24 January 2020 13: 52 New
            • 13
            • 2
            +11
            Yes, and aircraft carriers, few people have ...
          2. figwam 24 January 2020 14: 55 New
            • 4
            • 6
            -2
            Oh, how many minusers, well, write which country purchased or placed an order for the F-35C!
            1. Hog
              Hog 24 January 2020 15: 07 New
              • 6
              • 1
              +5
              Quote: figvam
              Oh, how many minusers, well, write which country purchased or placed an order for the F-35C!

              Well, the USA.
              1. figwam 24 January 2020 15: 09 New
                • 4
                • 7
                -3
                Quote: Hog
                Well, the USA.

                Brilliant ...
          3. Alexey RA 24 January 2020 18: 08 New
            • 5
            • 0
            +5
            Quote: figvam
            Not a single country, including those participating in the F-35 program, ordered the F-35C.

            And which of the countries participating in the F-35 program has ejection AB?
            In general, who in the world has combat-capable ejection AB except EMNIP, USA and France? Who needs to equip the decked air group with new catapult take-off aircraft?
            The French, as you know, own pride. So the only customer on a carrier-launched ejection aircraft can only be the United States.
            The third catapult will be China. But these guys are more likely to copy the "penguin" than to buy. smile
      2. Hog
        Hog 24 January 2020 15: 08 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: figvam
        Quote: rocket757
        A big "invisibility" NOT ???

        It has the highest price, so no one buys.

        It seems that the F-35B was the most expensive, and the C in the middle.
      3. Thunderbolt 24 January 2020 22: 05 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: figvam
        It has the highest price, so no one buys.

        The queue is generally worth it.
  2. Thrifty 24 January 2020 12: 27 New
    • 6
    • 8
    -2
    I read the moaning of a military Yankee pilot in reserve. It is very regrets that the USA F14 "Tomket" was removed. He wrote that they would not upgrade any more F35s for another 30 years and would not stand nearby. ..
    1. kjhg 24 January 2020 12: 37 New
      • 28
      • 11
      +17
      Well, that's right. Today’s Americans are stupid, as Zadornov taught us (the earth rest in peace). Their old people understand more in promising systems than current scientists and military. Here the marines instead of the well-proven F-18 Super Hornets buy the slop Fu-35S. They would have a couple of specialists with HE, then in the next century they would certainly have no equal. But, to our happiness, they have no equal even to ordinary VO specialists. Soon the dollar will collapse, and America will fall apart. lol.
      1. Thrifty 24 January 2020 12: 50 New
        • 7
        • 8
        -1
        The Yankees probably also argue that the ruble will collapse soon, and Russia will fall apart lol lol
        1. kjhg 24 January 2020 12: 53 New
          • 14
          • 6
          +8
          Lean, this comment was sarcasm over the patriots. I look, many did not understand what
          1. Thrifty 24 January 2020 12: 59 New
            • 5
            • 7
            -2
            So my comment is sarcasm too! !! lol
            1. kjhg 24 January 2020 13: 00 New
              • 8
              • 7
              +1
              So you made me fat drinks
              1. Deficiencies1980 24 January 2020 13: 21 New
                • 5
                • 7
                -2
                We understood you. And here you are not his sarcasm.
        2. vadsonen 24 January 2020 15: 37 New
          • 3
          • 3
          0
          The Yankees probably also argue that the ruble will collapse soon, and Russia will fall apart

          The ruble collapsed. And the USSR did fall apart. But the pyndocs can’t rot in any way.
    2. Alexey RA 24 January 2020 13: 02 New
      • 4
      • 3
      +1
      Quote: Thrifty
      I read the moaning of a military Yankee pilot in reserve. It is very regrets that the USA F14 "Tomket" was removed. He wrote that they would not upgrade any more F35s for another 30 years and would not stand nearby. ..

      Hehe hehe .. exactly the same moaning goes about the "warthog", who also want to replace with the F-35. smile

      In short, The horse will still show itself!. ©
    3. knn54 24 January 2020 13: 16 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      This version of the F-35 for UDC ("vertical"), and the deck F-14 - for the Navy, aircraft carriers
      1. rudolff 24 January 2020 13: 30 New
        • 9
        • 2
        +7
        No, the vertical is the F-35B. He is also for UDC. The article is about the F-35C, this is a purely deck for aircraft carriers.
        1. Alexey RA 24 January 2020 17: 13 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: rudolff
          No, the vertical is the F-35B. He is also for UDC. The article is about the F-35C, this is a purely deck for aircraft carriers.

          In short, the KMP has nothing to change: just as they had parallel KVVP (“Harirers”) and ordinary decks (“Phantoms”, “Intruders”, “Corsairs” and “Hornets”), the KVVP and the usual deck version will remain parallel the penguin.
          Given the fact that the KMP squadrons are part of the air wings of conventional ABs (now, however, the number of "decked marines" has been reduced to one) - nothing surprising.
          1. rudolff 24 January 2020 18: 07 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Yes, that was to be expected.
          2. bars1 24 January 2020 19: 21 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            A-7 Korsar was not in service with the ILC. They firmly attached to A-4 and used it to the last.
  3. nm76 24 January 2020 12: 29 New
    • 18
    • 15
    +3
    Now someone will say that all this garbage is complete, the fighter can be seen by our over-the-horizon radars ...
    And in general, all carriers of carrier-based aviation cannot be bonded from Zircon ...
    Therefore, this is the waste of American taxpayer money))
    1. Arg107 24 January 2020 12: 37 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      Shchas would worry about the money of American taxpayers
      1. nm76 24 January 2020 12: 49 New
        • 9
        • 13
        -4
        Yes, you probably saw few survivors here)))
    2. Prjanik 24 January 2020 13: 04 New
      • 4
      • 5
      -1
      Well, you’re worried about Zircons, why don’t you outstrip someone and for the fu-35. smile
    3. Ka-52 24 January 2020 13: 41 New
      • 5
      • 6
      -1
      Now someone will say that all this garbage is complete, the fighter can be seen by our over-the-horizon radars

      not necessarily beyond the horizon. It is visible with ordinary radars as part of aircraft avionics. And the "Bumblebee" Liski. Always there is only the question of distance.
      Therefore, this is the waste of American taxpayer money))

      why so? It is quite capable of bombing the infrastructure and focal defense facilities of banana republics. Because its costs will be taken away yes
  4. businessv 24 January 2020 12: 43 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Interesting, thanks for the info!
  5. Deficiencies1980 24 January 2020 13: 16 New
    • 6
    • 10
    -4
    Zen strange to me foaming Urta argued that the US Army did not buy £ 35.i they sell them only siugrozoy every US prisreshnikam.
  6. voyaka uh 24 January 2020 14: 35 New
    • 6
    • 3
    +3
    The plumage of the F-35S and F-35A is the same. Only the wings of the "C" are longer,
    and they are folding. And the chassis is reinforced.
    1. rich 24 January 2020 15: 07 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Greetings, Alex.
      There are still not big differences.
      The normal take-off weight is:
      modifications “A” - 24 kg;
      “B” - 22240 kg;
      “C” - 25 kg.
      The maximum allowable take-off weight is:
      for “A” - 29100 kg, for “B” - 27 215 kg, for “C” - 30 320 kg.
    2. Tuzik 24 January 2020 22: 47 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      The plumage of the F-35S and F-35A is the same. Only the wings of the "C" are longer,
      and they are folding. And the chassis is reinforced.

      And how do elongated wings affect the EPR? Five to ten percent add?
      1. voyaka uh 24 January 2020 22: 54 New
        • 4
        • 3
        +1
        I don’t think ... EPR is more affected by all sorts of right angles or roundness than dimensions.
        In the F-35 and F-22, the tail is illuminated on meter radars.
        Fatal flaw. Therefore, the B-2 and the future B-21 are tailless bombers - despite
        huge sizes, more stealth in all wavelengths than the small F-35 fighter.
        1. Tuzik 24 January 2020 23: 10 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          As always, I hoped that the warrior had already read this data somewhere. )
          If the ESR is measured in square meters, then the dimensions of the aircraft will certainly affect the parameter. And why did they finish it for so long? It seems to me that this particular problem has been optimized for a long time. By the way, how much did they increase this range?
          1. voyaka uh 24 January 2020 23: 42 New
            • 3
            • 2
            +1
            It was dopped for a long time due to several problems:
            1) short hook - insufficiently reliable engagement with the aerofinisher.
            2) a sharp start from the catapult when the plane is empty.
            As a result: they changed the attachment of the hook to the fuselage, strengthened the chassis,
            added software for a smooth start.
            And finally, the sailors gave the go-ahead to combat readiness.
            Now formed two training squadrons of F-35S on two aircraft carriers.
            ---
            Long wing - to reduce speed before landing, make it smoother,
            not for flight range.
            1. Tuzik 24 January 2020 23: 56 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              It always seemed to me that the greater the lifting force, the greater the range, all other things being equal. U-2 surfaced in my head with long wings and long range.
              1. voyaka uh 25 January 2020 00: 08 New
                • 3
                • 3
                0
                It seems to be so ... recourse but options "A" and "C" are everywhere indicated
                the same combat radius of 1200 km, while the F-35V has less - 950.
                The marine version "C" has less load on the fuselage: 7.5 g
                versus 9 g for the rest.
  7. Avior 24 January 2020 16: 40 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    why do the marines need a decked version? shouldn't they take off from the deck?
    Well, one could understand the F-18 for unification with the fleet.
    But in the case of the F-35, there is the F-35A
    1. Alexey RA 24 January 2020 18: 01 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Avior
      why do the marines need a decked version? shouldn't they take off from the deck?

      A must - they have been flying from the decks of conventional ABs since WWII.
      Now, however, they have only one squadron on AB.
      Quote: Avior
      But in the case of the F-35, there is the F-35A

      Air Force aircraft in the marines? Sacrilege! laughing
      Marines and the navy are part of the US Navy, so navy models always take precedence.
      1. Avior 24 January 2020 18: 23 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        F-35 in itself is unification.
        A must - they have been flying from the decks of conventional ABs since WWII.
        Now, however, they have only one squadron on AB.

        that is, sits constantly or instead of the usual naval?
        what's the point then? and replace how? came marinas and kicked out the navi from the aircraft carrier? smile
        found an old article on this topic
        - Three fleet aviation squadrons transferred to the MP aviation for permanent deployment (on a rotational basis) in the western part of the Pacific Ocean should be armed with F-35C aircraft (this will facilitate the rotation with crew training according to the usual Navy program);

        http://pentagonus.ru/publ/29-1-0-396
        that is, the preparation of the F35S pilots differs from the F35A, therefore, given the fact that they are going to use the rotations, they use the F35s to unify the training of pilots.
        then the meaning is clear ..
    2. 3danimal 27 January 2020 22: 44 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      I agree strange. From ships, they can only use F-35B. Option A- has better characteristics, more massive, simple and (due to this) cheap.
      Unless, marines suggest the possibility of landing on aircraft carriers, based on military doctrine.
      1. Avior 28 January 2020 00: 35 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        judging by what I read later, the explanation for this may be that the Marpech pilots are trained with the naval in the fleet system.
        and if you take the F35a marines as a cheaper option, you will have to create a separate training system for it - simulators, training centers, plus a supply system and so on.
        felt that it was more profitable for the marines to buy the more expensive F-35S in addition to the F-35V
        besides unification on pilots and equipment, and it is cheaper in general.
        Actually, it used to be similar - the marines had F-18s like the naval ones, and not F-16s like the regular Air Force
        1. Liam 28 January 2020 01: 57 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          KMP-expeditionary forces. An aircraft carrier is a means of transporting aircraft in this case. Therefore, you need a deck and not a "land plane.
          1. 3danimal 28 January 2020 02: 16 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            The marinas have UDC, from the deck of which it is possible to use F-35B. Abior, Avior proposed an explanation that fits well with the logic of aircraft selection.
            1. Avior 28 January 2020 02: 32 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              in principle, for amphibious operations, they can really include F-18 squadrons of marines in aircraft carriers, but not as transport carriers, but for combat use from the side, but if not for the factors that I wrote about above, we could have done without of this.
              Nevertheless, the main reason is the complete unification of technology, which allows including rotation of pilots.
              and using aircraft carriers simply as transports is wasteful, all the same anyway, even if you just have to take off an aircraft pilot from a carrier just to fly to a land aerodrome, he still has to go through the entire course of flying from the deck. as for just a transport option, a very expensive pleasure.
              It is easier to provide a flight from afar with refueling.
              but this applies to a bunch of f-18 + Harrier, in which the combat capabilities of Harrier were significantly lower than the F-18
              But the new F-35B team is quite capable of fulfilling most of the tasks of the F-35C, and the need to deploy F-35C squadrons of marines on aircraft carriers raises great doubts. Those individual tasks that the F-35v cannot do due to the shorter range, for example, can be provided without problems by the ordinary naval F-35S
              hi
              1. Liam 28 January 2020 03: 26 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                Quote: Avior
                unification of technology, which allows including rotation of pilots.

                What is it like? Pilots of the Navy or the army go to the ILC for a week and vice versa?. In the USA they will be very surprised at such scenarios)
                Quote: Avior
                expensive pleasure.
                It’s easier to provide a flight from afar with refueling

                Have you ever wondered why, for example, tanks mainly move on autotrailers or trains? The most expensive pleasure is to spend an unlimited resource of motors, etc. on "non-combat" movements.
                Quote: Avior
                Those individual tasks that the F-35v cannot do due to the shorter range, for example, can be provided without problems by the ordinary naval F-35S

                The difference is not only the radius of action.
                The usual naval F-35S has an irreparable flaw - they do not belong to the ILC. Do you propose to deprive the ILC of a large part of its aviation and reduce its "autonomy"? In the USA they will be surprised again)
          2. Avior 28 January 2020 02: 25 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            And that too.
            But direct assault support for marinas is usually provided by Harriers with UDC, and common with aircraft carriers, which could theoretically be handled by naval pilots, and then the F-18 marines can simply fly to captured coastal airfields, the Americans have high-level refueling in the air, and there is no direct need to transport aircraft on an aircraft carrier ..
            Again, for pilots navi and marinas, rotation of the flight crew is characteristic and the unification of technology allows this to be done.
        2. 3danimal 28 January 2020 02: 20 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          It looks quite logical. IMHO, option A, inherited by the Air Force, is optimal, but there may be arguments that outweigh this.
  8. Kerensky 24 January 2020 19: 07 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    And how is this deck connected to the main tasks of the ILC?