Some Marines are the last to know: the F-35 isn't for austere basing

Here is a good propaganda piece.

It is about the troubled F-35 program.

Specifically about the F-35B in USMC work.

It ignores some critical history. For example, the reason to have a STOVL, tac-air jet is a nonsense.

But let us move on.

F-35 KPIs for the F-35B in USMC trim expect 4 sorties per day.

How is an "austere" or "remote" base going to support these aircraft?

You change the definition of "austere" and "remote".

It is all a sham.

Find a remote airfield that you have to get 7 tons of gas to, as a logistics exercise, for every F-35 sortie. Well actually a little less than 7 tons these days.

Lets just say 7 tons per sortie. Four times a day, for 28 tons...for one jet.

One benefit is that the F-35 is yet to meet KPIs, it may only end up with 1 sortie per day.

Or point-5.

Hard to say. If we believe the propaganda...

6 jets at a remote site is a logistics footprint for fuel-only, per-day, at: 168 tons. You will break all your vertical logistical lift within a few days trying to do that one. Again, for 6 jets of dubious worth in supporting Marines on the ground.

Note that things like HIMARS and other precision artillery and mortars don't collect flight pay and are probably a better go.

Permissive air environment? Yankee's and Zulu's.

Non-permissive air? The F-35 gets shot down.

The CONOPS the USMC-air leadership cabal is pushing are nonsense. It is an exercise of self-before-service and what one can do for their post-retirement job prospects.

H/T- Solomon

.