F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

[Engines]

LO,

If I might gently offer an alternative narrative for the HMDS/HUD issue.

You're quite right that the original large display system technology (projector tubes) was changed, but as far as I remember the replacement was a flat panel display system. This was enabled by rapid advances in the technology of the panels. Good job too, because the original projector system was, in the view of many on the programme, a 'dog'.

As an aside, the changes to the cockpit were also part of an effort to fix some serious issues with the original display generation architecture - the very rapid effort to solve these was led by a simply excellent Brit at Fort Worth.

The original adoption of the HMDS was not, as far as I remember, driven by the size of the large cockpit displays. It was a combination of explicit requirements within the JORD, plus a desire to take advantage of a series of technology demonstration programmes that had been run by the USAF and the USN. One of the main aims was to allow the pilot to be 'heads out' as far as possible.

The HMDS is a key part of a determined and structured effort to get a very large amount of information effectively presented to the single pilot. That meant a fairly fundamental review of the balance of information presented between the HMDS and the main cockpit displays.

BAe people played a large part in that, with their recent experience on Typhoon proving very useful, once the US security 'goons' had been put back in their box. People with Sea Harrier experience also played a part, as they were used to using clever ways of getting lots of info to a busy pilot. Overall cockpit design also included a lot of very good Brit input, by the way, as did the 'Pilot Flight Equipment' (PFE) adopted for the jet.

I expect a chorus of 'but the Typhoon cockpit is rubbish' comments - I can only report what I saw happening.

Management of the HMDS will need to be different from that used for legacy helmets. They have been managed for many years as items of 'aircrew equipment', and maintained by personnel in Survival (or Safety) Equipment (SE) sections. A pool of items have been held by stations, and smaller pools by squadrons at sea. They have been set up for individual aircrew, but can easily be adjusted if required. They've also been relatively low tech affairs, and the skill sets of SE personnel haven't included maintenance of complex avionics.

The advent of NVGs placed a serious strain on that concept, and in my view (my view only) the HMDS will need to be handled by the main avionics support system, with the SE handling only fit and issue. The helmet and the display systems will probably be handled as sub assemblies, possibly with a need for harmonisation when assembled . Again my view, but I think a pool of items (helmets and display assemblies) will be used. Yes, they'd better not get soaked, but then that applies to just about every item of electronic equipment on a carrier, including the jets. The helmets are required to be able to resist being sprayed with water. You don't see many water sprinkler systems in an avionics shop, by the way.

Hope this helps, best regards as ever to those polishing the visors,

Engines