F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

[ORAC]

........

• For the F-35A, the airspeed at which the weapons bay doors can be open in flight (550 knots or 1.2 Mach) is less than the maximum aircraft speed allowable (700 knots or 1.6 Mach). Such a restriction will limit tactics to employment of weapons at lower speeds and may create advantages for threat aircraft being pursued by the F-35A.
  
• For the F-35A, the airspeed at which countermeasures can be used is also less than the maximum speed allowable, again restricting tactical options in scenarios where F-35A pilots are conducting defensive manoeuvres.............

In addition to the mission systems deficiencies cited above, the Block 2B fleet aircraft are restricted by fuel system deficiencies:

• All variants of the fleet Block 2B aircraft are restricted from exceeding 3 gs in symmetric maneuvers when fully fueled in order to avoid exceeding the allowable pressure in the siphon fuel tanks. The allowable g increases as fuel is consumed. The program has developed and tested a hardware correction to the problem for the F-35B; corrections for the F-35A and F-35C are still in work.

.............

I have concerns about weight, when combining the following.

.....The program completed the final weight assessment of the F-35B air vehicle for contract specification compliance in May 2015 with the weighing of BF-44, a Lot 7 production aircraft. Actual empty aircraft weight was 32,442 pounds, only 135 pounds below the planned not-to-exceed weight of 32,577 pounds and 307 pounds (less than 1 percent) below the objective vertical lift bring-back not-to-exceed weight of 32,749 pounds.

- The program will need to continue disciplined management of weight growth for the F-35B, especially in light of the small weight margin available and the likelihood of continued discovery through the remaining two years of development in SDD......................

• F-35B durability test article (BH-1) completed 11,915 EFH by August 13, 2015, which is 3,915 hours (48.9 percent) into the second lifetime. The program completed the 11,000 hour data review on August 5, 2015.

- Two main wing carry-through bulkheads, FS496 and FS472, are no longer considered production-representative due to the extensive existing repairs. The program plans to continue durability testing, repairing the bulkheads as necessary, through the second lifetime (i.e., 8,001 through 16,000 EFH) which is projected to be complete in mid-2016.

- Prior to CY15, testing was halted on September 29, 2013, at 9,056 EFH, when the FS496 bulkhead severed, transferred loads to, and caused cracking in the adjacent three bulkheads (FS518, FS472, and FS450). The repairs and an adequacy review were completed on December 17, 2014, when the program determined that the test article could continue testing. Testing restarted on January 19, 2015, after a 16-month delay.

- The program determined that several of the cracks discovered from the September 2013 pause at 9,056 EFH were initiated at etch pits. These etch pits are created by the etching process required prior to anodizing the surface of the structural components; anodizing is required for corrosion protection. Since the cracks were not expected, the program determined that the etch pits were more detrimental to fatigue life than the original material design suggested. The program is currently developing an analysis path forward to determine the effect on the overall fatigue life.

- Discoveries requiring a pause in testing during CY15 include:

• Cracking in the left- and right-hand side aft boom closeout frames, which are critical structural portions at the very aft of the airframe on each side of the engine nozzle, at 9,080 EFH. The cracks were not predicted by modeling and required a three-week pause in testing for repair, which consisted of a doubler (i.e., additional supporting element) as an interim fix to allow testing to continue. Designs for retrofitting and cut-in for production are under development.
  
• Damage to a significant number of Electro-Hydraulic Actuator System (EHAS) fasteners and grommets at 9,333 EFH. The EHAS drives the aircraft control surfaces based on the direction and demand input by the pilot through the control stick.
  
• Inspections in April 2015 revealed that cracks at four previously-identified web fastener holes near the trunnion lug of the FS496 bulkhead, a component integral to the bulkhead that supports the attachment of the main landing gear to the airframe, had grown larger. FS496 was previously identified as a life-limited part and will be modified as part of the life-limited modification plans for production aircraft in Lots 1 through 8, and a new production design cut into Lot 9 and later lot aircraft.
  
• Failure of the left 3-Bearing Swivel Nozzle door unlock in April 2015; requiring replacement prior to restarting testing in May 2015.
  
• Crack indication found at two fastener holes on the left side keel.
  
• Crack reoccurrence at the Station 3 pylon at 10,975 EFH.
  
• Cracks on the transition duct above the vanebox, a component of the lift fan, discovered in August 2015, requiring the jacks that transmit loads to the duct to be disconnected to allow cycling of the rest of the test article to continue.
  
• During the repair activity in September 2015, a crack was discovered in a stiffener on the right-hand side of the mid-fairing longhorn.

Testing has been paused since August 2015 to allow replacement and repair activities; a process estimated to take five months. Testing is planned to restart in January 2016.

Then there is the matter of suitability for sea, do the QE and PoW have suitable lockers.....

.......▪ When the aircraft is wet it is extremely slippery. The F-35 sits higher off the deck than legacy aircraft so falls off of it can cause greater injury, or at sea, can lead to a man-overboard. This is exacerbated by the plastic booties maintainers are supposed to wear when working on the aircraft to protect the LO coatings. The detachment decided, for safety reasons, to allow maintainers to work on the aircraft without wearing these booties. The program should investigate alternate footwear to continue to protect aircraft LO coatings while also ensuring the safety of maintainers........

....The Navy made several modifications to the USS Wasp in order to support F-35B operations. The deployment demonstration provided the following observations on some of these ship modifications:

▪ Naval Sea Systems Command installed a Lithium-Ion battery charging and storage facility. The F-35 relies on 270 Volts-Direct-Current and 28 Volts-Fully-Charged Lithium-Ion batteries, and other assets that will deploy onboard L-class ships are also predicted to make greater use of Lithium-Ion batteries. However, Lithium-Ion batteries can catch fire under certain circumstances, especially during charging and, due to their chemical nature, cannot be extinguished but must burn themselves out. The storage facility consisted of racks of lockers that resembled ovens, each with its own exhaust system that could flue smoke and heat from a battery undergoing “thermal runaway.” Battery charging would occur only in these lockers......