F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

[SpazSinbad]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSIzWFxznvM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApgPWpx0Msw

[tucumseh]

Today..... I confess, I can't recall the allegations mentioned. These notifications are usually sent out well in advance, inviting relevant evidence. An hour's notice ain't much!





Tuesday 12 September 2017

The Grimond Room, Portcullis House

Witnesses:

At 11.30am
· Deborah Haynes, Defence Editor, The Times
· Alexi Mostrous, Head of Investigations, The Times

At 12.15pm
· Justin Bronk, Research Fellow, RUSI

This is the first oral evidence session for the Committee’s inquiry into F-35 procurement. The Committee will focus on the F-35 joint strike fighter and, in particular, the allegations made by The Times during its investigation into the F-35 earlier this year.

[t43562]

Parliamentlive.tv - Defence Committee (http://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/63afa508-1f23-4105-971a-caa22bbc262f)

[SpazSinbad]

Difficult to see difference in initial bobble during cat stroke but reports on fix are good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09TdlKj2ti0

[ORAC]

Government of Canada: F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Aircraft with Support | The Official Home of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (http://www.dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/government-canada-fa-18ef-super-hornet-aircraft-support)

WASHINGTON, Sep. 12, 2017 - The State Department has made a determination approving a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Government of Canada of ten (10) F/A-18E Super Hornet aircraft, with F414-GE-400 engines; eight (8) F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft, with F414-GE-400 engines; eight (8) F414-GE-400 engine spares; twenty (20) AN/APG-79 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radars; twenty (20) M61A2 20MM gun systems; twenty-eight (28) AN/ALR-67(V)3 Electronic Warfare Countermeasures Receiving Sets; fifteen (15) AN/AAQ-33 Sniper Advanced Targeting Pods; twenty (20) Multifunctional Information Distribution Systems–Joint Tactical Radio System (MIDS-JTRS); thirty (30) Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems (JHMCS); twenty-eight (28) AN/ALQ-214 Integrated Countermeasures Systems; one hundred thirty (130) LAU-127E/A and or F/A Guided Missile Launchers; twenty-two (22) AN/AYK-29 Distributed Targeting System (DTS); twenty-two (22) AN/AYK-29 Distributed Targeting Processor (DTP); one hundred (100) AIM-9X-2 Sidewinder Block II Tactical Missiles; thirty (30) AIM-9X-2 Sidewinder Block II Captive Air Training Missiles (CATM); eight (8) AIM-9X-2 Sidewinder Block II Special Air Training Missiles (NATM); twenty (20) AIM-9X-2 Sidewinder Block II Tactical Guidance Units; sixteen (16) AIM-9X-2 Sidewinder Block II CATM Guidance Units. Also included in this sale are AN/AVS-9 Night Vision Goggles (NVG); AN/ALE-47 Electronic Warfare Countermeasures Systems; AN/ARC-210 Communication System; AN/APX-111 Combined Interrogator Transponder; AN/ALE-55 Towed Decoys; Joint Mission Planning System (JMPS); AN/PYQ-10C Simple Key Loader (SKL); Data Transfer Unit (DTU); Accurate Navigation (ANAV) Global Positioning System (GPS) Navigation; KIV-78 Duel Channel Encryptor, Identification Friend or Foe (IFF); CADS/PADS; Instrument Landing System (ILS); Aircraft Armament Equipment (AAE); High Speed Video Network (HSVN) Digital Video Recorder (HDVR); Launchers (LAU-115D/A, LAU-116B/A, LAU-118A); flight test services; site survey; aircraft ferry; auxiliary fuel tanks; aircraft spares; containers; storage and preservation; transportation; aircrew and maintenance training; training aids and equipment, devices and spares and repair parts; weapon system support and test equipment; technical data Engineering Change Proposals; technical publications and documentation; software; avionics software support; software development/integration; system integration and testing; U.S. Government and contractor engineering technical and logistics support; Repair of Repairable (RoR); repair and return warranties; other technical assistance and support equipment; and other related elements of logistics and program support. The estimated total case value is $5.23 billion. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency delivered the required certification notifying Congress of this possible sale on September 11, 2017.

This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security objectives of the United States by helping to improve the security of a NATO ally which has been, and continues to be, a key democratic partner of the United States in ensuring peace and stability. The acquisition of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet aircraft, associated weapons and capability will allow for greater interoperability with U.S. forces, providing benefits for training and possible future coalition operations in support of shared regional security objectives.........

[SpazSinbad]

Apparently the US Congress needs to approve the Canadian Super Hornet buy also. Anyways here is an RN CMDR describing the PaxRiver Ski Jumps etc.
"...With over 10 years of Harrier experience, Cdr Gray has conducted numerous operations from both land and sea, but only recently experienced how the F-35B performs a Ski-Jump take-off:

“With both the Sea Harrier FA2 and to a lesser extent the Harrier GR7/9/AV8B, the pilot was very much in-the-loop and had to execute near-perfect timing and control to safely execute a Ski-Jump launch. With the F-35B, the whole experience is much more controlled and predictable with the majority of the launch autonomous, allowing the pilot to focus on the mission ahead rather than being distracted by the launch.”

Each F-35 Developmental Test aircraft is able to capture a significant amount of detailed engineering information about each flight test, being equipped with flight science technologies including specially-designed landing gear to capture all necessary test data. Testing occurs daily with particular focus on aircraft configuration, weight and wind flight envelope (which is the combination of speed, altitude and angle of attack when a flying object is aerodynamically stable).... 12 Sep 2017 https://ukcarrierpower.tumblr.com/post/165259086946/the-f-35-lightning-integrated-test-force

[t43562]

Seems odd that Stryker II is supposed to be less advanced than the F-35 helmet but apparently has colour already and optical tracking that the F-35 is apparently only just getting because of accuracy (or precision?) issues.
pq5eRBCeqXM

[George K Lee]

It's the difference between starting out to invent to spec in 2001, and finding >10 years later that Big Tech is doing all the work for you. Phones in 2001 didn't have inertial reference systems.

Also, the JSF spec insisted on IR, which meant off-helmet sensors. The low-light capability of small CCDs has come a long way since then. And I believe Stryker is designed to work with a HUD, not as a substitute for HUD, so the extreme-assured-accuracy requirements can be left to something that's bolted to the airplane.

PS Did they call it Stryker because we can all count on it?

[2805662]

PS Did they call it Stryker because we can all count on it?

I guess "Ted" was already taken?

[SpazSinbad]

Some changes to F-35 Oxygen Mask and Survival Gear Reduction in Weight for PEs.

Pilot Breathing Issues Prompt Changes To F-35 Mask, Vest | AFA National Convention content from Aviation Week (http://aviationweek.com/afa-national-convention/pilot-breathing-issues-prompt-changes-f-35-mask-vest)

[ORAC]

Chickens starting to come home to roost - both for beginning series production before completing testing , which they were repeatedly warned against; and because of the escalating program cost.

It should be pointed out that the Block 2B software is that installed on all USMC F-35Bs delivered so far, declared as IOC, and operationally deployed - and which is now proposed will never be upgraded to what is considered the basic operational standard......

US considers non-combat-rated subset of F-35 fleet (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/us-considers-non-combat-rated-subset-of-f-35-fleet-441248/)

Scores of US-owned Lockheed Martin F-35s would remain in the fleet with a software operating system rated below combat-grade under one of several cost-saving proposals under review by the Joint Programme Office.

Scores of US-owned Lockheed Martin F-35s would remain in the fleet with a software operating system rated below combat-grade under one of several cost-saving proposals under review by the Joint Programme Office.

Delays during the development stage caused Lockheed to deliver more than 108 aircraft with Block 2B software. Each fighter requires 150-160 modifications to be raised to the combat-rated Block 3 standard, says Vice Adm Matt Winter, the F-35’s programme executive. The looming modification bills are threatening to suck resources from a looming production ramp-up with more than 900 aircraft projected for delivery over the next five years, Winter says. “We’re looking at solution spaces to give our warfighters options,” Winter says.

One of those options is to keep a subset of the F-35 fleet at the Block 2B software standard. It would follow a practice used on the Lockheed F-22 programme, which has about 30 fighters maintained at Block 20 for training missions and about 150 fighters using the go-to-war Block 30/35 standard.

Safety Experts: Some F-35 Ejections Pose ‘Serious’ Death Risk (http://www.rollcall.com/news//safety-experts-some-f-35-ejections-pose-serious-death-risk/)

[Rhino power]

“We’re looking at solution spaces to give our warfighters options,” Winter says.

Why can't these people just speak plain English, instead of this meaningless, management-speak drivel?

-RP

[tucumseh]

"Let me take you to the empty space, on my fire engine". (R Erickson / T Hall) :\

[SpazSinbad]

LM F-35 GM says in the video that in 'BEAST' mode the F-35 carries 22,000 pounds of ordnance with 18,000 pounds of that external (see graphic screenshot).

Lockheed Martin's Babione Shares F-35 Lightning II Fighter Update at ASC17 Defense & Aerospace Report 19 Sep 2017

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQRmILCmufc

[SpazSinbad]

Perhaps Babione needs one of these for hyperventilation issues but hey I digress.

Air Force Tests New System to Monitor for Hypoxia Problems 18 Sep 2017
"...Cobham’s system has inhalation and exhalation monitors that fit in a flight vest pocket. The inhalation monitor is designed to measure oxygen pressure, temperature, pressure within the breathing hose, humidity and other factors. The exhalation monitor checks oxygen pressure, expired carbon dioxide, and pressure within the mask, among other variables...." https://www.defensetech.org/2017/09/18/air-force-tests-new-system-monitor-hypoxia-problems/

[George K Lee]

Chickens starting to come home to roost

Indeed. Clucking hell!

I recall, although I don't remember exactly where, that there were some warnings a couple of years back that the early-standard jets might get left behind. It may have been when Bogdan warned that the business of bringing multiple standards of airplanes up to a common new standard, while incorporating fixes coming out of tests, with the whole process rolling forward so that the depot-upgraded airplanes were the same as new-production jets, was going to be... interesting.

But the logic of the depot is merciless. If I'm running the depot and there's a backlog of airplanes waiting to be inducted, the jets that need least labour and fewest parts come to the front of the line. The ones that need a lot of both may sit in backlog for a long time as new arrivals turn up, like fat poor guys in line at a posh nightspot.

[George K Lee]

LM F-35 GM says in the video that in 'BEAST' mode the F-35 carries 22,000 pounds of ordnance with 18,000 pounds of that external.

With a radius of action denominated in feet, I should think. Sanitary dihydrogen monoxide auto-ingestion in action.

[SpazSinbad]

F-35B UKers do stuff in sims with others:

F-35 pilots from across the UK and Europe begin coalition interoperability trials 12 Sep 2017
"For the first time, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force pilots have teamed up with fellow F-35 pilots from Italy and the Netherlands to take part in the latest in a series of F-35 interoperability trials..." F-35 pilots interoperability trials | Newsroom | BAE Systems | International (http://www.baesystems.com/en/article/f-35-pilots-from-across-the-uk-and-europe-begin-coalition-interoperability-trials)

[Not_a_boffin]

I recall, although I don't remember exactly where, that there were some warnings a couple of years back that the early-standard jets might get left behind. It may have been when Bogdan warned that the business of bringing multiple standards of airplanes up to a common new standard, while incorporating fixes coming out of tests, with the whole process rolling forward so that the depot-upgraded airplanes were the same as new-production jets, was going to be... interesting.



It's almost as if the early F-16A/B models (that had reduced combat capability compared to the Block 15 onwards) were never upgraded to be compatible with the C/D either......

[George K Lee]

Well, none were upgraded to C/Ds - but then the C/D (unlike the F-35 Block 3F) was developed to deliver capabilities not in the original contract. Also, many Block 1 and Block 5 aircraft were upgraded to Block 10s and at least some Block 10s made it all the way to MLU, which was superior to the initial C/D.

And you might ask the Iraqis whether or not the Block 10 was a fully combat capable aircraft.

[ORAC]

Defense Bill Language Could Let F-35 off the Hook (http://www.pogo.org/straus/issues/weapons/2017/defense-bill-language-could-let-f-35-joint-strike-fighter-program-off-the-hook.html)

[glad rag]

F-35B UKers do stuff in sims with others:

F-35 pilots from across the UK and Europe begin coalition interoperability trials 12 Sep 2017


In a different headline Starbucks profits soar...

[peter we]

It's almost as if the early F-16A/B models (that had reduced combat capability compared to the Block 15 onwards) were never upgraded to be compatible with the C/D either......

Tranche 1 Eurofighter.

[George K Lee]

"No worse managed than Eurofighter" ain't exactly a high bar, Mr We.

[Not_a_boffin]

And you might ask the Iraqis whether or not the Block 10 was a fully combat capable aircraft.



Without wishing to indulge in semantics, there's a difference between the phrase "fully combat capable aircraft" and "reduced combat capability compared to the Block 15 onwards".


The potential early obsolescence / limited capability of early LRIP blocks of aircraft is not exactly a new (or unexpected) phenomenon. As others point out Eurofighter has similar issues - as had Tornado F2 or even the MDD F4B if you want to go way back.


Somewhat counter-intuitively, it would appear that far from easing upgrades, software and IT hardware technologies make them harder. Or maybe there were just proportionately bigger budgets back in the day.....

[WillowRun 6-3]

I'm tending to take Secretary Mattis's word for it, when he states that uncertainty in budgets is the biggest problem facing the Defense establishment. It is entirely, completely, a counter-factual, but if the sequester had not occurred, and if certainty in appropriations and funding had been maintained even to only a modest extent, how much of this fifth-generation drag would be vortexing off the wingtips of the program, at least that's the question some inquiring minds want to know.

[ORAC]

Germany asks for Boeing fighter data as weighs order options (http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/germany-asks-for-boeing-fighter-data-as-weighs-order-options/article_e9eb6fc5-b19f-5dad-bdb7-fd61f287a474.html)

BERLIN • Germany has asked the U.S. military for classified data on two Boeing fighter jets as it looks to replace its aging Tornado warplanes, giving a potential boost to the U.S. company locked in a trade dispute with Canada and Britain.

A letter sent by the German defense ministry's planning division, reviewed by Reuters, said it had identified Boeing's F-15 and F/A-18E/F fighters as potential candidates to replace the Tornado jets, which entered service in 1981. Both fighters are made in St. Louis. A classified briefing is expected to take place in mid-November, following a similar briefing provided by U.S. officials about the Lockheed Martin Corp. F-35 fighter jet in July.

The ministry has said it is also seeking information from European aerospace giant Airbus, which builds the Eurofighter Typhoon along with Britain's BAE Systems and Italy's Leonardo.........

[Rhino power]

Short video clip of an F-35A arriving at Eielson AFB, noteworthy is the brake chute fairing/housing between the tail fins...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ-Kxm9EUBc

-RP

[SpazSinbad]

Never seen ice meself but this info may interest others:
"... This test’s purpose has two major outcomes: certifying the Norwegian drag-chute and demonstrating that the entire fleet of F-35As are capable of landing at a runway condition reading (RCR) of 7. The RCR scale is based on how wet and dry each runway is. A RCR 23 is considered a dry runway while an RCR 5 is compared to landing on ice.

“The F-35A is currently certified to land at an RCR of 12,” said Capt. Daniel Campbell, the 354th Fighter Wing F-35 PIO director of mission support. “This test is important to the base because it will help certify the F-35A to operate at an RCR of 7. The 354th Civil Engineer Squadron and 354th Operations Support Squadron try to keep our runway at an RCR of 12 or better during the harsh winters, but often are below that. We need the lower RCR certification to ensure the F-35A can operate throughout our winters.”..." https://www.dvidshub.net/news/251623/f-35a-arrives-eielson-testing

[George K Lee]

For the last 27 years or so, anything looking like that, bolted to an LO jet, has been called an "RCS augmentor". But I guess the F-35 is so awesome that it repeals Maxwell's equations as well as Breguet's, not to mention the laws of economics.

[glad rag]

C'mon George, we ken it's optimised for frontal LO so a wee bit of silk hanging oot the back is nothing tae gae wans bloomers in a twist.....

tongue firmly in cheek..

[SpazSinbad]

The Dutchies plan to unbolt that DAG as required (only used when up norf) whilst Norskmen may have it all the time.


http://www.codeonemagazine.com/f35_article.html?item_id=138

[cyclic35]

Quote extracted from link : "She’s a masterful piece of engineering and it makes her so effortless to fly. It’s impossible not to be exhilarated every time. She’s a beast when you want her to be and tame when you need her to be. She’s beautiful."

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/f-35-jet-and-new-batch-of-uk-pilots-cleared-for-carrier-take-off-defence-minister-tells-select-committee

Are there any questions? :)

[MPN11]

Do you have a box of Kleenex?

[Always a Sapper]

Aye, quickly moving past the sales pitch and glossy catalogue pictures...

A. Does it actually, really, honestly do what it says on the tin and more importantly, everything asked for in the design spec that was on the table when we bought into the programme?

B. Taking the cost per unit into consideration, and investing the same amount into, and buying a current frame such as the F15E or F16 to get more aircraft which is the best buy for the UK?

C. 5 x F35B vs 5 x SU 27.... Who wins?


Just a few off the top of the head questions....

[BEagle]

Beautiful? Andy, have you never heard of Specsavers?

[Pure Pursuit]

Aye, quickly moving past the sales pitch and glossy catalogue pictures...

A. Does it actually, really, honestly do what it says on the tin and more importantly, everything asked for in the design spec that was on the table when we bought into the programme?

B. Taking the cost per unit into consideration, and investing the same amount into, and buying a current frame such as the F15E or F16 to get more aircraft which is the best buy for the UK?

C. 5 x F35B vs 5 x SU 27.... Who wins?


Just a few off the top of the head questions....

Sapper,

Is point C is a serious question or a waaah?!

[57mm]

Cleared for take-off:

Buried in the blurb is the interesting statement that 4 first tour pilots will train on the F35. Good to hear this, on a par with the first 4 EE Lightning first tourists. Though if it were me, I'd rather have Tiffs.....

[George K Lee]

She’s a masterful piece of engineering and it makes her so effortless to fly. It’s impossible not to be exhilarated every time. She’s a beast when you want her to be and tame when you need her to be. She’s beautiful.

So when did Barbara Cartland start writing advertising copy for LockMart?

[muppetofthenorth]

Beautiful? Andy, have you never heard of Specsavers?

Would you have rather had the -32?...

[George K Lee]

C. 5 x F35B vs 5 x SU 27.... Who wins?

It's scenario-dependent. If the F-35s detect, track, ID and get within a high Pk launch envelope before they are detected themselves, it's a bad day for the Su-27s. But if all you've got is AMRAAM, which is all you've got if you're stealthy, and even a couple of the Sus survive to the merge...

[George K Lee]

Would you have rather had the -32?...

I'd rather have had the delta F-16. And we could have had it 17 years ago.

http://www.f-16.net/g3/var/resizes/f-16-photos/album11/album28/aae.jpg?m=1371937527

[Lonewolf_50]

So why didn't you get it? Short production runs make for expensive aircraft and expensive parts support in the longer term.

[A_Van]

C. 5 x F35B vs 5 x SU 27.... Who wins?

It's scenario-dependent. If the F-35s detect, track, ID and get within a high Pk launch envelope before they are detected themselves, it's a bad day for the Su-27s. But if all you've got is AMRAAM, which is all you've got if you're stealthy, and even a couple of the Sus survive to the merge...



Right. Moreover, such questions reflect "mentality of the previous war". Or a war between undeveloped countries (in a military sense).
In a "serious" war such aircraft on both sides would be (though I wish it never happens) accompanied by and dependent on things like "your" AWACS, Rivet Joint and other e-warfare planes, plus multitude of surface radars, SAMs, etc. etc. Many of them on the Net with unclear performance (of this Net) in combat conditions.

[George K Lee]

Oh right, I have AWACS and Rivet Joint. At least I think I do. Hey, where'd they go?

http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/58878dcdf10a9a98468b9560-1190-625/the-real-purpose-behind-chinas-mysterious-j-20-combat-jet.jpg

As for the delta F-16 - we nearly did get it, but the Pooh-Bahs of Pentagon Power, back in 1990-something, had an idea worth ten of that, and we know what it was.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

https://www.dvidshub.net/video/559300/f-35-eielson-debut

F35 arrives for cold weather testing... Ok, not news.

However, around 1:25 in,one can see there's a pod on the spine of the jet I've not seen before, which appears to open and close. Anyone know what it is? I initially thought drag chute housing or something for 'icey runway tests' but then saw the shot of it 'open' in flight.

[SpazSinbad]

The F-35A drag chute is in that pod (perhaps not in this screenshot because testing the open/close function inflight I'm guessing) so the chute will be deployed upon landing at about 150 KIAS. I'll post a YouTube video soonish. AF-02 is the work horse 'orange wire' F-35A test aircraft (lots of gauges & stuff inside).

F-35A AF-02 Drag Chute Pod Testing ICY Alaska Oct 2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSXc_tecwms

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSXc_tecwms

[PPRuNeUser0211]

Spaz,

Cheers for that. Just couldn't suss out why they'd have it open seemingly in reheat!

[glad rag]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/f-35-jet-and-new-batch-of-uk-pilots-cleared-for-carrier-take-off-defence-minister-tells-select-committee

Are there any questions? :)

Exceptional progress indeed....

[glad rag]

F-35A Pilots Report Five More Hypoxia-Like Episodes | Defense content from Aviation Week (http://aviationweek.com/defense/f-35a-pilots-report-five-more-hypoxia-episodes?NL=AW-05&Issue=AW-05_20171026_AW-05_681&sfvc4enews=42&cl=article_1&utm_rid=CPEN1000001317839&utm_campaign=12278&utm_medium=email&elq2=8054cbc70c9f4d2b963dcc68b14856cd)

"“I think there might be something based on how the machine and the human are interacting that’s altering the breathing,” Bishop said."

Interesting article..

[Vendee]

Major "Taz" Amdal, project test pilot for F-35 Drag Chute Program

That's rather specialised isn't it!

[SpazSinbad]

That's rather specialised isn't it!
There is no end to the F-35 test program perfidy. First you had an UK civvie ex-UK knuck jumping off of ski ramps as lead test pilot, not to mention a Canuckian ONLY test pilot 'flying' the F-35B 'on the ground' in a cold/hot test chamber then he goes and beez the only aerobatic Parisian test pilot! What gives with this Norskman doing slippin' and a slidin' testin' for 'mericans, norf to Alaska - I'm going norf the rush is on. :} Plenty more test pilots are specialists but I'm too tired to type them all. :hmm:

[ORAC]

It’s all behind him now......

[ORAC]

A bit OTT, but expressing the view of many USMC Grunts. The links embedded in the story lead to the original article.

SNAFU!: Pentagon takes over cost savings program from Lockheed...Death spiral obviously on the horizon. (http://www.snafu-solomon.com/2017/10/pentagon-takes-over-cost-savings.html)

[[email protected]]

Is the drag chute programme a fully LGBTXi? compliant exercise in female clothing?????

[SpazSinbad]

:} I wondered when the drag queen aspect would open but as 'ORAC' said "it is behind him". :} Is that a bump on the behind or is it just glad to be there?

[Brat]

I think there might be something based on how the machine and the human are interacting that’s altering the breathing,” Bishop said."

Yes. The experience is so exhilarating it is leaving them quite breathless.

[ORAC]

New F-35 warplane costs $1 trillion to operate (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/new-f-35-warplane-costs-1-trillion-to-operate-sp6p3wdw2)

The estimated lifetime cost to operate and support the world’s most expensive warplane has risen by almost a quarter in four years, a US spending watchdog has found.

The figures on the US fleet of F-35 Lighting II, from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in the United States, were released on Thursday, barely a week after a British defence minister, giving evidence to MPs, said that she did not know the UK-specific cost for the full F-35 programme......

The GAO report, entitled F-35 aircraft sustainment, painted a picture of rising support costs and a lack of understanding within the US military of what they were paying for. It said that the US Marine Corps, which flies the F-35B — the same variant as the UK — saw the amount of money charged for support this year rise to $364 million from $293 million, largely because of contractor personnel costs. To afford the hike “the Marine Corps had to reduce its planned flying hours”, the GAO said.

The F-35 JPO wants to reduce by 30 per cent the 60-year cost of support and operation for the US’s fleet of F-35s. It was estimated to be $850 billion in 2012. However, as of 2016 the estimate had jumped by 23.9 per cent to $1.06 trillion, the GAO said. It warned of a failure by the Pentagon to set budget limits for support costs based on what the military could afford. This could affect the availability of spare parts and support to Britain’s F-35s. The US plans to buy 2,457 jets in all. Britain owns 12 and plans to buy a total of 138.

A Lockheed Martin spokeswoman said: “We are working with the JPO to understand every factor of the cost per flying hour and identify disciplined ways we can reduce the overall operations and sustainment costs as we have done on the F-35’s unit recurring flyaway cost.”.....

[George K Lee]

Report is here:

http://www.gao.gov/assets/690/687982.pdf

I'm ready to be corrected, but I don't see where these numbers include the recurring costs of Block upgrades, particularly new hardware. They certainly don't include the development and testing costs for upgrades, which are the thick end of a billion per year (so if you're assessed according to your fleet, and you are at a point where there are 1000 airplanes in service, it's still $1m/aircraft/year.

I suspect that this is one of the things crimping UK and USAF procurement and giving the USAF pain in reaching 60/year. That's the magic rate, as the average age of the fighter force is already creeping towards 30 years; because if you nominally have 1763 jets to be replaced by F-35s, 60 a year is a 30-year turnover so you can only stabilize at a 30-year average age.

[ricardian]

Problem with spares and documentation (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/10/30/f35s_grounded_by_spares_shortage/)

[glad rag]

Problem with spares and documentation (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/10/30/f35s_grounded_by_spares_shortage/)


Quote

"Navy deployments are even more difficult, since “intermediate-level” repair capabilities are needed on board ship. A lack of budget for that program, the GAO warns, leaves a $267 million shortfall between 2019 and 2023.

As was discussed by Warisboring last week, it's possible as many as 200 F-35s will remain permanently unfit for combat, because “the Pentagon would rather buy new aircraft than upgrade the ones the American people have already paid for”.

I fail to understand the lack of comprehension of on-board operations and the need to "fix stuff" on board ship.
It's almost criminally negligent..

[SpazSinbad]

F-35B Does Vertical Landing & SRVL in Warton UK Simulator

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0h-Ux4QCACo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0h-Ux4QCACo

[SpazSinbad]

Interest in the B model just gets betta & betta....
Turkey expresses interest in buying F-35B STOVL variant 30 Oct 2017 Kerry Herschelman
"Turkey recently expressed to the United States its interest in purchasing the F-35B short take-off/vertical landing (STOVL) version of the Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, Jane’s has learned from Turkish and Western defence industry sources. This is in addition to the 100 F-35As it already plans to buy from Lockheed Martin.
A senior Turkish Defence Industries undersecretariat official expressed his country’s interest in buying F-35 STOVL variants to Vice Admiral Mathias Winter, head of the US Defense Department’s F-35 programme office, during a meeting held in Ankara in mid-October. It is unclear how many F-35B STOVL variants Turkey intends to buy...."
Turkey expresses interest in buying F-35B STOVL variant | Jane's 360 (http://www.janes.com/article/75300/turkey-expresses-interest-in-buying-f-35b-stovl-variant)

[Stitchbitch]

Will SRVL be used to bring back unexpended stores to the boat or will the jet be able to VL will stores? Thinking hot weather here (Gulf).

[SpazSinbad]

Will SRVL be used to bring back unexpended stores to the boat or will the jet be able to VL will stores? Thinking hot weather here (Gulf).
The F-35B is able to comply with the KPP to return for a VL with internal stores and an appropriate amount of fuel for such a VL in stated WX conditions. However the UK invented 'hotter weather east of sewers' so they had to bring back the SRVL (if it ever went away). :} Yes thinking hot weather by UK brings to mind those mad dogs & Englishmen.... The English always wanna be different. :eek:
" UK 'hot day'Ambient Temperature: 35.5ºC and Pressure: 992mb
https://vtol.org/store/product/development-of-the-shipborne-rolling-vertical-landing-srvl-manoeuvre-for-the-f35b-aircraft-9024.cfm
KPP: somewhat less than above "sea level, tropical day, 10 kts operational WOD"

[George K Lee]

Mad dogs and Englishmen aside, it appears to me that the delusional ones are the people who think that since the MIL-STD-210A assumes a certain pressure, and the KPP assumes a WOD, reality will conform to the MIL-spec wherever you might be operating.

Gulf weather is different, and generating WOD is not always easy without running into a tanker or out of water. And of course it doesn't help that even stripped, carved up, with downgraded g, the jet is still a ton heavier than it was at contract signature.

[sandiego89]

Interest in the B model just gets betta & betta....
Turkey expresses interest in buying F-35B STOVL variant 30 Oct 2017 Kerry Herschelman


Interesting, earlier this year the Turkish President Erdogan indicated Turkey will build aircraft carriers: Erdogan says Turkey to build aircraft carriers (http://www.trtworld.com/turkey/erdogan-says-turkey-to-build-aircraft-carriers-392733)



We could see some interesting continuing, new, or returning, players to fixed wing carrier aviation with the B aboard various flat decks. Besides the US and UK, there have been the musings about Japan, Egypt, Australia, Italy, Spain all with their biggish flat tops, and now Turkey....


Bet Brazil would like to, but can't afford it

[Lonewolf_50]

I don't think Turkey can either, SD.

[glad rag]

Will SRVL be used to bring back unexpended stores to the boat or will the jet be able to VL will stores? Thinking hot weather here (Gulf).

Depends what "block" your talking about....weight increases up to block 4 with increasing mission equipment jammers etc etc..

[ORAC]

Depends what "block" your talking about....weight increases up to block 4.... And if the history of every other aircraft program will continue to be followed it will continue to grow for every model thereafter.

There are suggestions by LM to change the engine of course (having eliminated the contemporary more powerful competitor), but at least a decade or more in the future - and untold billions more in cost - and unaffordable as a retrofit and thus fulfilling their wishes for a solution involving the replacement all the current and programmed tranches.....

Cynical? Moi??

[jindabyne]

The following are factual:

In 2000, BAES was offering Typhoon to DoD in the mid-2000's; at a price that was, and is now, realistic

F35 was being offered as stealthier and far more capable

F35 would be available in 2006 and if this was debatable, it would always be ahead of Typhoon, in delivery timescales

F35 would be at least 2/3 cost of Typhoon

These assertions from my friendly US counterpart in Canberra

John Howard went to the US, by himself, and was 'convinced' that F35 was the solution. All else was set aside. No more competition

I know, I was there. In the midst

Believe what you will.

[SpazSinbad]

:} I wondered when the drag queen aspect would open but as 'ORAC' said "it is behind him". :} Is that a bump on the behind or is it just glad to be there?
Some ordinary speed then VERY SLOW SPEED video of the bumping and grinding with the chute of much drag at the EDWARDS Showcase earlier.

Demo of the brake screen on the F-35 combat plane Defense Department Published on Jul 7, 2017

"On this video you can see the demonstration of the F-35 brake screen."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEzn7bc_kOg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEzn7bc_kOg

[glad rag]

Puts things into perspective ..

http://m.aviationweek.com/site-files/aviationweek.com/files/uploads/2017/10/31/DF-HYPOXIA_chart4.jpg

[Buster15]

The following are factual:

In 2000, BAES was offering Typhoon to DoD in the mid-2000's; at a price that was, and is now, realistic

F35 was being offered as stealthier and far more capable

F35 would be available in 2006 and if this was debatable, it would always be ahead of Typhoon, in delivery timescales

F35 would be at least 2/3 cost of Typhoon

These assertions from my friendly US counterpart in Canberra

John Howard went to the US, by himself, and was 'convinced' that F35 was the solution. All else was set aside. No more competition

I know, I was there. In the midst

Believe what you will.

I was on the project at that time and one of the attractions of Typhoon was the fitment of conformal fuel tanks to greatly enhance the range. I am sure that you will understand the threat from the north.
I believe that there was also some discussion of carrier capabilities. Huge fan of Typhoon but am disappointed it has not sold in far greater numbers but the cost has been prohibitive.

[Heathrow Harry]

"understand the threat from the north"

Papua New Guinea???

[Not_a_boffin]

"understand the threat from the north"


Warton?:}

[ORAC]

Costly US F-35 Fighter Jets Miss the Mark, Denmark Finds (https://sputniknews.com/military/201711031058783272-denmark-us-fighter-jets/)

To the dismay of Denmark's Air Force, which had been betting on F-35s replacingthe country's aging fleet, the National Audit Office has decided that the pricey war toy is overrated, arguing that the Defense Ministry has been far too optimistic in its evaluation. For Denmark, where the acquisition of the US F-35 fighter jets is set to become the largest-ever state purchase, the new report highlighting the shortcomings of its prized possession, is hardly good news.

The new fighter jets, which are expected to set Danish state coffers back DKK 66 billion ($10 billion), could actually yield much more modest performance than that stated by the Defense Ministry, the National Audit Office (NAO) found in a report. According to the NAO, the Defense Ministry has overestimated the amount of tasks the 27 new F-35 aircraft can handle. Another blunder regards how many hours the aircraft can spend in the air. While the Defense Ministry proceeded from a solid 250 hours a year, the same fighter jets only are airborne 168 and 210 hours in Norway and Holland respectively, Danish Radio reported (https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/politik/rigsrevisionen-dyre-kampfly-kan-mindre-end-lovet).

"There are a couple of over-optimistic figures," Ole Wæver, a professor of international politics at the University of Copenhagen, said. According to Wæver, there are two important consequences. "First, some of those who have promoted the decision may well feel cheated. The other problem is that the aircraft we have purchased are unable to perform as expected," he explained.

Denmark's leading daily Berlingske suggested in an opinion piece that the newly-revealed shortcomings may force the country to buy more aircraft than the 27 initially decided, in addition to tarnishing the Armed Forces' reputation.

"The dishonest figures also reveal that both civil servants and ministers are willing to use fake marketing to promote an otherwise sensible political choice," Berlingske wrote (https://www.b.dk/berlingske-mener/uaerlige-tal-om-nye-kampfly-skader-forsvaret).

The NAO's criticism came shortly before Parliament is to make a final decision on the purchase of the 27 new F-35 combat aircraft that will replace the 44 Danish F16 aircraft that have been in service since 1980s. The agreement on the new combat aircraft was concluded in June 2016 between the Liberals, the Social Liberals, the Liberal Alliance, the Danish People's Party and the Social Democrats.

Rasmus Jarlov, defense spokesman of the Conservatives, which did not support the agreement, said that the NAO's report was not surprising. "We reached the same conclusion last year. But it's good that the NAO can confirm that we were right," Jarlov said.

Despite the criticism of the ministry's assessment of the aircraft's capabilities, Social Democrat defense spokesman Henrik Dam Kristensen is confident in the decision.

"I have a lot of respect for the NAO, but when we talk about flying hours, it's very important to listen to people who are knowledgeable about aircraft technology," Henrik Dam Kristensen said. "I just believe that the combat aircraft department, which is manned with experts in the area, may be better at assessing this than the National Audit Office," he ventured.

[M609]

First 3 Norway based F-35As delivered to RNoAF today at Ørland.

https://gfx.nrk.no/14bwbPgAxwhW9ZxyZPdWIAlL90Xr4227ao2u9PMf8rBA

In Norwegian (http://www.adressa.no/nyheter/trondelag/2017/11/03/Tre-av-de-nye-jagerflyene-landet-på-Ørlandet-15548397.ece)

The RNoAF already have 7 at Luke AFB for training.

[Heathrow Harry]

""I just believe that the combat aircraft department, which is manned with experts in the area, may be better at assessing this than the National Audit Office,""

Now that is a new definition of an optomist....................

[Frostchamber]

Costly US F-35 Fighter Jets Miss the Mark, Denmark Finds (https://sputniknews.com/military/201711031058783272-denmark-us-fighter-jets/)

To the dismay of Denmark's Air Force, which had been betting on F-35s replacingthe country's aging fleet, the National Audit Office has decided that the pricey war toy is overrated, arguing that the Defense Ministry has been far too optimistic in its evaluation. For Denmark, where the acquisition of the US F-35 fighter jets is set to become the largest-ever state purchase, the new report highlighting the shortcomings of its prized possession, is hardly good news.

The new fighter jets, which are expected to set Danish state coffers back DKK 66 billion ($10 billion), could actually yield much more modest performance than that stated by the Defense Ministry, the National Audit Office (NAO) found in a report. According to the NAO, the Defense Ministry has overestimated the amount of tasks the 27 new F-35 aircraft can handle. Another blunder regards how many hours the aircraft can spend in the air. While the Defense Ministry proceeded from a solid 250 hours a year, the same fighter jets only are airborne 168 and 210 hours in Norway and Holland respectively, Danish Radio reported (https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/politik/rigsrevisionen-dyre-kampfly-kan-mindre-end-lovet).

"There are a couple of over-optimistic figures," Ole Wæver, a professor of international politics at the University of Copenhagen, said. According to Wæver, there are two important consequences. "First, some of those who have promoted the decision may well feel cheated. The other problem is that the aircraft we have purchased are unable to perform as expected," he explained.

Denmark's leading daily Berlingske suggested in an opinion piece that the newly-revealed shortcomings may force the country to buy more aircraft than the 27 initially decided, in addition to tarnishing the Armed Forces' reputation.

"The dishonest figures also reveal that both civil servants and ministers are willing to use fake marketing to promote an otherwise sensible political choice," Berlingske wrote (https://www.b.dk/berlingske-mener/uaerlige-tal-om-nye-kampfly-skader-forsvaret).

The NAO's criticism came shortly before Parliament is to make a final decision on the purchase of the 27 new F-35 combat aircraft that will replace the 44 Danish F16 aircraft that have been in service since 1980s. The agreement on the new combat aircraft was concluded in June 2016 between the Liberals, the Social Liberals, the Liberal Alliance, the Danish People's Party and the Social Democrats.

Rasmus Jarlov, defense spokesman of the Conservatives, which did not support the agreement, said that the NAO's report was not surprising. "We reached the same conclusion last year. But it's good that the NAO can confirm that we were right," Jarlov said.

Despite the criticism of the ministry's assessment of the aircraft's capabilities, Social Democrat defense spokesman Henrik Dam Kristensen is confident in the decision.

"I have a lot of respect for the NAO, but when we talk about flying hours, it's very important to listen to people who are knowledgeable about aircraft technology," Henrik Dam Kristensen said. "I just believe that the combat aircraft department, which is manned with experts in the area, may be better at assessing this than the National Audit Office," he ventured.


Actually I'd suggest the final quote is the key one here. Mr Kristensen makes a very fair point. It's not blind optimism to suggest that a team of accountants may not have the best grasp of the technicalities of air combat capability.

[Heathrow Harry]

well "experts" haven't been very good at estimating how long it would take to build, what the cost is going to be or the actual performance figures have they??

And you have the 787, the US Air Tanker (and we'll not go near the Nimrod) as other examples ............................. the list is VERY long

[George K Lee]

Ahh, those experts!

But Gates said the Air Force can afford to have fewer big fighters, because the U.S. has such a huge margin of superiority over any potential rival, in the air. "By 2020, the United States is projected to have nearly 2,500 manned combat aircraft of all kinds" in the Air Force, Navy and Marines, Gates said. "Of those, nearly 1,100 will be the most advanced fifth-generation F-35s and F-22s. China, by contrast, is projected to have no fifth-generation aircraft by 2020. And by 2025, the gap only widens."

https://www.wired.com/2009/08/air-force-to-get-new-light-fighter/

http://www.eastpendulum.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/2017-07-31-Ce-que-pensent-les-pilotes-de-leur-J-20-09.jpg

[SpazSinbad]

LM F-35 Fast Facts 01 Nov 2017 PDF: "110,000 flight hours - 250 F-35 aircraft delivered"
https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a63ddcc0c289f9457bc3ebab.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/13567/fast_facts-nov_2017.pdf (1.2Mb)

[George K Lee]

Sorry, Spaz, but how does that translate into 960 JSFs* in US service by 2020? And LM somehow overlooks the fact that a large and as yet undetermined fraction of those 250 airplanes will never be combat-ready.

*"1100 5gen" - 140 combat-capable F-22s

[SpazSinbad]

I'm not sorry. Also it is TBD how some F-35s how/will/when will be upgraded. Some only require software updates. I'm not interested in your predictions - just the facts ma'am - just the fast facts.

[George K Lee]

OK, Spaz - Here is a fact. The DoD has funded 422 LRIP F-35s through FY18 (deliveries completed during 2020, on the usual pattern).

You can check it here...

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) (http://comptroller.defense.gov/Budget-Materials/)

...although you might not, since it's harder work than citing manufacturer claims.

Subtract from that the very early aircraft that everyone understood would never be operational, the early LRIP blocks (TBD) that cannot be economically brought to service standard, and however many airplanes are still stuck waiting for upgrades in 2020... even if that total is zero, which it is not, Gates' 2009 prediction is still far, far off the mark.

And his prediction for 2025 will be even less accurate since the affordable annual quantity of airplanes is some 30 aircraft lower than promised in 2009.

[glad rag]

The dishonest figures also reveal that both civil servants and ministers are willing to use fake marketing to promote an otherwise sensible political choice,"
Berlingske wrote


LMFAO.

[SpazSinbad]

I'm not going to jump up and down about any predictions - even those made eight years ago - just the facks maam - nuttin' but facks. Whine all you whish - wot no pizza ovens?

Meanwhile: Trump could let the UAE buy F-35 jets 04 Nov 2017 Any predictions here?

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/dubai-air-show/2017/11/04/trump-could-let-the-uae-buy-f-35-jets/

[George K Lee]

Pizza ovens? Can you explain that strange comment?

[SpazSinbad]

Nope. No point in explaining jokes others do not GET.

[ORAC]

About those 250 delivered jets. They may currently be flyable, but is corrosion now inevitable - and if s9 what effect will it have on airframe life?

Pentagon reports another production glitch in Lockheed Martin’s F-35 (http://www.star-telegram.com/news/business/article182139891.html)

The Pentagon’s F-35 program office is weighing how to fix a newly discovered glitch that halted deliveries of the Lockheed Martin fighter jet for 30 days in west Fort Worth.

The problem was linked to a primer that is supposed to be applied as a protective layer on aluminum fasteners to prevent corrosion. The Defense Department temporarily stopped deliveries of the next-generation jet for a month, ending Oct. 20, to assess the issue.

“After a thorough government and industry investigation, it was discovered that Lockheed Martin had not applied the required primer in fastener holes on F-35 substructures during the aircraft production process,” Pentagon spokesman Joe DellaVedova said in an email. “This is a production quality escape issue and, though it needs be corrected to prevent potential future corrosion, it does not pose a safety of flight risk to the F-35 fleet or affect current operations.”

Discovery of the flaw came after the Pentagon has taken delivery of about 250 F-35s with plans to accelerate production including a block purchase by U.S. allies of as many as 211 jets. The Fort Worth plant, which employs about 14,000 workers, is expected to add about 1,800 workers over the next couple of years. This summer, the company held a series of job fairs in Fort Worth, where more than 2,000 candidates received job offers.

The fastener glitch has been flagged to Pentagon officials preparing Ellen Lord, the undersecretary for acquisition, for a meeting scheduled Nov. 6 with top Lockheed officials, including Chief Executive Officer Marillyn Hewson, according to an official who asked not to be identified.......

[George K Lee]

Not the sort of thing you like to see after >250 units down the same assembly line.

[Turbine D]

wot no pizza ovens?
Probably meant firing up the engine periodically outside the maintenance hanger to make fresh pizzas...
Trump could let the UAE buy F-35 jets
Being the astute dealmaker that he is, maybe he could sell them all the ones we paid for that will never be combat ready.

The F-35 program never got started correctly, concurrent engineering and production where a great deal of the technical intricacies weren't understood. Understanding years later still being developed. As a result, the program will not end well. But Spaz, keep sending us videos of F-35s taking off and landing like it is demonstrative of the most successful aircraft ever designed and produced, delivered on time and under estimated costs... Mission accomplished?:sad:

[TLB]

Not the sort of thing you like to see after >250 units down the same assembly lineBut not at all surprising considering that this program has not yet completed the development phase and has not even started the initial OT&E phase.

'Concurrency' fights back ...

[ORAC]

Germany declared preference for F-35 to replace Tornado (http://www.janes.com/article/75511/germany-declared-preference-for-f-35-to-replace-tornado)

The German Air Force has a shortlist of existing platforms to replace its Panavia Tornados from 2025 to 2030, but the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is the service’s “preferred choice", a senior service official said on 8 November. Speaking under the Chatham House Rule, the official said that the F-35 already fulfils most of the requirements that the Luftwaffe requires to replace its Tornados in the 2025 to 2030 timeframe, and that it offers a number of other benefits besides.

“The Tornado replacement needs to be fifth-generation aircraft that can be detected as late as possible, if at all. It must be able to identify targets from a long way off and to target them as soon as possible. The German Ministry of Defence [MoD] is looking at several aircraft today, including the F-35 – it is commercially available already, has been ordered by many nations and is being introduced into service today, and has most of the capabilities required.”

Germany had previously engaged Airbus Defence and Space (DS) in defining the requirements for a future Tornado replacement under its Future Combat Air System (FCAS) programme. However, the timelines involved of an anticipated retirement of the Tornado in about 2030 has caused the Luftwaffe to look instead at an already developed platform.

As the official explained, “The timeframe suggests we need to start introducing successor in about 2025 to cover the Tornado retirement in 2030 – we need a five-year transition phase. That is only seven years away, and so it is very unlikely that industry could develop and introduce an entirely new aircraft type that fulfils the functionalities that we require. History show that the Eurofighter took 25 years before the first aircraft was introduced.”

[ORAC]

Mainly a recap of the F-111 procurement debacle and the similarity to the F-35 program. But a long article and packed with political and other details of that program that I didn’t know, and well worth reading in full. It rings the alarm bell with the intent to follow the same path with the Future Vertical Lift program to replace both 4 different helicopter types and the C-130.

Turning Point: The F-35 May Not Deliver | The National Interest (http://nationalinterest.org/feature/turning-point-the-f-35-may-not-deliver-23026)

[Bing]

As the official explained, “The timeframe suggests we need to start introducing successor in about 2025 to cover the Tornado retirement in 2030 – we need a five-year transition phase."

Well that's a bid of an odd concept, surely they should be retiring the Tornado and then having a capability gap for a few years until introducing the F-35 into service?

[glad rag]

Like they can afford to....lots of mouths to feed and a minimum of 200,000 per year to add to the queue for the foreseeable future they are going to suddenly run out of dosh...

:ok:

[George K Lee]

The Germans don't really have a choice. The dual-key nuclear arrangement is still a big factor, although they don't like to talk about it, so if they want to buy anything other than F-35 they have to ask Washington for permission and then pay for integration, which is nontrivial.

[glad rag]

The Germans don't really have a choice. The dual-key nuclear arrangement is still a big factor, although they don't like to talk about it, so if they want to buy anything other than F-35 they have to ask Washington for permission and then pay for integration, which is nontrivial.

Really? I'm amazed at that.

Ref. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

Before German reunification in 1990, both West and East Germany ratified the Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany. Germany reaffirmed its renunciation of the manufacture, possession, and control of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. In addition to banning a foreign military presence in the former East Germany, the treaty also banned nuclear weapons or nuclear weapon carriers to be stationed in the area, making it a permanent Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone. The German military was allowed to possess conventional weapons systems with nonconventional capabilities, provided that they were outfitted for a purely conventional role.

The United States provides about 60 tactical B61 nuclear bombs for use by Germany under a NATO nuclear weapons sharing agreement. The bombs are stored at Büchel and Ramstein Air Bases, and in time of war would be delivered by Luftwaffe Panavia Tornado warplanes. As well as being a breach of the Protocols to the (revised) Treaty of Brussels (terminated in 2010), many countries believe this violates Articles I and II of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), where Germany has committed:

"... not to receive the transfer from any transferor whatsoever of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or of control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly ... or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices ...".
The U.S. insists its forces control the weapons and that no transfer of the nuclear bombs or control over them is intended "unless and until a decision were made to go to war, at which the [NPT] treaty would no longer be controlling", so there is no breach of the NPT. However German pilots and other staff practice handling and delivering the U.S. nuclear bombs.[9] Even if the NATO argument is considered legally correct, such peacetime operations could arguably contravene both the objective and the spirit of the NPT.

Like other countries of its size and wealth, Germany has the skills and resources to create its own nuclear weapons quite quickly if desired. The Zippe-type centrifuge was, indeed, invented by captured Germans working in the Soviet Union in the 1950s, and URENCO operates a centrifuge uranium enrichment plant in Germany. There are also several power reactors in Germany that could be used to produce bomb-grade plutonium if desired. Such a development is, of course, highly unlikely in the present benign security environment. In 2007, former German defence secretary Rupert Scholz stated that Germany should strive to become a nuclear power.[10] In September 2007 the French president Nicolas Sarkozy offered Germany to participate in the control over the French nuclear arsenal.[11]

Chancellor Merkel and foreign minister Steinmeier declined the offer however, stating that Germany "had no interest in possessing nuclear weapons".[12] Due to concerns over Vladimir Putin's actions, Merkel reversed her position, stating to the German press, "As long as there are nuclear weapons in the world, we need to have these capabilities, as NATO says." [13]

[sandiego89]

Well I do agree if the Germans really do want an aircraft that can be detected "as late as possible", and first deliveries around 2025, the F-35 is the only answer. No way another program could be started now to deliver in that time frame.

[George K Lee]

GR - As far as I am aware, the B61 bombs covered by nuclear sharing remain in place, to be delivered, in extremis, by host-nation aircraft including Tornados.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_sharing

For Germany to exit the program at this point would be politically difficult.

[glad rag]

Well I do agree if the Germans really do want an aircraft that can be detected "as late as possible", and first deliveries around 2025, the F-35 is the only answer. No way another program could be started now to deliver in that time frame.

I see what you did there.

:cool:

[ORAC]

Nothing new here. First you decide politically what you want to buy. Then you write the requirements and parameters to justify your purchase.

Same as a defence review. First you define your budget, then you define the threat to fit inside it.....

[old,not bold]

Much the same as calculating the likely cost of an infrastructure project (think HS2), and then setting the assumptions about what savings will result in the future from the project, until the benefits outweigh the costs, at least on paper.

A process called "Cost/Benefit Analysis" that I learned and applied to "feasibility studies" for grossly elaborate and costly airport projects around the world, when it was well understood that the third-world client wanted the CBA to prove that the new airport, named after the President, should go ahead, financed, natch, by friendly powers extending their area of influence. My favourite variable was "Cost of business travellers' time" which could easily be increased as needed. It amused me hugely when I read that this particular variable has been increased by 1000% since the first estimate, so as to justify the waste of money that is HS2.

[ORAC]

Never though5 we were going to buy all of them anyway...

SNAFU!: British Committee Members told price of F-35 impossible to predict and numbers may be cut... (http://www.snafu-solomon.com/2017/11/british-committee-members-told-price-of.html)

[Heathrow Harry]

According to the "Times" a senior office told MP's "it would not be unreasonable to think that the F-35 procurement would not follow the T45 trajectory if costs continued to escalate"

Sir Humphrey Appleby would be proud of the man!!!

They cut the t45's from 12 to 6..............

An MoD spokesman said "we have ordered 48"

[ORAC]

The comment was actually made by the committee chairman, Julian Lewis MP.

An interest8ng point is the last line of the Telegraph report, which does not name the source, which states that: “If a decision to scale back purchases was made, the MOD would consider keeping older jets the F-35 is due to replace”.

Which would presumably be another lease of life for the Tornado? And, of course, a total loss of any surge capability to man both carriers in an emergency.

[pr00ne]

ORAC,

And to that point, as they can ONLY be referring to Tornado, it is out of service in 2018/9, BAE have announced that they are laying off the support staff at Marham and Leeming, and they will not know about price or the next order tranche until AFTER Tornado OOS date, how on earth could this be delivered?

[melmothtw]

The comment was actually made by the committee chairman, Julian Lewis MP.

An interest8ng point is the last line of the Telegraph report, which does not name the source, which states that: “If a decision to scale back purchases was made, the MOD would consider keeping older jets the F-35 is due to replace”.

Which would presumably be another lease of life for the Tornado? And, of course, a total loss of any surge capability to man both carriers in an emergency.


ORAC,

And to that point, as they can ONLY be referring to Tornado, it is out of service in 2018/9, BAE have announced that they are laying off the support staff at Marham and Leeming, and they will not know about price or the next order tranche until AFTER Tornado OOS date, how on earth could this be delivered?

Over the life of the F-35 programme, he could instead be (and probably is) referring to Typhoons if you read "older jets" as meaning individual aircraft that were to be retired and which could be retained, rather than an entire type.

[ORAC]

But the F-35 has never been planned to replace any of the Typhoon Sqns.

[melmothtw]

But the F-35 has never been planned to replace any of the Typhoon Sqns.

Not in one fell swoop, but at some point in the dim and distant future older Typhoons will be phased out at the same time as new F-35s continue to enter service.

All this comment is saying (to me at least) is that some of these older Typhoons will have to serve a little longer than planned if the F-35 proves to be too expensive.

[glad rag]

Straw clutching at it's finest


The death spiral tightens.

[ORAC]

Doesn't compute. If the F-35 proves too expensive and the order is cut, then in that time frame new F-35s won’t be entering service because purchases would have ceased. In which case the Typhoons will be replaced by whatever has selected as an alternate platform.

If the order isn't cut then there will be no need to extend the life of any other current type.

The comment only makes sense if a cut to the order is already being contemplated in the current SDR.

[Lonewolf_50]

Still not cancelled.
I wonder if we should ask for this thread to be locked and a new one started about, simply, the F-35. (All pro and con considered).

What do you all think?

[Heathrow Harry]

ORAC - they aren't contemplating a "cut" - it will be a "deferment" ... for a few budgets/Reviews and then the total buy will just quietly fade away to maybe 60 aircarft

[George K Lee]

This is the kind of thing that is contributing to uncertainty:

https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/687982.pdf

Fig. 3 in particular.

Even the USAF has been forced to reduce its delivery rate by 25 per cent, so the program of record now has the USAF getting ship # 1763 in 2046, 50 years after the project got started.

[Stitchbitch]

Over the life of the F-35 programme, he could instead be (and probably is) referring to Typhoons if you read "older jets" as meaning individual aircraft that were to be retired and which could be retained, rather than an entire type.

He’ll have to hurry, older Typhoons are being scrapped for parts.

[melmothtw]

'Older' is a relative term, Stitchbitch. The 'older' airframes that may be retained in the future are not the same older airframes that you say are now being scrapped for parts. Right now, they are the newer airframes. But you know that.

[George K Lee]

I'm shocked, shocked...

F-35 stealth fighter caught spying on its owners (http://www.news.com.au/technology/online/security/spy-f35s-send-sensitive-norwegian-military-data-back-to-lockheed-martin-in-the-united-states/news-story/12b4fafce6b579448cc8416518063d1f)

Here's the original in Noggysprek, for those with Chrome.

https://www.abcnyheter.no/nyheter/norge/2017/11/21/195349469/f-35-utfordrer-nasjonal-suverenitet

Lots of people are going to pretend to be surprised by this.

[ORAC]

Canada to announce plan to buy second-hand Hornets from Australia; scraps Super Hornet initiative (http://alert5.com/2017/12/06/canada-to-announce-plan-to-buy-second-hand-hornets-from-australia-scraps-super-hornet-initiative/)

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada is scrapping a plan to buy 18 Boeing Super Hornet fighter jets amid a deepening dispute with the U.S. aerospace company, three sources familiar with the matter said on Tuesday.

Instead, the Liberal government will announce next week it intends to acquire a used fleet of older Australia F-18 jets, the same kind of plane Canada currently operates, said the sources, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the situation.

[ORAC]

Boeing statement on the Canadian Interim Fighter Capability Project and free and fair competition:

We have read reports that the Government of Canada is choosing to purchase used F/A-18 Classic Hornets from the Royal Australian Air Force in lieu of new Super Hornet fighter jets.

The Boeing Company respects the Canadian government’s decision and applauds the government’s continued use of a two engine fighter solution, which is a critical part of their northern Arctic border defense, NORAD cooperation, and coast to coast to coast security.

Although we will not have the opportunity to grow our supply base, industrial partnerships and jobs in Canada the way we would if Canada purchased new Super Hornets, we will continue to look to find productive ways to work together in the future. Boeing is fortunate to have an outstanding 100 years of partnership with Canada, which had culminated in our $4B annual economic impact in Canada, and we look forward to partnering for the next 100 years.

Our commitment to creating a level playing field in aerospace remains. Therefore, we will continue to support all efforts to build an environment of free and fair competition marked by compliance with agreed upon rules.

[West Coast]

Sale contingent upon US Govt approval.

Hmmmm......how hard is a hard ball?

[FODPlod]

This is the kind of thing that is contributing to uncertainty:

https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/687982.pdf

Fig. 3 in particular.

Even the USAF has been forced to reduce its delivery rate by 25 per cent, so the program of record now has the USAF getting ship # 1763 in 2046, 50 years after the project got started.
Fig.3 is definitely not good news but I was taught that truncated graphs can often be misrepresentative apart from showing trends. I have been suspicious of them ever since. Like statistics, they can be manipulated to suit an agenda.

This side-by-side comparison of graphs showing the same information demonstrates what I mean. I'll leave others to decide which is more representative.

[George K Lee]

23.9 per cent is nearly a quarter, any way you draw the chart, and it's a little disappointing for a jet that was advertised as cheaper to operate than an F-16.

[Heathrow Harry]

Yeah but the manufacturer has to claw back losses elsewhere somehow

[sandiego89]

Canada to announce plan to buy second-hand Hornets from Australia; scraps Super Hornet initiative (http://alert5.com/2017/12/06/canada-to-announce-plan-to-buy-second-hand-hornets-from-australia-scraps-super-hornet-initiative/)

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada is scrapping a plan to buy 18 Boeing Super Hornet fighter jets amid a deepening dispute with the U.S. aerospace company, three sources familiar with the matter said on Tuesday.

Instead, the Liberal government will announce next week it intends to acquire a used fleet of older Australia F-18 jets, the same kind of plane Canada currently operates, said the sources, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the situation.


Yikes, when it comes to kicking the can down the road, no one seems to kick like Canada. I realize there will be a refit, but are slightly less knackered first generation Hornets really the way to go? I just fear a repeat of the Sea King saga where the can just keeps being kicked until things start falling out of the sky....

[etudiant]

Yikes, when it comes to kicking the can down the road, no one seems to kick like Canada. I realize there will be a refit, but are slightly less knackered first generation Hornets really the way to go? I just fear a repeat of the Sea King saga where the can just keeps being kicked until things start falling out of the sky....

However, it does buy some time, perhaps enough to reach a settlement on the Bombardier C series dispute with Boeing.
If no agreement can be reached, Canada will buy combat aircraft from anyone but Boeing, so Europe and perhaps even Russia would have a shot.

[ORAC]

Germany favors Eurofighter as it seeks to replace Tornado (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-defence/germany-favors-eurofighter-as-it-seeks-to-replace-tornado-idUSKBN1E52EK)

BERLIN (Reuters) - The German Defence Ministry said on Monday that the European fighter jet was the leading candidate to replace its Tornado jets, which it wants to start phasing out in 2025. The ministry’s position appears to contradict that of the German air force, whose chief indicated last month that he preferred Lockheed Martin’s F-35, which meets the military’s requirements of stealth and long-distance operational capabilities.

In a letter to a Greens lawmaker who had inquired about the deliberations, the ministry said the F-35 and Boeing’s F-15 and F-18 fighters were secondary options.“The indicated view of the inspector of the air force that the F-35 Lightning II is an especially suitable successor to the Tornado system is not the position of the federal government,” Deputy Defence Minister Ralf Brauksiepe wrote in the letter.......

The contract to replace Germany’s 85 Tornado jets, which go out of service around 2030, could be worth billions of euros. A new fighter purchase would have to be approved by parliament in the next two years and a contract signed by 2020 or 2021 to ensure deliveries by 2025. No final decision is likely before a new government is formed, following elections this past September......

[Brat]

Instead, the Liberal government will announce next week it intends to acquire a used fleet of older Australia F-18 jets, the same kind of plane Canada currently operates, said the sources, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the situation.Buying Advanced Super Hornets instead of F-35’s would at least contained some sense in that they would have been getting new aircraft with a full service life to go, and were superior to the Legacy Hornets they would have been replacing.

How will 35 year old Australian Hornets be in better shape then equally old Canadian Hornets?

Legacy Hornets are out of production, and being phased out of service. Keeping old aircraft flying is costly, and will only get more so the longer they continue to operate.

As for the bad news that is continually being peddled around about the F-35, there certainly have been problems, but, also a great deal of overblown hysteria.

There have been a large number of various critical Government teams studying the F-35 purchases. All but Canada’s, seem to have been satisfied that the various contentious issues are being attended to.

It would seem that the process has become a political football, that their selection process has not been fit for purpose, and that Canada, and the Canadian Forces will end up with a less than optimal solution to their future defence needs.

[T28B]

Brat, the Canadian government does not have the deep purse that their southern neighbor does, so they have to be careful with their expenditures. In any major defense acquisition policy, both cost and opportunity cost have to be addressed.

There is no major acquisition decision that is not political, because the politicians have to account for how public funds are spent. The opportunity cost of a very expensive decision is that one cannot spend those same funds on something else whose requirement was validated. Within the past decade or so, the Canadian government has had to answer for an expensive helicopter acquisition decision that didn't turn out as expected. Being recently bitten may inform their caution now.

[George K Lee]

As for the bad news that is continually being peddled around about the F-35, there certainly have been problems, but, also a great deal of overblown hysteria.

There have been a large number of various critical Government teams studying the F-35 purchases. All but Canada’s, seem to have been satisfied that the various contentious issues are being attended to.

Brat,

Look back on this thread. Look back on any other forum. How many times since 2008 can you find this kind of stuff posted by shills and fanboys?

So tell me, tell me, Brat - where are we, against the 2008 schedule? The 2010 schedule? The 2013-finally-we've-got-this-sorted schedule?

Cough it up, Brat - how many fully-and-formally-tested, in-service F-35s are there, that meet the end-of-SDD spec as contracted in 2001? Answers now or forever hold your peace.

Now think - how much have you, and the other shills and fanbois, contributed to anyone's national defense (other than China's) by your passionate defense of your fetish project?

[chopper2004]

Germany Reportedly Favors Typhoon to Replace Tornado, Also Eyeing F-15, F/A-18 - The Drive (http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/16892/germany-reportedly-favors-typhoon-to-replace-tornado-also-eyeing-f-15-f-a-18)

For the usual reasons - access to codes , etc

Cheers

[glad rag]

As for the bad news that is continually being peddled around about the F-35, there certainly have been problems, but, also a great deal of overblown hysteria.

There have been a large number of various critical Government teams studying the F-35 purchases. All but Canada’s, seem to have been satisfied that the various contentious issues are being attended to.

Brat,

Look back on this thread. Look back on any other forum. How many times since 2008 can you find this kind of stuff posted by shills and fanboys?

So tell me, tell me, Brat - where are we, against the 2008 schedule? The 2010 schedule? The 2013-finally-we've-got-this-sorted schedule?

Cough it up, Brat - how many fully-and-formally-tested, in-service F-35s are there, that meet the end-of-SDD spec as contracted in 2001? Answers now or forever hold your peace.

Now think - how much have you, and the other shills and fanbois, contributed to anyone's national defense (other than China's) by your passionate defense of your fetish project?


108 batch 2's that cannot affordably be made up into the BASIC combat level that's some serious investment right there.....

[Brat]

Look back on this thread. Look back on any other forum. How many times since 2008 can you find this kind of stuff posted by shills and fanboys?

As many times as there doom gloom and disaster “turkey” stories put around by the likes of you.

The ‘fanbois’ as you so quaintly put it, are the pilots who are presently flying them, analysts who are studying how they are performing in the various exercises they have participated in, and the Services who are presently deploying them.

Various countries have had experts with large amounts of experience and expertise in various fields, with beancounters behind them, study the F-35, and have committed themselves to the project and the machine.

There has never been any other fighter project of this size and complexity, and as I have already said there have been many problems along the way.

So despite the “turkey’ gobblers the F-35 hasn’t been cancelled, is in production, and dealing with the various delays inherent in any complex project of this kind.

[Brat]

Re the Canadian purse and defence. In 2016 NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg released his annual state-of-the-alliance report noting that it was an agreement by all members to spend two per cent of GDP on defence.

In the report it was noted that Canada saw bump in defence spending in 2016, which pushed the percentage of its GDP spent on defence from 0.98 to 1.02.

An increase that moved Canada to 20th from 23rd in terms of spending among NATO's 28 allies, putting it in a tie with Hungary and Slovenia.

It was the smallest share of GDP that Canada has spent on defence since 2012. Only Belgium, Iceland, Luxembourg Spain and Czech Republic spent less.

Short arms, deep pockets.

[glad rag]

In other words there NOT buying F35


:D:D:D

[jindabyne]

there? ----

[T28B]

Brat, the arguments and fingerpointing over defense spending in NATO has a long and rancorous history over the course of five or six decades, and remains a source of considerable frustration to the governments who tend to achieve that goal versus those who don't even try. Short arms, deep pockets. Perhaps. The very real political problem is that in Canada, in order for the government to realistically support an increase to 2% (be it in the next year or in the next five years) that increase in defense spending has to be sold politically both within parliament and to the public at large. I have serious doubts that "we need to increase our defense spending to make sure we can buy F-35's" is how the Canadian government's leaders who support an increase will try to sell the increase (in the usual political process of back scratching and deal making).
F-35 isn't the only program, nor project, that needs funding or upgrade.

[George K Lee]

So, Brat, you are evading my question with bluster and bloviation. Par for the course.

So would you care to identify and quote the "doom and gloom disaster turkey stories"?

Maybe you might want to look back at those GAO and JET predictions from 2008-09, about how the jet might not be operational until 2015?

Or the reports about how the B couldn't VL except on AM-2 or special concrete?

Seriously, Brat, if you actually look back at the "doom and gloom", the historic pattern is that it's been underestimated, if anything. Not that it can't get fixed, but it's dumber-than-dirt to think that everything is puppies-and-rainbows from now on. There's work to be done, and mindless cheerleading doesn't help one bit.

[tdracer]

Isn't Canada's fundamental problem with the F-35 that they believe a single engine combat aircraft is inherently unsuitable for their climatically hostile (and remote) northern territories?
Hard to see how the F-35 would ever overcome that problem...

[Brat]

versus those who don't even try. Canada’s ranking would suggest that is a applicable description.

[George K Lee]

Percentage of GDP is a somewhat vacuous measure of defense spending in any event. If you land a new job and get a 20% raise, do you automatically trade in your car for one that's 20% more expensive? Spend one-fifth more on groceries? Turn up the heat and turn down the air-con so the gas and electric bills go up?

Canada has two land borders with the same non-aggressive neighbor. Its major cities and assets are located thousands of miles from the major cities of any other nation. It is not a nuclear power. Its non-alliance, non-overeseas defense needs are thus rather minimal.

[melmothtw]

Isn't Canada's fundamental problem with the F-35 that they believe a single engine combat aircraft is inherently unsuitable for their climatically hostile (and remote) northern territories?
Hard to see how the F-35 would ever overcome that problem...

It has often been cited as a concern for Canada, but with the USAF regularly flying F-16s over Alaska, and Norway doing the same over its just as harsh northern territories (not to mention the Swedes with their Gripens), I'm not sure how much of an issue it really needs to be.

Indeed, single-engine operations are inordinately safer today than they were when Canada operated the CF-104 seemingly without having the same concerns.

[ORAC]

The USAF might well fly F-16s from Elmendorf during exercises in the spring and summer when SAR is avaialable and the weather temperate (though getting bitten to death by insects is a danger). But the resident air wing is equipped with twin engined F-22s

[melmothtw]

The USAF might well fly F-16s from Elmendorf during exercises in the spring and summer when SAR is avaialable and the weather temperate (though getting bitten to death by insects is a danger). But the resident air wing is equipped with twin engined F-22s

Looks pretty wintery to me https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:USAF_F-16_fighters_during_the_Red_Flag-Alaska.jpg

http://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/foundry/image/?q=60&url=https%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Fthe-drive-staging%2Fmessage-editor%252F1501667095049-18_agressor_squadron_f-16s_in_snow.jpg

And the Norwegians and Swedes, and Canadian themselves with the CF-104?

[George K Lee]

The Canadians have always gone with twins for Northern air defense - CF-100, CF-105, Voodoo and F/A-18.

The Swedes on the other hand have never seriously contemplated a twin-engine fighter (while operating a twin-jet trainer for ever). But you'll notice that their fighter engines, or the main bits of their fighter engines (JT8D-based RM8, F404-based RM12), have always been well wrung out by someone else before they get into RSwAF service.

[melmothtw]

CF-105? Nice try ;-) The technology of the day required that most of those fighters you list had two engines, regardless of where they were operated.

The Swedes on the other hand have never seriously contemplated a twin-engine fighter (while operating a twin-jet trainer for ever). But you'll notice that their fighter engines, or the main bits of their fighter engines (JT8D-based RM8, F404-based RM12), have always been well wrung out by someone else before they get into RSwAF service.

I'd suggest that there will likely be far more diagnostic and analytical information available for the F135 (and probably actual flying hours) by the time that Canada comes to the F-35.

[George K Lee]

I'd suggest that there will likely be far more diagnostic and analytical information available for the F135 (and probably actual flying hours) by the time that Canada comes to the F-35.

Something will have gone horribly pear-shaped if there isn't. Actually I don't think a single engine is an automatic disqualifying factor for the RCAF mission these days.

And of course the Arrow had twin engines for speed, range and weapon capacity, all well in excess of many contemporary fighters. Arrow and J-20 are an interesting comparison - maybe the Canadians should invite a bid from Chengdu?:E

[etudiant]

I'd suggest that there will likely be far more diagnostic and analytical information available for the F135 (and probably actual flying hours) by the time that Canada comes to the F-35.

Something will have gone horribly pear-shaped if there isn't. Actually I don't think a single engine is an automatic disqualifying factor for the RCAF mission these days.

And of course the Arrow had twin engines for speed, range and weapon capacity, all well in excess of many contemporary fighters. Arrow and J-20 are an interesting comparison - maybe the Canadians should invite a bid from Chengdu?:E



Iirc, even the famed Arrow only had about a 400 mile mission radius, enough to cover Canada's industrial core, but nowhere near what it would take to patrol the entire country. Why Canada still needs fast jets today seems a valid question. Pending a plausible answer, perhaps it makes sense to minimize the associated outlays.

[George K Lee]

The logic behind retaining many military capabilities goes like this:

1 - We can't prove that we won't need it, some day.

2 - If we let the capability go, and that day arrives, we won't be able to regenerate it quickly enough.

[Brat]

[I]...Now think - how much have you, and the other shills and fanbois, contributed to anyone's national defense (other than China's) by your passionate defense of your fetish project?

I have simply been interested in the F-35 for a long while, as an observer, in answer to a question of yours, and not in a sexual way, the usual connotation associated with that word.

Curious though why would defence (the British spelling), of the ‘fetish project’ as you put it, contributes to China’s defence??

However, I do remember you stating...
… I'm sure this forum would function better if everyone acknowledged their identities. As for me, I am...

Wait, I'm being un-Britishly rude!

You go first, old bean!
… but then seem not to have not gone on to enlighten us.

Mr Engines - I don't want to continue this forever, but as it happens I too have been closely associated with this project for a long time. …

Associated how, if you don’t mind telling us and revealing some credentials?

[Brat]

LM F-35 GM says in the video that in 'BEAST' mode the F-35 carries 22,000 pounds of ordnance with 18,000 pounds of that external.

With a radius of action denominated in feet, I should think. Sanitary dihydrogen monoxide auto-ingestion in action.

Would think that ‘beast' mode would be utilised by the USMC once air superiority has been established, and operating from forward bases close to the action where range is not so critical.

Has there been a range given in that config?

[Just This Once...]

The range with external stores is not as truncated as you may think. The F-35 is already relatively fat and draggy so adding some external drag is not as dramatic as it would be on a more traditional aircraft.

[George K Lee]

Brat,

Irony is apparently not native to you. Also, drag your mind out of the gutter, please.

Fetish, n. - an object believed to have supernatural powers, or in particular, a human-made object that has power over others.

As for the USMC hauling 22 klb of ordnance off a short runway, in that case I would suggest that the mission range would be equivalent to the distance to the trees at the end of said runway. There's only so many things any airplane can do at once and I don't thing the STO MTOW would permit it.

JTO - I hadn't thought of it quite that way...

[Lonewolf_50]

George, it seems to me bad form to blast Brat for speculation when you are engaging in the same -- see JTO's pointing that out to you -- regardless of your past linkage to the program. (The last direct contact I had was about 14 years ago).
The program isn't canceled. It's going ahead. I find it amusing that the journalistic fury that got a book like the Pentagon Paradox published still didn't stop the F-18, which aircraft has served pretty well and continues to serve pretty well.

Of what value is your getting shirty with brat about the myriad stumbles the program has had? (My pet "you have to be kidding me!" moment was the original mess with the 'oops, it doesn't work' tail hook for carrier ops :ugh:).
You are coming off like one of the never listening V-22 critics who act as though it's still 2002.
Wake up, George. The year is 2017, the FY is 2018, and this (very expensive) aircraft is going forward. Those in the program will try to make the best of it, as did the F-18 folks over 30 years ago in the face of considerable push back for that aircraft.


That the Canadians can't afford the F-35, or don't like the price tag, is disappointing but that's real life. Sometimes, things don't work out as you hoped they would. I don't blame the Canadians for their reticence given the cost.

[George K Lee]

You can make anything fly with enough power. You can make almost anything reach IOC with enough extra money and time.

Sometimes it's worth it.

[Brat]

You can make anything fly with enough power. You can make almost anything reach IOC with enough extra money and time.

Sometimes it's worth it.

As a lot of people think about the F-35 program.

Never did get your connection or credentials. Still being coy.

[Brat]

Fetish:- a form of sexual desire in which gratification is linked to an abnormal degree to a particular object, item of clothing, part of the body, etc.

And how exactly was this passionate defence of the F-35 by myself, the other 'shills and fanbois' benefiting China’s national defence?

[PhilipG]

Does anyone know when Software Block 3F is finally going to be rolled out?

Further does anyone know what the plans are for bringing the UK's F35s to that standard, thinking of all the press about the USAF not being able to afford to upgrade the c200 F35s that it has at the moment, concurrency..

[Engines]

PhilipG,

Perhaps I can help - although it's over 7 years since I was involved with the programme, and I can only go by what's out there on the net.

Publicly issued information states that Block 3F was planned to be rolled out around October this year, starting with USAF aircraft. Block 3F clears different sets of weapons for A, B and C, so it's a good idea to get out there and see what the plans are. For example, it appears that the USMC is waiting for Block 4 to introduce the 250 pound Small Diameter Bomb. The USAF has stated that it intends to retrofit 3F to all aircraft delivery so far. However, other sources have indicated that some early aircraft might be left in a reduced capability. I've not seen any definite decisions yet. (Shades of Typhoon Tranche 1)

As I've frequently posted before, the F-35 mission system software development programme has been severely delayed compared with the original (highly optimistic) schedules that the JPO went with. Reasons? Many. I think I'd identify:

1. Good old 'optimism bias' - programme managers believing their internal publicity about computer aided design ensuring that all software would be 'right first time' and thus test programmes could be cut right back. These unrealistic programmes were then used to try to keep IOC dates on track.

2. A decision to only have one full mission systems software development and test rig. This decision was challenged in the early days, particularly by BAE, who were still coming out of their nightmare that was Typhoon mission systems development. A second (UK based) software development and test rig was proposed, but the UK MoD wouldn't support it (or foot the bill). Lack of rig capacity has severely hampered software development schedules.

3. Poor requirements development - I've posted on this before. The F-35 programme as developed by LM allowed insufficient time for the systems engineers to develop a properly constructed set of detailed mission system requirements flowing down from the high level JORD. This process is called 'requirements decomposition', and it's not at all sexy or exciting. Worse, it doesn't deliver any progress that your average political or pilot can really grasp. (Honourable exceptions were the specialist UK aircrew provided to support the programme both in the JPO and in LM. They were screaming for this stuff to be done). Instead, LM just steamed ahead to 'get some code written at all costs'. The result was that early mission systems software versions lacked essential features. That meant big rework programmes, and that delayed matters even more.

4. Not invented here - LM had access to a highly talented mission systems team from Warton who has just come off the Typhoon programme, armed with lots of lessons learned and some really advanced concepts for building and testing next generation software. It took LM some time to start listening to these people. Note - I'm not saying 'Brits good, Americans bad' - it's just that LM passed up the chance to bring some fresh knowledge into their mission systems team. After a year or so, Brits were allowed into the mission systems development effort, but much damage had been done by then.

There might be more, but that's all I can reliably add to the conversation. Mission systems software development and test is a formidably complex task. Flight testing of internally and externally carried weapons is also complex, and requires a high level of very specialist knowledge. Clearing weapons and software for operational service isn't at all straightforward either.

The F-35 team aren't chumps. They're working damn hard to deliver what the customer needs, trying to make as few mistakes as possible and get the job done as soon as they can. I suppose the best outcome from this programme would be an improved and more realistic appreciation of the importance of proper requirements development, and the risks involved in marrying up millions of lines of code with potentially hazardous weapon systems, making it work and proving that it's acceptably safe. While I wouldn't bet on that happening, one can only hope.

Best regards as ever to all those working so hard on the F-35 programme to get the capabilities out to the front line.

Engines

[George K Lee]

Thanks, Engines, for the insights.

I would add that - with 21 years of history since LM and Boeing were put on contract to fly the CDAs and design the PWSC - a pattern is apparent. Top management has tended to focus on today's big problem (first weight, then late flight-test assets, then production issues, then software and then...) and make two errors: prescribe an optimistic schedule-driven get-well for the current problem and lose sight of the next.

(Aside: The fans and shills have helped create a climate where this behavior was rewarded, thereby helping to waste a lot of money. And I'm sure that climate has been truly unpleasant for many of the troops in the program.)

The next issue is sustainment and upgrade.

[PhilipG]

Thanks Engines, as ever a very helpful post.

It would seem to me that at the moment the answer to my questions is not sure....

Unless I have misread your post?

[t43562]

I suppose the best outcome from this programme would be an improved and more realistic appreciation of the importance of proper requirements development, and the risks involved in marrying up millions of lines of code with potentially hazardous weapon systems, making it work and proving that it's acceptably safe. While I wouldn't bet on that happening, one can only hope.
Engines

I can only say that where software is concerned it seems that the same mistakes get made alarmingly frequently in the commercial world and also from my experience a lot of people don't learn, or end up making diametrically opposite mistakes to their previous ones. Success seems to be a matter of luck and the weeding out of the bad and entrepreneurs who did things "their way" and not as much about a logical process by which any big company can set about the design of software and guarantee that it will be a success.

Perhaps software should be competed out as engines are?

[Engines]

PhilipG,

My sincere apologies for a schoolboy error - I failed to fully answer the question. Sorry for that.

I think I answered the question about Block 3F. As far as I know, all of the UK's F-35B's will be brought up to Block 3F, and then to Block 4 as that software standard is delivered. The idea is that, as a Tier 1 partner (actually the only Tier 1 partner) the Uk fleet will stay 'in sync' with the US fleet.

I expect that there might be a separate UK 'sub version' of Block 4non national security grounds (both US and UK), but I'm too old and too ill informed to be able to explain how that might work, if it were required.

However, I hope this delayed explanation helps,

Engines

[PhilipG]

Engines,

Thanks again for getting back to me.

Regarding 3F software, I also understood that the software was meant to have been released by now, as yet I have not seen a photo of a F35, that is not part of the test fleet with external stores, makes me think that 3F has yet to be released. Although I have read somewhere that 3F has been released, with no linked source as I recall.

As I understood it plan A was that all F35s would in the end be on the same level of software, implicitly any necessary technical refreshes necessary would have to be installed.

My concern is that IF the USAF has decided NOT to upgrade their early LRIP F35s, where will the UK ones be upgraded and where the funding for the upgrade comes from?

Apologies if I have misunderstood your response.

Philip

[ORAC]

Seems a comprehensive report here. Airworthiness testing has been done using software version 6.2; the IOT&E fleet have been upgraded and are testing the release 6.3; the testing should take a year and the operational release of 6.3 should be at the end of 2018.


https://www.reddit.com/r/F35Lightning/comments/7grg7b/f35_exiting_the_pattern_the_end_of_sdd_and_what/

....Under the restructure plan, initial operational test and evaluation (IOT&E) was supposed to have begun around July 2017, which means the development program will probably wrap up between six and eight months late. That reflects estimates made by top Pentagon leaders—such as former Undersecretary of Defense Frank Kendall—in mid-2016, but is better than estimates made by the Defense operational test and evaluation community that same year. DOT&E forecast that operational testing might be delayed until late 2018 or even early 2019......

”There is “nothing major,” preventing the F-35 from entering the home stretch of its basic development, Joint Program Office director Vice Adm. Mathias Winter told Air Force Magazine in a September interview. “We have the resources” in the Fiscal 2017 and 2018 defense budgets to complete development, Winter said, adding that he expected airworthiness flight testing of all three variants, in the 3F configuration, to conclude in December 2017.......

What will be handed over to the Pentagon’s initial operational test and evaluation community will be a “warfighting capability,” Winter said. The aircraft will be in the 3F configuration, flying with 3F software version 6.3. Developmental test units have already been flying with version 6.2, Winter said.....

While IOT&E depends on handing testers 23 jets in the 3F configuration, Winter’s predecessor, retired Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, told Congress last year an arrangement was being struck with DOT&E to begin testing with fewer jets, adding more as they become available. Earlier-version F-35s, flying with the 2B or 3i software and/or processors, have to be modified to the latest and “final baseline” configuration. The 23 jets comprise six each of the A,B, and C variants from the Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy, while three more will be B models from Britain and two others will be Dutch F-35A models.

So what happens after the jets are handed off? The test community will put them through their paces, matching them against the no-fail requirements set by the services in all the mission areas the F-35 must perform. These include air-to-ground attack, air-to-air combat, suppression of enemy air defenses, electronic warfare, electronic attack, close air support, and ancillary missions related to intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. If all goes well, and no substantive deficiencies are found, the F-35 can proceed to full-rate production in the 3F configuration........

The IOT&E program should last “roughly a year,” Winter said, and the exact test plan was to have been nailed down in November......

[PhilipG]

Thanks for that, so 3F is roughly a year away and there is a facility to upgrade the LRIP airframes.

[ORAC]

IIRC there was always the ability to upgrade the early airframes; the problems being that the list of other structural and system updates required to bring them up to the operational standard, along with the processor and other changes to handle 3F made it so expensive it wasn’t economic.

Secondly the number of aircraft requiring update would serious slow and affect the ramp up of production aircraft and thus increase their unit price.

Lastly, the structural upgrades required in the F-35Bs as add-ons would mean their weight would grow so much their operational payload would be severely effected and would not meet the minimum requirement.

The first is an operational necessity in the IOT&E fleet and the second and third are not a factor. But a very large political question hangs over whether the customer delivered jets will ever be upgraded.

[golder]

The weight of training aircraft wouldn't be an issue. How many are the UK keeping in the US? I understand all partners have to provide training frames. Is this a forever plan?
It also seems that it would impact on 2 or possibly 3 frames @$15M. LRIP 7 concurrency costs seem ok @$5M.
h ttp://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=19101&mode=view
2 F-35B in LRIP run 3,
1 F-35B in LRIP run 4,
1 F-35B in LRIP run 7,
4 F-35B in LRIP run 8, 6 F-35B in LRIP run 9, 3 F-35B in LRIP run 10, 2 F-35B in LRIP run 11, 2 F-35B in LRIP run 12
6 F-35B in LRIP run 13, 8 F-35B in LRIP run 14 and 7 F-35B in LRIP run 15. This brings us to 42 in 2023.

[George K Lee]

Of what value is your getting shirty with brat about the myriad stumbles the program has had?

In hope that the upcoming stumble will be handled better if we take "denial" out of the list of management options.

[Brat]

In a perfect world!??

[Brat]

In the meantime some these ‘stumbling’ disasters of a plane have recently concluded taking part in Vigilant Ace where they will have had the opportunity to test sensors against North Korean forces and validate the accuracy of their threat data library against the real thing in operational conditions. 18 F-35 stealth fighter jets were deployed during the exercise along with 6 F-22’s which has now finished.
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/12/04/vigilant_ace_the_us_and_south_koreas_largest_aerial_show-of-force_to_date_112724.html

[etudiant]

In the meantime some these ‘stumbling’ disasters of a plane have recently concluded taking part in Vigilant Ace where they will have had the opportunity to test sensors against North Korean forces and validate the accuracy of their threat data library against the real thing in operational conditions. 18 F-35 stealth fighter jets were deployed during the exercise along with 6 F-22’s which has now finished.
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/12/04/vigilant_ace_the_us_and_south_koreas_largest_aerial_show-of-force_to_date_112724.html

Doubtless the NK radar operators and their friends are doing exactly the same thing....

History tells us that Sparta was defeated after a long series of indecisive engagements allowed its enemies to identify and target the weak points of its military. The protracted 'war on terror' and exercises such as the above offer similar learning opportunities.

[Brat]

The alternative being?

[etudiant]

The alternative being?

Well, diplomacy does have its uses.
For instance, the US could mention to China and Russia that it is prepared to discuss the sale of nuclear weapons to South Korea and Taiwan unless North Korea is also denuclearized.
My guess is that this might attract more productive discussions than the expensive bluster has to date.

[ORAC]

Fantastic idea. You are aware of the NPT?

[TBM-Legend]

OK now the Israeli Air Force has declared their LM F-35A's operational where are the naysayers?

IDFAF is one of the most combat ready air forces in the World and they're happy...
Israel declares F-35 to be operational | Jane's 360 (http://www.janes.com/article/76204/israel-declares-f-35-to-be-operational)

[Just This Once...]

If somebody else pays the bills then every F-35 customer would be happy. Sadly only Israel is in this fortunate position.

[George K Lee]

JTO is correct.

Israel has cut a unique deal in other ways, particularly in terms of its future ability to match the jet's characteristics to its specific requirements. That is important, not nit-picking.

And they got a gift-wrapped industrial participation package, of the kind that everyone swore blind would never be handed to anyone, into the bargain.

[TBM-Legend]

The real issue is that the aircraft appears to work.

How it is paid for etc etc is a smokescreen. The US uses Israel as a a test and verification piece while maintaining a balance and bastion in the ME.

[Brat]

Israel certainly has a reputation of honing it’s weapon systems to a fine edge, and of being able to use them to their full potential.

[glad rag]

In the meantime some these ‘stumbling’ disasters of a plane have recently concluded taking part in Vigilant Ace where they will have had the opportunity to test sensors against North Korean forces and validate the accuracy of their threat data library against the real thing in operational conditions. 18 F-35 stealth fighter jets were deployed during the exercise along with 6 F-22’s which has now finished.
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/12/04/vigilant_ace_the_us_and_south_koreas_largest_aerial_show-of-force_to_date_112724.html

Give it a rest, everyone knowns that those aircraft are not combat ready, all they are doing is burning gas and boring holes in clouds...

[Lonewolf_50]

Well, diplomacy does have its uses.
My guess is that this might attract more productive discussions than the expensive bluster has to date. Given that the last 40 years of varying approaches have achieved the square root of bloody fork all, this current approach is no better and no worse than previous. Negotiations don't happen in a vacuum. Your suggestions on this simple solution to a somewhat complex problem, have you forwarded it to Foggy Bottom yet? OK, we are heading off topic, so I'll stop there.
I agree with JTO on the virtues of using 'other peoples' money.' As an American tax payer, I am not happy that our special relationship with the UK is somehow being overwritten by this "extra special" relationship with Israel.


everyone knowns that those aircraft are not combat ready, No, everyone does not know that. You appear to be making stuff up. (As to "how many systems are cleared and how many are not" that's another matter and we can thank our friends in the world of software program management for how that's going. :p

[George K Lee]

The US uses Israel as a a test and verification piece[sic]

That may not be correct, since the Israelis appear to be headed towards customizing their F-35s. Media reports refer to an in-country test aircraft being delivered next year. If they follow the pattern with the F-16 (where they also had their own testbed jet) it's quite possible that the IDF jets will diverge from the standard upgrade track.

The real issue is that the aircraft appears to work.

To be more specific, it appears to meet Israeli criteria for IOC (or equivalent) and neither you nor I know what those criteria are.

[KenV]

In the meantime some these ‘stumbling’ disasters of a plane have recently concluded taking part in Vigilant Ace where they will have had the opportunity to test sensors against North Korean forces and validate the accuracy of their threat data library against the real thing in operational conditions. 18 F-35 stealth fighter jets were deployed during the exercise along with 6 F-22’s which has now finished.
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/12/04/vigilant_ace_the_us_and_south_koreas_largest_aerial_show-of-force_to_date_112724.html

Come on! Those aircraft were all flown by Lockheed shills.

[KenV]

Well, diplomacy does have its uses.
For instance, the US could mention to China and Russia that it is prepared to discuss the sale of nuclear weapons to South Korea and Taiwan unless North Korea is also denuclearized.
My guess is that this might attract more productive discussions than the expensive bluster has to date.

Really? That could only be done if the US were to unilaterally abrogate the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, an extremely unlikely event. So China and Russia would almost certainly call that bluff.

[KenV]

To be more specific, it appears to meet Israeli criteria for IOC (or equivalent) and neither you nor I know what those criteria are.Indeed we do not. But we can be confident that Israel's criteria were not created by the LM shills who supposedly created USMC's and USAF's criteria.

[Lonewolf_50]

George, I believe I mentioned a few pages back that the IAF risk assessment and risk thresholds are likely to be different than other nations' programs and processes, and that they are incentivized to exercise the aircraft and arrive at their own change/mod proposals that are tailored to their requirements.

Put another way, they may have been willing to take on far more risk than the other users/stake holders.

[Brat]

The fact is that despite the problems that have occurred, the mistakes made, and indeed the money spent, the project and system has gone ahead, and seems to be a path that has led the way into the future of air combat.

A path that appears to be being followed by the Russians and Chinese.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=HQqLJwyVN68

[George K Lee]

"Despite... the money spent"?

No, Brat. Because of the money spent. Without the Pentagon's deep pockets, or rather its access to the taxpayers' pockets, the project would have been killed off years ago.

And if you think that Russian and Chinese planning looks like the JSF program, you need a stronger eyeglass prescription, or a whack on the head with the good ol' clue-by-four.

[Brat]

Well how about that. The money was spent despite your rabid opposition the project appears to be alive well and they are being being produced, so perhaps you should go and run that head of yours against some wall and stop being a Pierre Sprey Walt.

And no, the Russian pale imitation is nothing like, possibly no money? And the Chinese efforts could do with some decent engines.

[Lonewolf_50]

If the ladies would please put their handbags back on their shoulders, we might have an item or two (new?) to discuss about the F-35.


Or not.

[George K Lee]

ere ya go

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmdfence/326/326.pdf

PS What are the criteria for "decent engines"? My Granny used to say that T:W ratio was an important number for fighters...

[KenV]

PS What are the criteria for "decent engines"? My Granny used to say that T:W ratio was an important number for fighters...There are several. Thrust/wt of the engine package is but one. Other criteria include but are not limited to:
specific fuel consumption
reliability (flt hrs between in-air shut downs)
durability (flt hrs between overhauls)
maintainability (maintenance manhrs per flt hr, etc)
inspectability (presence and location of borescope access points, etc)
compressor stall resistance
steam ingestion resistance (for carrier catapult ops)
throttle response (can it handle large throttle changes over its entire speed envelope)
horsepower extraction capability (for driving various accessories, which may include a huge lift fan in the case of the F-35B's engine)
Bleed air extraction capability
etc, etc, etc.

[Lonewolf_50]

Noise level, so that the EIS doesn't shut down your training wing ...

[Buster15]

There are several. Thrust/wt of the engine package is but one. Other criteria include but are not limited to:
specific fuel consumption
reliability (flt hrs between in-air shut downs)
durability (flt hrs between overhauls)
maintainability (maintenance manhrs per flt hr, etc)
inspectability (presence and location of borescope access points, etc)
compressor stall resistance
steam ingestion resistance (for carrier catapult ops)
throttle response (can it handle large throttle changes over its entire speed envelope)
horsepower extraction capability (for driving various accessories, which may include a huge lift fan in the case of the F-35B's engine)
Bleed air extraction capability
etc, etc, etc.

That pretty much captures the primary requiremens all of which should be defined in the engine requiremens specification. Of particular importance are those 'ility' specs which are required to be demonstrated during the development programme. EJ200 is a good example where all the Reliability Maintainability and Testability had to be and were demonstrated. These are so important during the whole life cycle of the product.

[Turbine D]

Originally Posted by Brat:
Well how about that. The money was spent despite your rabid opposition the project appears to be alive well and they are being being produced, so perhaps you should go and run that head of yours against some wall and stop being a Pierre Sprey Walt.
Perhaps you are a little late to the F-35 discussion scene and missed the early history and why the program is what it is. The idea of designing and building one aircraft to do three different service missions harkens back to the Robert McNamara "folly" aircraft of the 60s which turned out to be a booming success story (tongue in cheek) as so few were built before the program was cancelled. It was cancelled because in the US Congress it received little ongoing support except from the State where the company that built it was located and it cost too much.

Now, fifty years later, give or take a few, Congress recalled the McNamara "folly" and bulletproofed the F-35 by spreading out where its individual pieces are manufactured to include nearly all 50 US States plus some foreign countries, thus assuring as you noted "the project is alive and well". Then when milestones were missed and costs ballooned, the Pentagon authorities moved the aircraft capability goalposts numerous times to fit reality and assure Congress everything was okay, we are doing just fine, just send money. So is the F-35 going to be a modern-day McNamara "folly" aircraft or an average aircraft, neither a complete success or complete failure?

Success/failure has yet to be determined, landing and taking off, firing weapons on a test range, non-detection due to its "stealth" and the recent multiple F-35 flight demonstration around South Korea near North Korea isn't proof of anything at the moment. One sure thing, beyond the procurement cost, one needs to have deep pockets for the long run. For the fleet size the Pentagon wants the life-cycle cost projections now top 1.2 trillion US dollars and it will probably go higher, nothing ever stays the same. Brat, if you haven't been, you need to save your Pounds, maybe invest in Bitcoins, lobby your politicians and DoD do the same, the F-35s are not cheap short term or in the long run for a typical average aircraft...

[Brat]

With handbag shouldered, as George has indicated the new item on the F-35. The latest Government submission on the F-35 in response to recent issues of concern.
https://publications.parliament.uk/p.../326/32610.htm
...others have possibly enlarged on his paternal grandparent’s views on a suitable engine.

There have been numerous claims made concerning both the F-35, and HMS Queen Elizabeth since both projects began in our strategic defence planning. Defence is not nor never has been ‘cheap’. And neither could be describes as average.

Given the significance, and cost of both programmes to this country, with regard to both defence and industrial base, it is perfectly reasonable to maintain scrutiny, and to expect the programme to remain timely and affordable.

Opinions have differed to a huge degree on each. Given the number of countries involved with the F-35 it could be argued that much more attention has been paid to that.

With the different political parties in charge of the various countries, and different military procurement teams, it can be said that of any major military weapon program this one may well have had the most scrutiny.

There continue to be issues of concern raised that require answers. This appears to give some to this.
https://publications.parliament.uk/p...ce/326/326.pdf

[Turbine D]

Brat,
https://publications.parliament.uk/p.../326/32610.htm
and
https://publications.parliament.uk/p...ce/326/326.pdf
I get:Page cannot be found, Must be secret info...

BTW, In terms of average, I am speaking about F-35 performance, what it probable will be verses what it could have been. The F-35 Program represent the "Finest Hours", or should I say, "Finest Years" between the military industrial complex and the government...

[sandiego89]

Looks like the C went back to the boat.


Carrier qualifications on the ABRAHAM LINCOLN: Lincoln Completes 1st F-35 Carrier Qualification (http://www.asdnews.com/news/defense/2017/12/15/lincoln-completes-1st-f35-carrier-qualification)


No mention of the head bobble/neck strain issue. Has the catapult stroke or strut been tweaked?


Article repasted:
The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) successfully completed Fleet Replacement Squadron (FRS) Carrier Qualifications for the F-35C Lightning II program, carrier qualifying the first nine fleet aviators in the new aircraft, while underway Dec. 7-11.

Along with Abraham Lincoln, the "Rough Raiders" of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 125, the "Grim Reapers" of VFA-101, and VX-9 accomplished many first steps including first-time use of Autonomic Logistic Information System (ALIS) aboard a carrier, and use of the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) in an operational setting.

"Thanks to the tireless work from the VFA-125, VFA-101, VX-9, CVN72, and the Lockheed Team this detachment was able to successfully complete numerous milestones that will set the foundation for the future 5th generation employment of the F-35C into the Carrier Air Wing," said Cmdr. Scott Hulett, VFA-125 executive officer.

One of those milestones achieved was with ALIS, an information infrastructure that allows operators to plan, maintain, and sustain systems over the F-35Cs. The system provides a secure way to transmit up-to-date operations, maintenance, prognostic, support, training and technical data to users and technicians worldwide. According to Lockheed Martin, the developer of the F-35C, ALIS is considered the IT backbone of current and future aircraft throughout the Department of Defense.

Abraham Lincoln operated in inclement weather during portion of the qualification process, which gave the squadrons varying condition to test the new landing system, JPALS. The all-weather system works with the ship's navigation system to provide accurate and reliable guidance for the aircraft. Prior to this underway, F-35Cs only used JPALS for developmental testing.

While the pilots put new systems to the test in the air, Abraham Lincoln Sailors, both on and below deck achieved important milestones. The aircraft intermediate maintenance department performed their first unassisted F-35C tire change. This accomplishment provided proven capabilities that will help ensure full and successful integration of the air wing with Abraham Lincoln.

"We could not have achieved our lofty goals without the dedication and expertise from everyone involved. We look forward to working with the CVN72 team throughout 2018 as we continue to ensure 5th generation power projection from the sea," said Hulett.

By 2025, the Navy's aircraft carrier air wings are forecasted to consist of F-35C, F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, EA-18G Growlers electronic attach aircraft, E-2D Hawkeye battle management and control aircraft, MH-60R/S helicopters and Carrier Onboard Delivery logistics aircraft.
Abraham Lincoln is currently underway conducting carrier qualifications and training.

[t43562]

What good is "scrutiny" if there is no real threat of the aircraft being cancelled or replaced?

[KenV]

That pretty much captures the primary requiremens all of which should be defined in the engine requiremens specification. Of particular importance are those 'ility' specs which are required to be demonstrated during the development programme. EJ200 is a good example where all the Reliability Maintainability and Testability had to be and were demonstrated. These are so important during the whole life cycle of the product.Its the depth and breadth of the requirements (especially the "ility" requirements) that set apart western engines from their eastern counterparts, which are often designed without many ility requirements at all.

And one requirement I missed is visible smoke emissions. To put this in perspective, the smoke problem was solved in the J79 (which powered the F-4 and many other aircraft) way back in the 1960s and all western engines since have been pretty much smokeless. And yet, the MiG-29's engines still have problems with smoke.

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/attachments/commercial-vehicles/1401434d1439067797-mig-29-fulcrum-balance-rests-us-mig29_smoke.jpg

[KenV]

What good is "scrutiny" if there is no real threat of the aircraft being cancelled or replaced?There are lots and LOTS of incentives for success and disincentives for failure short of program cancellation/replacement.

[Brat]

Apologies turbine, I did read the answer to the first PDF posted but am uncertain if I can copy and post.

In there was quoted the following blog in support of the submission in reply to the times article, which may have already been posted/seen.

https://ukcarrierpower.tumblr.com/post/163087799726/the-f-35-is-the-best-fighter-jet-out-there

[glad rag]

That was a good read right up to....

"The aircraft intermediate maintenance department performed their first unassisted F-35C tire change. This accomplishment provided proven capabilities that will help ensure full and successful integration of the air wing with Abraham Lincoln."

Desperate. Desperate.

[sandiego89]

That was a good read right up to....

"The aircraft intermediate maintenance department performed their first unassisted F-35C tire change. This accomplishment provided proven capabilities that will help ensure full and successful integration of the air wing with Abraham Lincoln."....
.


I caught that also- a squadron crew changed a tire apparently without LockMart help!!!!


Flying a complex type to the boat, first real qualifications with fleet type pilots, complex nav systems, landings, data sharing at sea, challenging weather....and you talk about a tire change....

[Turbine D]

Originally Posted by KenV
To put this in perspective, the smoke problem was solved in the J79 (which powered the F-4 and many other aircraft) way back in the 1960s and all western engines since have been pretty much smokeless.
Well, not quite. I was around, believe it or not, when the solution to the J79 engine smoke on military aircraft was established, it was called the smokeless combustor. It was in the mid-1970s before it was fully implemented on the Phantom fighter. And more up to date, this is a photo of B-52s taking off for the 2016 readiness exercise:

http://i1166.photobucket.com/albums/q609/DaveK72/gallery-1474476826-2861284_zpss2dpdgua.jpg (http://s1166.photobucket.com/user/DaveK72/media/gallery-1474476826-2861284_zpss2dpdgua.jpg.html)

Bottom line is there is often a difference in time reality between problem solution and implementation of the solution, sometimes decades.

[George K Lee]

I have been around this business for a while, and have never seen a media release that highlighted the achievement of changing a tire.

KenV - Yes, there are all sorts of nice-to-haves in an engine, but just as SFC is the big one for commercial engines, T/W is important for a fighter engine because of its influence on the rest of the design. It then becomes a driving requirement for the engine.

Right behind it is transonic/supersonic performance, which drives supersonic acceleration and supersonic persistence (the F100/F110 generation were not so strong there, the EJ200 and F119 are better).

It will be interesting to see where the new engine for the J-20 falls out, but I'd be a bit surprised if they're still in the 6.5:1 T/W class. As (cough) some engines are.

[Brat]

Yes the Chinese appear to have made significant advances according to this.
https://www.popsci.com/china-stealth-fighter-new-engine

The latest WS-10 Taihang turbofan engines developed and manufactured in China distinguished by serrated afterburner nozzles and interior flaps for manipulating the exhaust flow, appear to be an advanced variant of the Russian Al-31 turbofan engine.

The semicircle of small flaps, vanes which control exhaust flows on the inner nozzle, and wider after-burning variable geometry petals are absent on the Salyut AL-31. The sawtoothed serrations on the edges of its after-burning nozzles providing reduced radar signature.

Thought to provide about 14-15 tons of thrust means the J-20 can probably super-cruise at Mach 1-1.2. Possibly due to recent advances in superalloy research and single crystal turbine blades of rhenium-nickel superalloys allowing for a hotter and more efficient engine used in light weight high thrust engines like the US F109 turbofan.

Engine development in China has previously appear to have been handicapped by inferior single crystal turbine blades and the new advances could signal a major breakthrough.

[George K Lee]

Bingo, Brat.

Next question - how, otherwise, are the Chinese plans for the deployment and development of LO technology different from the F-35 program?

Hint: H-6K, J-10B/C, J-20 roles and missions.

[Brat]

Play somewhere else Mr Lee.

[Turbine D]

Thanks for the article Brat.

There isn't enough rhenium in the world to supply the needs of GE, CFMI, RR & P-W let alone the Chinese entering the market. Rhenium is a by-product of copper mining where the copper ore contains molybdenum, not all copper mines contain rhenium. For the ones that do, rhenium content in the copper ore is measured in parts per million, 15-30ppm is typical as I recall. If copper demand sinks, prices go down and some mines close because mining costs are higher than copper prices. It is a tough element to be dependent on for turbine airfoils, both from availability and cost viewpoints.

[George K Lee]

So do many engine manufacturers use something else?

It's a new story to me, but high-temperature turbine production has been accelerating steadily for decades, and you'd have thought it would have been a flagged issue.

In any event, engine production for the J-20's not going to drive the exotic-metals market any time soon.

BTW, this was the only reference I could find:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/12/17/the-modern-economy-depends-on-dozens-of-obscure-metals-what-happens-if-we-run-out/?utm_term=.930a6aed0857

[George K Lee]

As to the linked media release above about the program meeting its delivery goals....

Actually it seems they sort of did and sort of didn't, according to the highly professional Israeli site Defense Update.

In contrast to these positive news, the Pentagon’s contract management agency said the number of aircraft delivered in 2017 came short of its annual goal, because the 66 delivered included nine planes that were supposed to be delivered in 2016.

http://defense-update.com/20171218_f35_2017.html (http://defense-update.com/20171218_f35_2017.htmlNot)

Not the end of the world, but jeez, after 21 years of investment...

[A_Van]

Regarding raw metals in aviation in general, the following article might be of interest:


How Long Can the U.S. Rely on Russian Titanium? | RealClearWorld (http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2014/08/12/how_long_can_the_us_rely_on_russian_titanium.html)

[Turbine D]

Originally Posted by George K Lee
So do many engine manufacturers use something else?

It's a new story to me, but high-temperature turbine production has been accelerating steadily for decades, and you'd have thought it would have been a flagged issue.
It is true, rhenium has been used to add both temperature capability and improve high temperature strength in turbine airfoils for decades. But as events would have it, the availability of rhenium was an issue and worrisome but always available and manageable.

First it was used in petroleum cracking towers, those used to produce unleaded gasoline. It replaced 10% of the platinum catalyst at one tenth the cost of the platinum it replaced. That usage didn't affect the aircraft engine turbine market in the long run as the petroleum folks found a way to clean and reuse the rhenium after it ran through a cracking tower's catalyst total life cycle.

P&W were the first to use a substantial amount of rhenium in their proprietary high temperature alloys for turbine blades. However, that amount dropped off as their commercial engine business went down when GE's commercial business increased. GE entered the rhenium usage marketplace with the F110 engine competing against P&W's F100 engine. Then after settling a patent dispute with P&W, GE began to use it in commercial engines as well. The availability of rhenium remained acceptable because the price of copper rose and copper production increased as well as the supply of rhenium which mainly comes from a molybdenum producer in Chile but some from the US producer as well. Both GE and P&W maintained reserves in case the copper market changed. A typical high temperature superalloy contains 3% rhenium.

Then Rolls Royce entered the rhenium market on their newer commercial and military engine alloys. Everything was okay in the beginning because the Chinese were buying copper and molybdenum in huge quantities enhancing the availability of rhenium. Then a problem occurred, the Chinese copper and molybdenum market slowed and it became apparent there may not be enough rhenium available for all the new turbine airfoil production, excluding Russia from the picture. So what is the solution?

Develop new superalloys that have the same capability as rhenium containing alloys which do not contain rhenium or have a reduced rhenium content. I know of one engine producer that has done this with some success. Also, reclamation programs have been established with engine customers to reclaim used parts and recover the rhenium through remelting the recovered parts back into alloy for new rhenium alloy part manufacturing.

There is a lot at play when the material is a byproduct of a byproduct as is the case with rhenium.

[glad rag]

An interesting read, Turbine D: who is going to blink first in the resources race?


https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51NZT01kVAL.jpg

[ORAC]

The point about rare earths is that they aren’t rare at all, they exist everywhere, just at very low concentrations. rhenium is in minerals found everywhere, just at concentrations of about 1 part per billion. The reason copper and molybdenum ores are used as a source is because they possess it in higher proportions, and the cost is reduced as it is byproduct.

Yes, the price will go up; yes, as the price goes up alternatives will be found; but it won’t run out, and in a cost product like a jet engine, there will always be a source.

[Turbine D]

ORAC,
rhenium is in minerals found everywhere, just at concentrations of about 1 part per billion.

Rhenium rarely occurs as a native element or as its own sulfide mineral; most rhenium is present as a substitute for molybdenum in molybdenite. We have molybdenum mines in the US that do not contain rhenium, same is true of some copper mines. Sediment-hosted strata-bound copper deposits in Kazakhstan (of the sandstone type) that contain rhenium also contain harmful impurities that must be eliminated before using the resulting rhenium in superalloys at added costs.

https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/pp1802P

[ORAC]

It is also found elsewhere, such as in manganese and uranium ores. As I said it is much lower concentrations and not currently economic to recover. But it is there if required, as the Russians researched.

http://www.sibran.ru/upload/iblock/38f/38f0604087b6cce55f175af98515b5cc.pdf

[glad rag]

I'm sure there is a point on the periodic table where the elements become extra-terrestrial, think it's iron...

[ORAC]

Everything beyond hydrogen and helium. We are all the residue of nova and supernova.

[iranu]

It's off topic, but:

Availability of Rhenium will not be an issue when ceramic matrix composite (CMC) turbine blades become the norm.

I was involved with research into ceramic materials for static engine components in the early 90s. Specifically Silicon Nitride in the form of SiAlON as well as Silicon Carbide.

Neither of which were viable with the technology of the time, even for static parts, but lots of original work lead to a greater understanding of material properties and advancements in manufacturing.

CMCs are beginning to worm their way into commercial and military engines (see LEAP, GE9X and of course F135 exhaust nozzle). Those applications are all static components, but it's only a matter of time. I'd say about 20 years considering the development cycle.

[ORAC]

Lies, damn lies and.... (http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/17250/lockheed-touts-non-existent-beast-mode-f-35-configuration-with-16-air-to-air-missiles) No, unfortunately - just lies.....

[George K Lee]

It's hard to see what point they're even trying to make.

It's not a KPP, it doesn't appear to be funded for flight-test, few if any other fighters even bother to demonstrate with those Christmas-tree loads any more, you're not going to reach the WBY very fast with 27 klb thrust and > 70 klb gross weight and a 35-foot span, and you're not going far if you use burner all the way to altitude.

[FODPlod]

Not sure why some people are getting so upset about a graphic portraying potential developments.

http://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/foundry/image/?q=60&url=https%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Fthe-drive-staging%2Fmessage-editor%252F1514511677451-bbq5g.jpg

[George K Lee]

Not sure why some people are getting so upset about a graphic portraying potential developments.

Exactly! It might be different if the program had a two-decade history of inflated claims and optimistic predictions, but we all know that's not the case.

[FODPlod]

Not sure why some people are getting so upset about a graphic portraying potential developments.

Exactly! It might be different if the program had a two-decade history of inflated claims and optimistic predictions, but we all know that's not the case.

Could be worse: ;)

1983 - Aircraft* development begins.
1994 - Aircraft first flight.
2007 - RAF takes delivery of first aircraft.
2017 - Aircraft achieves integration of MBDA Meteor Beyond Visual Range air-to-air missile.

* Eurofighter Typhoon (https://www.arrse.co.uk/wiki/Eurofighter_Typhoon). Other expensive jet fighters with protracted development programmes are available.

[George K Lee]

Very true, but missing an item or so:

1983 - Aircraft* development begins.
1989-92 - NATO's adversary self-destructs.
1990 - Germany elects government committed to cancel program.
1992-2000 - Partner air forces shrink, also slowing the increase in average airplane age.
1994 - Aircraft first flight.
1997 - German Government talked off the ledge.
1998 - Contract signed for production, and development of production-standard airplane.
2004-20XX - One government or another (usually Germany) drags feet over every stage of the contract.
2007 - RAF takes delivery of first aircraft.
2017 - Aircraft achieves integration of MBDA Meteor Beyond Visual Range air-to-air missile.

This blatantly erroneous tu quoque comparison has been part of the fans' manual since 2010 or so.

Rafale has a parallel story, but in that case the program had to accommodate the different needs of the AdlA, which was left well supplied with newish M2000s at the end of the CW, and the Aeronavale, which urgently needed an F-8 replacement.

[Rhino power]

2007 - RAF takes delivery of first aircraft...

No, not so much, initial Typhoon deliveries to the RAF (to 17(R) Sqn) began in 2003 under the Case White contract, this provided initial support and training while 29(R) got up to speed and before they moved to Coningsby in July 2005...
Whilst Typhoon's development has also been somewhat glacial, much of that is down to the partner nation's procrastination, Germany in particular in the early years and also a lack of financial commitment, the F-35 on the other hand has never suffered any financial constraints which have impacted it's development, in fact it's more or less had money thrown at it constantly!

-RP

[Frostchamber]

Not sure about the 2007 delivery date. The RAF's understanding is that deliveries started in 2003 to 17(R) Sqn at Warton, for development and testing. The first Coningsby sqn was activated in 2005, Typhoon took over responsibility for UK QRA in 2007 and was formally declared as an air defence platform on 1 Jan 2008. [EDIT - as Rhino has just said while I was typing. Doh...]

[FODPlod]

No, not so much, initial Typhoon deliveries to the RAF (to 17(R) Sqn) began in 2003 under the Case White contract, this provided initial support and training while 29(R) got up to speed and before they moved to Coningsby in July 2005...

Whilst Typhoon's development has also been somewhat glacial, much of that is down to the partner nation's procrastination, Germany in particular in the early years and also a lack of financial commitment, the F-35 on the other hand has never suffered any financial constraints which have impacted it's development, in fact it's more or less had money thrown at it constantly!

-RP
Where have I heard that before? This paragon compared to the F-35?

Management of the Typhoon Project

The cost of each Typhoon aircraft has risen by 75 per cent. While Typhoon performs some defence tasks now, it won’t take on all roles until 2018...

Among the findings in today’s report are that key investment decisions were taken on an over-optimistic basis and costs have risen at a rate the MOD did not predict. The objectives of four partner nations on the project are not fully aligned and decision-making is slow. There have also been problems with spares and other support which mean the RAF is not flying Typhoon as much as planned.

Okay, Typhoon first flew with the RAF for development and testing in 2003 although not operational until 2007.

[George K Lee]

While Typhoon performs some defence tasks now, it won’t take on all roles until 2018...

And as you know perfectly well, the missions for which Typhoon is being developed today are not the mission for which it was originally designed.

Nobody's holding up the Typhoon as a paragon. That's a strawman-fallacy argument, another diversionary tactic. The point is that a direct Typhoon-to-JSF comparison is simplistic and uninformative because of the very different histories of the programs.

Actually, in some respects the F-35 has been better managed than Typhoon: it has a single project office reporting to one DoD point of contact (OSD); it has never had a purely-budget-driven cut to its annual top-line*; and no significant upward change has been made to the JORD requirements since 2000.

All those factors are very good things for program management, but they also eliminate many handy excuses for delays and overruns.

* Such as "there's a war in Iraq/a budget crisis/etc. so we need to give JSF a haircut and slip IOC by XX months."

[glad rag]

http://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/foundry/image/?q=60&url=https%3a%2f%2fs3.amazonaws.com%2fthe-drive-staging%2fmessage-editor%252f1514511677451-bbq5g.jpg

Stealth, uhuh,

what is it good for?

.... Absolutely Nothing

[George K Lee]

You're on to something there, GR. "Beast mode" sounds so much better than "subsonic, short-range and completely non-stealthy mode".

[glad rag]

"Future weapons designs should use F-35 as Design Driver"


Even more mediocrity for tomorrows "warfighters"?

:\

[golder]

That was an early slide, they are saying 6 aim-120 internal for the A and C

[KenV]

Stealth, uhuh,

what is it good for?

.... Absolutely Nothing

Cute! As incredibly short sighted as Starr's song it's based on, but cute.

[Heathrow Harry]

Ken - be fair - you wouldn't start with the F-35 if you want a non-stealthy bomb truck would you?

It's only because there may be nothing else that it's even worth considering

[KenV]

Ken - be fair - you wouldn't start with the F-35 if you want a non-stealthy bomb truck would you?

No, probably not. (I say probably, because stealth is only ONE of the F-35's unique capabilities. It has others.) And why some nations have chosen the F-15, F-16, F-18, Typhoon, Rafale, and even Gripen over F-35.

But stealth worth "ABSOLUTELY NOTHING"? Not even remotely true.

It's only because there may be nothing else that it's even worth considering"Nothing else?" I just listed SIX western "something else" currently in production and did not include what's being offered by Russia, China, and soon seemingly India. The Israel Air Force knows a thing or two about power projection from the air and they seem very pleased to include a stealth aircraft with the F-35's sensor/processor suite in their bag of tricks. I could say the same thing about USN.

[KenV]

Short sighted???

Sorry, nope. I said both are "incredibly short sighted." But your statement is cute.

[Trim Stab]

You're on to something there, GR. "Beast mode" sounds so much better than "subsonic, short-range and completely non-stealthy mode".

Subsonic, short-range, completely non stealthy beast mode is maybe why the F35 is also slated for a CAS role to eventually replace the A-10.

The Legendary A-10 Warthog vs. the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: Who Wins? | The National Interest Blog (http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-legendary-10-warthog-vs-the-f-35-joint-strike-fighter-19878)

[glad rag]

That was an early slide, they are saying 6 aim-120 internal for the A and C

And what is the UK lumbered with?

{Apart from the Temp and NVH issues}

[glad rag]

Subsonic, short-range, completely non stealthy beast mode is maybe why the F35 is also slated for a CAS role to eventually replace the A-10.

The Legendary A-10 Warthog vs. the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: Who Wins? | The National Interest Blog (http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-legendary-10-warthog-vs-the-f-35-joint-strike-fighter-19878)

Interesting thing that many on here stated if could CAS from 30,000 ft with the wayward [quote_to rip them up_unquote] gun system/PGM and it was naturally out of small/med/large AAA effect.
Which is handy as the ballistic trials/testing fell to the wayside under operation "catch up".....which is of course why the IAF is flying them with external lightning 5 pods ..what was that you were saying about attributes again Ken?

:ok:

[Brat]

If the F-35 is performing a role that does not require it to be stealthy, then the fact that it can perform in ‘beast’ mode is simply another plus to it’s versatility.

A fact that appears to sail right over one or two members of the ‘anti’ brigade.

[George K Lee]

Of course everyone knows that the F-35 can carry external loads. That's why it's an F-35 and not an F-117. It's not "another plus to it's [sic] versatility", it's one of the basic requirements that have cost $50bn to meet.

The question is whether the 22,000 pound load identified by the teenage-video-player name of "beast" mode is realistic, or even attainable.

[George K Lee]

Kenneth old chap...

Stealth is only ONE of the F-35's unique capabilities. It has others.

Stealth is not unique to the F-35, as you well know. There are aircraft that have been in service for years that match or exceed its stealth characteristics, so why do you even make that statement?

And what other capabilities of the aircraft are actually "unique"?

[George K Lee]

Trim Stab... The key word is "eventually".

[Lyneham Lad]

This might be news to some...
Lockheed meets 2017 F-35 delivery goal (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/lockheed-meets-2017-f-35-delivery-goal-444363/?cmpid=NLC%7CFGFG%7CFGFDN-2018-0103-GLOBnews&sfid=70120000000taAm)
(Flight Global)