F-35 Up Close @ Nellis

[CoffmanStarter]

It certainly is an ugly bird ... you can now appreciate the comments on the poor 6 o'clock viz :suspect:

F-35 Lightning II Arrives At Nellis Air Force Base

Coff.

[SpazSinbad]

My favourite Gen. Bogdan quotes on the visibility issue:

F-35 Production on Track, Program Chief Says 14 Mar 2013 By Claudette Roulo | American Forces Press Service

F-35 Production on Track, Program Chief Says (http://www.asdnews.com/news-48155/F-35_Production_on_Track,_Program_Chief_Says.htm)

"...Bogdan said recent criticisms about technical issues and allegations of limited aft visibility are ill-informed. “I don't lose sleep at night over the technical issues on this program,” he said. There are known solutions for all of the known issues with the aircraft, he added.

“We have yet to fly a single air-to-air engagement with another F-35 or another airplane,” he said. “The airplane's not ready to do that. We're still doing basic training on the airplane, [and] we're still doing basic testing on the airplane. So for someone to assess that the visibility behind the airplane is such that it will 'get gunned down every time,' a little premature."..."
___________

F-35: Quotes of the Day 13 Mar 2013 Barry Graff

http://whythef35.********.com.au/2013/03/f-35-quotes-of-day.html

"I've pointed out the absurdity of a particular quote attributed to a "leaked memo" from the Director of the Operational Test and Evaluation Directorate to the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, i.e.:

Other sections of the report outline some of the flaws that make the cockpit unsafe for pilots:

“The out-of-cockpit visibility in the F-35A is less than other Air Force fighter aircraft The head rest is too large and will impede aft [rear] visibility and survivability during surface and air engagements. Aft visibility will get the pilot gunned [down] every time in dogfights."

Lieutenant General Bogden(sic), DoD's lead man on the F-35 program, was apparently hit with a question about this by someone in the media. His answer is priceless:

[I]He pointed out the DAS system, would allow rear viewing (and below) and then said, “If some F-35 pilot out there is afraid of getting gunned every time, then we can have him fly C-12s.”

Of course a C-12 is the military of a civilian King Air. In terms of insulting a fighter pilot, I can't imagine a worse one. What Bogden effectively did is dismiss the criticism as just plain nonsense. That won't stop uniformed critics from still trying to use this as some sort of indicator of the aircraft's deficiencies, but, in fact, it is a red herring...."

[rmac]

But at least he should admit that it is definitely fugly

[ORAC]

What Bogden effectively did is dismiss the criticism as just plain nonsense. That won't stop uniformed critics from still trying to use this as some sort of indicator of the aircraft's deficiencies, but, in fact, it is a red herring...." The pilots quoted weren't picked to fly the F-35 evaluation of the street; their comments weren't included in the report without a lot of thought about the consequences; and the Director of the Operational Test and Evaluation Directorate wouldn't have sent a memo to the Vice JCS without even more thought.

For Bogden then to trash and dismiss the comments in such a fashion sends more alarm bells ringing than almost anything else I can imagine. Someone is panicking and trying to squash the report before it's taken up by someone in the Senate.

[SpazSinbad]

"What? Me Worry?" Alfred E. Neumann quote. :hmm:

U.S. pilots start F-35 training flights as report pans jet 07 Mar 2013 Andrea Shalal-Esa

U.S. starts F-35 training as report pans jet | World | News | Canmore Leader (http://www.canmoreleader.com/2013/03/07/us-pilots-start-f-35-training-flights-as-report-pans-jet)

“WASHINGTON — Some students in the U.S. Air Force’s F-35 fighter pilot school took their first flights on Wednesday [06 Mar 2013] in the new radar-evading jet as a report by the Pentagon’s chief tester found fault with early versions of the plane’s radar, pilot helmet & other systems…

...Defense officials said they were not surprised by the negative tone of the report given Gilmore’s views, but said it included no “showstoppers” that jeopardized the program, which must complete several more years of development before it moves into combat testing and is declared ready for operational use.

The report reviewed an “operational utility evaluation” conducted by the Air Force last year before it decided to start training seasoned pilots to fly the F-35 fighter. The training lasts 3 months and includes time in the classroom, on sophisticated simulators, and in the air. This year, the Air Force says it plans to train about 72 pilots & 711 mechanics to maintain the new planes. The first official class just completed the academic portion of their training & are now taking to the skies....

...The Air Force’s Air Education and Training Command, which approved the start of training in December, said it believed the training system was perfoming adequately and should continue.

Lockheed, the prime contractor on the F-35 program, said it agreed with the Air Force’s decision to start training pilots on the F-35, and said it was confident that the service was able to conduct safe and effective flight training operations. It said it would continue to refine the operating and tactical procedures for the jet as needed.

Joe DellaVedova, spokesman for the Pentagon’s F-35 program office, said Gilmore’s latest report was based on the Air Force’s report about its evaluation, which had found no reason to hold off on training experienced pilots to fly the new plane. He said the Air Force & F-35 program office already knew about the issues raised in the report & were working to resolve them....”

[Not_a_boffin]

The viz doesn't look anything like as good as an F14, F15, F16, F18, SHAR, GR9, Tiffy or A10 for that matter.

But does that make it a show-stopper? Looks a bit better than Tornado, F117and F4, A7, A6, Buccaneer, all of which were very successful.

It's obviously not ideal, but is this another case of "there's something that's not as good as it is on the F-whatever, it MUST be cancelled immediately!" outrage bus?

[CoffmanStarter]

"Looks better than a Buccaneer" ... I beg your pardon :eek:

[JSFfan]

Stoopid mericans...mother russia has da looking-glass to see back

http://www4.picturepush.com/photo/a/12413682/640/12413682.jpg (http://picturepush.com/public/12413682)[/URL]
[URL="http://picturepush.com/public/12413682"] (http://picturepush.com/public/12413682)

[SpazSinbad]

F-35 JSF Distributed Aperture System (EO DAS)

F-35 JSF Distributed Aperture System (EO DAS) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9fm5vfGW5RY)

"Uploaded on Mar 19, 2010 Courtesy: Northrop Grumman
Northrop Grumman has developed the only 360 degree, spherical situational awareness system in the electro-optical distributed aperture system (DAS). The DAS surrounds the aircraft with a protective sphere of situational awareness. It warns the pilot of incoming aircraft and missile threats as well as providing day/night vision, fire control capability and precision tracking of wingmen/friendly aircraft for tactical maneuvering.

Designated the AN/AAQ-37, and comprising six electro-optical sensors, the full EO DAS will enhance the F-35's survivability and operational effectiveness by warning the pilot of incoming aircraft and missile threats, providing day/night vision and supporting the navigation function of the F-35's forward-looking infrared sensor.

The DAS provides: * Missile detection and tracking * Launch point detection * Situational awareness IRST & cueing * Weapons support * Day/night navigation

In addition to developing the EO DAS, Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems is supplying the F-35's AN/APG-81 advanced electronically scanned array (AESA) fire-control radar. The AESA radar is designed to enable the pilot to effectively engage air and ground targets at long range, while also providing outstanding situational awareness."

[Not_a_boffin]

"Looks better than a Buccaneer" ... I beg your pardon

As obviously nothing looks better than a Bucc, especially one in Sea Grey paint with Royal Navy written on it, I shall rephrase my point above ....

"visibility aft looks a bit better than..... etc"

[Bevo]

Might be good if it worked like the Northrop YouTube video.

Then there’s the high-tech computer-linked helmet-mounted display system that will control these weapons (already in use with other aircraft and in other air forces)—classified as “deficient”. Doesn’t work. Why? “Expected capabilities that were not delivered” (35) include latency problems with the distributed aperture system (DAS) in the helmet-mounted video display. Latency—some call it ‘transport time’—is the time between aircraft sensors’ signal acquisition and its transmission and projection in readable format on the pilot’s helmet video display. Currently at .133 seconds, that time delay of over an eighth of a second then has to be added to the pilot’s additional physical response time of about .15 seconds if he or she is to react to the data displayed and launch a weapon. In dogfights with closing speeds of over 1000 knots, this cumulative delay of more than a quarter of a second can be potentially fatal, and the latency-derived .133 second margin of error in initial aim point stands as an unacceptable contributor to this dangerous combat deficiency. Then add in deficient “night vision acuity,” excessive jitter that degrades data and images, inconsistent bore sight alignment, distracting “green glow” seepage from other avionics, imagery and data unable to be recorded (35). So—those high-tech air-to-air missiles and guided bombs cannot even be launched.When Money is No Object: the Strange Saga of the F-35 » Counterpunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names (http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/03/04/when-money-is-no-object-the-strange-saga-of-the-f-35/)

[Lonewolf_50]

FWIW, the lack of rear vis has not been some sort of technological surprise. When was F-35 chosen after the fly off?

I want to understand: how is this all of a sudden a big issue? Engineering and design demands tradeoffs. Anyone familiar with aircraft ought to know this.

[SpazSinbad]

For 'Bevo': (Apologies for my non-existent skills in translating Norwegian to English)

- It goes slowly forward 28 Feb 2012

Google Translate (http://translate.google.com.au/translate?sl=no&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.regjeringen.no%2Fnb%2Fdep%2Ffd%2Ftema%2Fk ampfly-til-forsvaret%2F--det-gar-sakte-men-sikkert-fremover.html%3Fid%3D715294)

"...Progress in technical development
After much work has now identified or fully developed solutions to all the known technical challenges on the plane. This includes the most talked about challenges that helmet, software development and the protection against lightning.

- We see that progress with the helmet is now so good that one is likely to return to a solution at the next major milestone in April, and it will then scrutinize backup solution began to work with last year. Lightning Protection has now agreed on a solution, and restrictions on flights in the storm will be repealed in 2015, while software version "2B" installed in the aircraft. This is the software the U.S. Marine Corps will be operational in 2015, and where shortly after the use of F-35 in crisp military operations if necessary. The development of software in general, where we previously saw a backlog is now collected, and the development of Block 2B software is now on track to be installed in 2015. This shows that the measures taken just months back, now performing well, says Klever...."

Another forum translation of the relevant phrase is: "...- We see that progress with the helmet is now so good that [they/we] are likely to go back to one solution at the next major milestone in April, and [they/we] will then scrap the backup solution which began its work last year...."

[Old Bricks]

If you think the F35 is ugly, remember what the Boeing entry to the competition looked like. That was surely the ugliest aircraft ever.

[SpazSinbad]

Some extra EODAS features (there is a video on Utube also) might be handy for the others also.

F-35 device shows new capabilities 11 Feb 2013

Northrop Grumman reports success for F-35 Lightning device - UPI.com (http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2013/02/11/F-35-device-shows-new-capabilities/UPI-45871360610033/#ixzz2NE5v85xr)

"BALTIMORE, Feb. 11 (UPI) -- U.S. company Northrop Grumman reports that detection of hostile ground fire has been added to the capabilities of its Electro-Optical Distributed Aperture System.

The AN/AAQ-37 was designed for use by F-35 Lightning IIs for simultaneously detecting and tracking aircraft and missiles in every direction and for providing visual imagery for day or night navigation and targeting purposes.

Northrop said the new capability was demonstrated by the AN/AAQ-37 DAS while being flown aboard a test aircraft. The Distributed Aperture System detected and located tanks that were firing live rounds during preparations for a military exercise.

"Although hostile fire detection is not an F-35 requirement for the DAS, the system design makes it ideal for this mission," Northrop Grumman said. "This inherent capability enables DAS to harvest, process and deliver key battlespace information to ground forces and other aircraft autonomously, without the need for cueing or increasing pilot workload.

"The ability to gather this live fire data expands the mission possibilities of the sensor to include close air support and ground fire targeting."

In addition to detecting artillery, the system has also demonstrated a capability to simultaneously detect and pinpoint the location of rockets and anti-aircraft artillery fired in a wide area, Northrop said."

[JSFfan]

F-35 JSF Distributed Aperture System (DAS) Sensors Demonstrate Hostile Fire Detection Capability - YouTube

[Lonewolf_50]

Hmm, might be cheaper to put tha DAS on a drone with long dwell times ...:\

[LowObservable]

People are missing the point here. Since the F-35 cannot outrun or outmaneuver any likely adversary in WVR, and is also outclassed in the weight and diversity of its air-to-air weaponry, knowing what is behind you is not useful, but merely depressing.

And having seen a version of the magic EODAS in action I can confirm that it detects birds and clouds very well. Civvy jets half a mile away, not so much.

[JSFfan]

but it's HMD and missiles can
the f-35 isn't as good as a clean f-16, it's as good as a clean fa-18
current piloted sims is greater than LER 6:1 ..4 f-35 vs 8 red air
so das can't see an airliner at 1/2 a mile...seems like all your other facts

[Courtney Mil]

If you're not already, JSFfan, you need to be in LM marketing. Ignore everything that's said around you, pick upon one point and call it stupid and then keep trotting out same, unproved figures. Excellent and totally convincing.

[JSFfan]

it's a hard call to either listen to a dozen air forces or a forum guy

RAF - F-35 (Joint Strike Fighter) (http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/f35jointstrikefighter.cfm)
The JCA will place the RAF at the forefront of fighter technology and will give it a true multi-role air system that will surpass the majority of other weapons systems in production today.
This will give the UK a world-beating land-based and sea-based joint expeditionary air power capability well into the middle of the century. When the JCA enters service, it will be able to conduct deep strike missions, into contemporary Integrated Air Defence Systems, against a myriad of target sets. Moreover, by conducting robust Integrated Air Operations, JSF will support friendly ground forces with close air support, long-range interdiction, anti-surface warfare and tactical reconnaissance.

[ftrplt]

If anyone thinks they are getting anything near a realistic picture, on either side of the good or bad fence, from this unclas website and the associated unclas links then they are just a little naive.

[SpazSinbad]

F-35 Program Status March 14, 2013

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_download-id-17262.html (120Kb)

"...Helmet/Software
- Pilots have flown more than 4,000 flights and 5,000 hours with the helmet and our feedback from pilots at Edwards, PAX River, Eglin and Ft. Worth, is they love this helmet. During the fall, dedicated tests were performed testing the improvements we’ve made and the results are positive.

- Block 1 and 2A software is supporting pilot training at Eglin.The same software will also be used to support flight operations at Yuma. Successful test results in flight test are seen at both Edwards and PAX.

- Only 10 percent of the software is still in development...."

[ColdCollation]

Re. post 21:

Well done JSFfan on regurgitating a policy aspiration. Now do the same with a reality.

[Bastardeux]

When the JCA enters service, it will be able to conduct deep strike missions, into contemporary Integrated Air Defence Systems, against a myriad of target sets.

I'll fix the quote for you:

When the F35 enters service, it won't be able to conduct deep strike missions, into contemporary Integrated Air Defence Systems until the software has actually been developed, heck it won't even be able to carry storm shadow or meteor inside it, never mind launch them.

[Courtney Mil]

The JCA will place the RAF at the forefront of fighter technology and will give it a true multi-role air system that will surpass the majority of other weapons systems in production today. This will give the UK a world-beating land-based and sea-based joint expeditionary air power capability well into the middle of the century.

Yep! Straight out of someone's sales brocheur.

How about coming up with some facts instead? As we're discussing the helmet and its capability for mitigating the lack of rearward vis, why not take the opportunity to show us just what it can do. This is not particularly new technology, albeit a huge development of it. So, what picture does the pilot get whilst staring backwards at the seat headbox or the rear cockpit firewall? How well can he/she gauge target aspect, range, range rate and control surface deflection?

Do you think you might actually come up with some real answers or will this fall into your "too-difficult" box and remain ignored?

[SpazSinbad]

Ooops - info is for 'JSFan' (Mike Skaff is 'lead designer' of the F-35 cockpit)

A White Paper By: Lockheed Martin An Overview of The F-35 Cockpit

An Overview of The F-35 Cockpit | SLDInfo (http://www.sldinfo.com/whitepapers/an-overview-of-the-f-35-cockpit-what-5th-generation-aircraft-are-all-about/)

"...Currently, the helmet is working well but with any new technology there are developmental challenges. Mitigation pathways for the issues facing the helmet have been developed and are being implemented. The fact is that the helmet is already in use and the reviews from the pilots are overwhelmingly positive. One pilot went so far as to say, “I could fly the whole mission with a helmet bag over the top of my head and just look through the sensors and fly the airplane safely.” http://www.f-16.net/modules/PNphpBB2/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

Another pilot recently stated, “I wouldn’t go back to a fixed HUD (Head-Up Display). It is clear that the potential of the helmet and what it’s going to be able to do for the war fighter is overwhelmingly positive and I would never want to go back."..."

The F-25 Cockpit: Enabling the Pilot as a Tactical Decision Maker
Michael L. Skaff | F-35 Pilot Vehicle Interface

Graphics from the .PPTX file at:
http://www.slideshare.net/robbinlaird/the-f35-cockpit/download
OR
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_download-id-15870.html (2.4Mb PDF)
__________________

Graphics will follow and in the meantime they can be viewed here:

Helmet-mounted displays :: F-16.net (http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-16223-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-180.html)

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l261/SpazSinbad/NewerAlbum/F-35HMDviewSymbols2ed.gif

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l261/SpazSinbad/NewerAlbum/F-35HMDviewSymbols2zoomED-1.gif

[JSFfan]

Courtney Mil said Yep! Straight out of someone's sales brocheur.

that's not a nice thing to say about your RAF
RAF - F-35 (Joint Strike Fighter) (http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/f35jointstrikefighter.cfm)

[WhiteOvies]

Another F-35 thread that quickly descends to a slanging match between those who are supporters of the jet and those that hate it. The F-35 is clearly a 'marmite' aircraft!

However, there are some elements of this programme that are classified for good reasons. What is released or leaked will always push the agenda of the individual who released it, sound bites from reports can be twisted either way.

Asking for the 'facts' is unlikely to get the response sought as no-one who actually works on this programme is going to just put all the details on a forum.

A lot of BS is out there on the F-35 and views are so entrenched that positive press releases from the JPO or LM will get dismissed as PR, whilst negative press will be seized on.

[Bastardeux]

Whiteovies, maybe because we've sacrificed so much for such a small number that anything other than exceptional will be unacceptable...

[WhiteOvies]

Bastardeaux - true, but then people need to give it a chance to become exceptional before writing it off. Typhoon has become a good aircraft for the UK but only because of a lot of hard work, expense and time delays. Should we have pulled out of Eurofighter in the 90's to invest more money into Jaguar or Tornado F3? The arguments are the same just for the next generation of aircraft.

[Rhino power]

JSFfan, how about Courtney's last sentence in post #26 then?

-RP

[Bastardeux]

Whiteovies, you're absolutely right, but how many people would honestly go through the whole typhoon saga again, instead of building a super F15E under license and in bigger numbers...and much faster? I think people recognise that we're about to go through it all over again, but on typhoon on steroids scale...it's got the vast majority of its testing to achieve and we're supposed to be putting in an order next year. Ask yourself "would a private company be buying this product before 2020?" And the answer is of course, no.

[JSFfan]

rhino, spaz put up the answer which some ignore

[WhiteOvies]

Bastardeaux,

Maybe, 20/20 hindsight etc! Of course 'buying American' in the form of JSF was supposed to mitigate against issues such as happened to Typhoon. Something ironic about that!

[LowObservable]

WO - Classified or not, the fact remains that the JSF has set records for overruns in cost and time, still has no announced IOC (having passed its original IOC date), and is likely to become "operational" with lots of capability missing and unpaid-for. And it doesn't have the 'Phoon's excuse that the Germans spent four years trying to scrap it.

And do I buy the line that there are all kinds of miraculous capes on this thing that have not been disclosed? Not really. Why? Because that wasn't the goal at the start of JAST - the goal was stealth + everyday fighter missions at a low LCC.

And after 16 years of development and the thick end of $50 billion, asking to be "given a chance to become exceptional" is a bit cheeky. I'd respect those involved more if they conceded that they had presided over a monstrous FUBAR, and asked very nicely for a second chance.

And press releases will always be picked apart, as are the speeches of politicians, and for the same reason.

[Courtney Mil]

that's not a nice thing to say about your RAF

Of course, the RAF PR portal (I'd be delighted if anyone would show me otherwise) is hardly likely to be a reliable, "warts and all" account of a multi-billion pound program that the tax payers are funding, is it?

I would say that's very much an online PR brochure. You have reinforced my view.

For the record, AGAIN, I am not anti-JSF. I would love to see it work. My position here is that it isn't shaping up (or, maybe and hopefully hasn't YET shaped up) to be the all-singing, all-dancing master of all (FJ) trades. I know it does get slagged here occasionally, but I think some of the extremely pro lobby seem a little overly defensive, short on tolerance for any valid criticism of the program and failing to address fully the questions with anything other than the same old, somewhat unsubstantiated claims - claims that often read like a company, Government or Defence PR release.

I would rather see acknowledgements of the failings and real evidence of fixes. Real evidence does not mean phrases like

Mitigation pathways for the issues facing the helmet have been developed and are being implemented.

Which basically means we want you to believe that it's all going to be fine so that people don't start pulling out.

Now, how can that excellent helmet picture make up for all the visual cues that a pilot might want in what should be visual combat? Control surface deflection for example. The picture is good (actually excellent info to have on a guy outside a HUD FOV), but not a complete alternative to (ideally "also") being able to see the other guy.

[JSFfan]

Don't you read the links Spaz puts up?
April is when we find out about the helmet, they either continue with the bae one or not. indications are that they will drop it because the Israeli one is on track.
Oh by the way, I think it's night time, you can see the land at the bottom of the picture and the plane in sight would be very small

Fair and balanced isn't the first thing that comes to my mind when I read your posts

If you have followed it, software is the issue


@LO, as a percentage there are much better fubars and the f-35 is almost a model programme in comparison

[Archimedes]

Fair and balanced isn't the first thing that comes to my mind when I read your posts


Pot, kettle, radio check. Over.

[Courtney Mil]

Don't you read the links Spaz puts up?

Yes, I did.

If you have followed it, software is the issue

Yes, I know.

the plane in sight would be very small

Yes it would and that is one reason why I am a fan of HMS/HMD/etc. But you you still won't see it for what it is through the rear cockpit wall when it gets closer.

Fair and balanced isn't the first thing that comes to my mind when I read your posts

No need for that. In my previous post I thought I was setting out my stall in a very fair and balanced way. At least you read them, but you still ignore the difficult questions.

[JSFfan]

yes you will..eo das does give an actual image 360 deg...I don't know why you guys don't invest some time to actually read/youtube what it will do.
F-35 JSF Distributed Aperture System (EO DAS) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=9fm5vfGW5RY#t=265s)

[Just This Once...]

Perhaps because some of us get to play with the real equipment rather than relying on youtube.

Would you go on a surgeon's forum and argue about surgical tools with them as you seem to have zero insight into military aviation?

[Courtney Mil]

yes you will..eo das does give an actual image 360 deg...

An answer! Thank you. Can you comment on the resolution? That may be beyond the scope of this forum for now, I know.

I don't know why you guys don't invest some time to actually read/youtube what it will do.

Now YuoTube is fount of all knowledge, eh? Remember that's a marketing video, but it does explain the concept to me, so again, thank you. Not sure I'll be investing too much time on that, given that I'll be able to see the real thing before too much longer.

[JSFfan]

Just This Once... (http://www.pprune.org/members/109931-just-this-once-)please, that's just a silly thing to say...who posting on this thread is playing with eo-das?


Courtney Mil (http://www.pprune.org/members/375756-courtney-mil), considering you didn't know that eodas produced an image, I'd say it can't come soon enough for you

some of you guys would have a clearence that would allow you to go to a UK show and tell on the f-35 in the 5th gen system, I know the aussies have show and tell

[JSFfan]

we, as in the UK, or we as in you?

edit, doesn't matter just this once, you removed your post

[Courtney Mil]

Courtney Mil, considering you didn't know that eodas produced an image, I'd say it can't come soon enough for you

I didn't know, that was why I was asking you - as the self-appointed guru. Maybe that's not completely fair, but I hope you see what I mean. It was a question. Really. That was why I asked a question and said thank you for an infromed answer.

[Stuffy]

What are the odds on it being cancelled?
I want to go down to the bookies to place a bet.

[JSFfan]

perhaps you didn't express yourself clearly when you said "But you you still won't see it for what it is through the rear cockpit wall when it gets closer."

self appointed guru? nar I'm a pleb with no clearance and only read the public stuff

[BEagle]

If this wacky electric wonder-hat is sooooooo clever, why is there any need for a cockpit canopy at all?

When the Lockheed liars find that it just doesn't work, perhaps they will simply advise the Pentagon "Hey, J-35 is low observable. No-one will see it, so no sweat about the rearward view!"

:rolleyes:

[peter we]

Can the mods please ban JSFan as he has admitted he is not military aircrew and has no connection whatever to the aerospace industry and persists in insulting those who do.

This is not supposed to be a fanboy forum, FFS.

[CoffmanStarter]

Someone please enlighten me ... is this what the new F-35 Electric Hat looks like ?

If so ... it makes my old Mk1a Bonedome look a bit prehistoric :(

http://www.carbonfibergear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/2-carbon-fiber-hmds-helmet.jpg

Or is it this thing ?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9b/F-35_Helmet_Mounted_Display_System.jpg

Coff

[WhiteOvies]

Coff,

Yes it is. Because of the technology invested in the helmet the pilot does his walkaround checks in a standard flight deck helmet (see the Washington Post article posted on the other JSF thread).

They're all individually fitted too so plenty for the Squippers to do! Maybe even enough to justify a higher pay band ;)

Lower picture is Gen 1, upper is Gen 2 iirc.

[CoffmanStarter]

Thanks WO ... So the trusty Mk1 eyeball is slowly becoming redundant ... or so the Sales People would have you believe ... if all that tech goes tits up when it matters up top ... I hope you can still swivel the old bonce :ok:

[M609]

Even the Joint Helmet-Mounted Cueing System is a pricy bit of kit to have laying about on the flight line. It´s rumored that it´s best to NOT leave your helmet bag with helmet in it on the ground outside the HAS, then let blind crew van driver flatten it...... :\

[WhiteOvies]

Coff,

I believe the phrase is 'the Mk 1 eyeball is slowly becoming augmented'!

Despite all the well documented helmet issues the aircraft are still flying daily so the visibility can't be that bad i.e. preventing safe flight.

[Pontius]

What is this 'somebody getting behind you', of which they talk?

In my day, blah, blah, blah, ZZzzzzzzz. Harrier!! Axe!! Bonkers!! ZZzzzzzz

[JSFfan]

well when they stick mirrors on the canopy bow and reduce the size of the headrest, it will indicate that the eodas isn't providing detection of aft planes at a tactically relevant range

[Courtney Mil]

why is there any need for a cockpit canopy at all?

To keep the wind out. Oh, I see what you mean. Maybe for when the batteries run out.

[CoffmanStarter]

Originally posted by Courtney
To keep the wind out. Oh, I see what you mean. Maybe for when the batteries run out.

Best keep a pair of these in the old leg pocket then :ok:

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af162/CoffmanStarter/mark-8-raf-flying-goggles_1_zps17fb8ed6.jpg

[Courtney Mil]

Now we're talking. Far less image latency in a pair of those!

[kbrockman]

I don't understand the emphasis put on the DAS part by the F35 enthusiasts , it is basically a subsystem, a very promising one but still something that could be implemented on most other aircraft according to Northrop who , by their own account, will make this available for other platforms.

It is the first of its kind, an evolution , not a revolution, the first to have 360° coverage but it would be foolish to say that it will be the only one in the following years to come , eg RAFALE is almost @ the same level a couple more sensors around the airframe will make it virtually equal to the EO DAS with the added benefit of also having a good TV channel on its OSF.

Front End of the Kill-Chain | Defense Media Network (http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/front-end-of-the-kill-chain/)
Edwards confirms that Northrop Grumman intends to offer DAS for platforms other than the JSF.

“There’s nothing about the DAS system that would prevent it from being applicable to other platforms if that was desired. Integration would be the only real developmental work required.”

The biggest challenge in the development of DAS for the JSF was adapting the system for the three variants.

I would be more interested in the Gimball mounted AESA on the Typhoons starting in 2017 and the NG Gripen, a wider FOV for the AESA is certainly a nice tool to have.
Also the provisions for side lobes on the F22 and RAFALE are very interesting future developments.

IR sensors on the F35 are maybe its most redeeming feature but that says more about the lack of redeeming features/performance from the rest of the basic F35 fighter.

Besides as Radar's go, the F18SH and the F22 seem to have an AESA at least equal to the F35, put some EO DAS on these 2 (or 3 if you include the F15) and the benefits of the F35 are pretty much negated.

Also the future will undoubtedly prove to be much more difficult with new IRCM which will undoubtedly also finds its way on future fighters and missile systems.
Being able to physically look over your shoulder will be something you'll love to be able to do if the EO DAS wizardry let's you down when you really need it or is being deceived by your adversaries wizardry.

If EO DAS and the AESA would really be enough to ensure a positive outcome all of the time , why bother with trying to build a high performance jet in the first place?
A nice and comfortable learjet sized stealth plane would be equally fine with the added benefit of silent engines, a nice toilet, IFE and a microwave and coffee-machine.

[ColdCollation]

kbrockman, but doesn't that then explode the myth? Put the gubbins on a so-called 'Gen 4' and you've got most of the performance at a fraction of the cost.

[Mimpe]

A simple point was made recently in an Australian tactical simulation - the lack of egress speed could prove a disaster once the initial exchanges are over against cheaper but numerically superior opponents.

[CoffmanStarter]

All this High Tech Bonedome stuff is very interesting ... but a little scary to say the least ... OK it may be a bit crude to suggest future FJ Pilots have a USB Port grafted to the back of their heads ... but there again ...

I remember reading this article at the time (2004) and thinking how scary :eek:

Florida scientists have grown a brain in a petri dish and taught it to fly a fighter plane.

Scientists at the university of Florida taught the 'brain', which was grown from 25,000 neural cells extracted from a rat embryo, to pilot an F-22 jet simulator. It was taught to control the flight path, even in mock hurricane-strength winds.

The Register Rat Brain Pilot (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/12/07/rat_brain_flies_jet/)

So the tech has for sure progressed ... and I'm guessing it won't be too long before data can be feed the other way direct to the Brain without going via the Mk 1 eyeball :uhoh:

On a lighter note ... "25,000 neurones" ... That rules me out as I'm down to about 5 after the Rugby this weekend :(

Coff.

[BEagle]

'25000 neurones'

Isn't that actually a description of the Pentagon?

[CoffmanStarter]

Spelled slightly different beginning with M :E

[Mk 1]

Mimpe, I'm curious - which simulation are you talking about?

[Lonewolf_50]

Of course 'buying American' in the form of JSF was supposed to mitigate against issues such as happened to Typhoon. Something ironic about that!
Given how some of the habitual Yank bashers on this forum call for Americans to try to be more like Europeans, I find it doubly ironic: in this aspect, American succeeded in being more like the Euros, and still the bitching reaches hearing loss magnitude sound pressure levels.

Damned if you do,
damned of you don't,
so damn the torpedoes,
and devil take the hindmost. :E

[JSFfan]

MK1, I think he is referring to apa clown club.
if you like I can give you links to the ADF response

well they won't talk about the EW and the eodas/eots does have good pictures to show

according to you guys, here is another air force that don't know what they are doing
Singapore Expected To Order F-35s Soon: Source (http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_03_14_2013_p0-559083.xml)

Singapore, a major business and shipping hub with the best-equipped military in Southeast Asia, is expected to submit a “letter of request” soon for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, said two U.S. government officials who were not authorized to speak publicly on the matter.

[Mk 1]

And the irony of hiding behind the tag 'LowObservable' is obviously lost on you...

Sorry to disappoint, but I'm another real Australian

JSF, I can't believe that pack on incompetent fools have joined the incompetent fools in the US defense force, the UK, Australia, Norway, Israel, Japan etc. All a bunch of idiots who clearly wouldn't have a clue about aerial warfare...:rolleyes:

[JSFfan]

Nationalistic pride also has to be considered in some responses, though that tends to go out the window when the schite hits the fan.

Japan Retains Confidence in F-35 Fighter, Defense Chief Says - Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-27/japan-retains-confidence-in-f-35-fighter-defense-chief-says-1-.html)
Japan Retains Confidence in F-35 Fighter, Defense Chief Says

"Japan is confident Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT)’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will overcome its development setbacks and expects to accept an initial order of four planes on schedule in 2016, Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera said.
“Problems tend to occur when a plane is in development,” Onodera said today in an interview at his office in Tokyo. “We have heard nothing from the U.S. to say there will be a delay. We think the end result will be a good product.”"

"Japan picked the F-35 to replace its aging F-4 aircraft, and could increase its order as its F-2 and F-15 models are retired. The Air Force has a total of 361 fighter planes, according to a white paper published in July last year.

[Torque Tonight]

Rat Brain Pilot

Presumably a career in airline management beckons once it retires from the F-22.

[CoffmanStarter]

LW50 ... Moi European http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-angry021.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php)

Never !

[SpazSinbad]

Original: http://www.edwards.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/2013/01/130111-F-ZZ999-001.jpg (2.2Mb)

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l261/SpazSinbad/NewerAlbum/F-35HeadRestHMDSIIsalute.jpg:original

[CoffmanStarter]

Now where have I seen something like that before ... I wonder ...

http://www.starwarshelmets.com/jbvadbaden11.JPG

And NO it's not mine :suspect:

[Dysonsphere]

And NO it's not mine http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/cwm13.gif

Are you sure about that Coff

[yoyonow]

What a great helmet, it looks like you have to take your hand off the throttle whilst tanking to raise your (RAF) gloved hand to protect your eyes from the sun. Perhaps all EO and no canopy is the way ahead....

[Courtney Mil]

Surely that wouldn't work, yoyonow. Put your hand up to sheild your eyes but the damned electro-optics project a full size sun into the visor which fries your retina anyway.

[yoyonow]

Ah but they are way ahead of you there Courtney. You can overlay a black spot on the position of the sun or, until that mod is completed, you can strap in facing backwards.

And don't call me Shirley!

[LowObservable]

Fascinating photo, Spaz. I'd like that headrest on my next long-haul flight as it looks very comfortable.

Complete guess - but it looks as if, at any conceivable head angle and location that involves the hereinbeforementioned head remaining attached to the rest of the pilot, the headrest occludes some of the glass. Which makes the point of having glass back there a little hard to understand.

Also, that headrest - which inter alia contains two airbag thingies that catch and decelerate your head as the airblast pushes it back, because the helmet means that your head is snapping forward and down on ejection - looks a bit bigger than the catcher's-mitt device on the rival Goodrich ACES 5.

http://www.goodrich.com/gr-ext-templating/images/Goodrich%20Content/Business%20Content/Interiors/Products/Specialty%20Seating%20Systems/ACES5%20Data%20Sheet%20for%20website.pdf

[CoffmanStarter]

Is that miles of reflective 3M tape I see on the visor housing ... if so ... that's going to be fun to cover that up with black bodge tape when on ops :ok:

[SpazSinbad]

F-35 VIDEO 4 – F-35 ESCAPE 13 May 2009
Video Story:
http://www.baesystems.com/video/BAES_026077/f-35-video-4---f-35-escape?_afrLoop=35056471436000

Direct Video Download:
http://www.baesystems.com/cs/groups/public/documents/digitalmedia/mdaw/mdq1/~edisp/baes_026077~1~h264rendition.mp4 (11Mb)

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l261/SpazSinbad/NewerAlbum/F-35airBagStill.jpg:original

[LowObservable]

What are those huge slabs flying out there? Isn't the idea of that det cord to shatter the canopy into tiny non-head-removing bits?

As I understand it, the history of the escape system has been a battle among a whole mass of factors.

1 - Expanded pilot population. Enough bang to get the 95 per cent big pilot out of there = very fast acceleration for the 95 per cent small pilot = a lot of neck snap, especially with....

2 - Big helmet with horrible weight constraints.

3 - Difficult envelope corners, including zero airspeed, falling out of sky with high roll and/or pitch rate.

4 - One-piece canopy, so that the top can't be much less thick than bird-resistant front, that has to be blown apart (#3) not jettisoned.

F'rinstance, one ejection test blew a hole in the top of the helmet (A Bad Thing). Nobody told the helmet people that they had upgunned the det cord to sort out a canopy-fracturing issue.

[SpazSinbad]

A side view of the 'airbag' at work:

http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/3/12/b38fce91-a7ab-4d77-9cb0-1b25ab43a68c.Full.jpg

+ MB info on the seat: F-35 (http://www.martin-baker.com/products/ejection-seats/mk16/f35) & 0.5Mb PDF: http://www.martin-baker.com/_pdfs/mk16_f-35.pdf
__________________

For 'CoffmanStarter':

Another HMDS II view showing decoration variation:

Test Flying the F-35: “A Building Block Approach” | SLDInfo (http://www.sldinfo.com/fly-testing-the-f-35-a-building-block-approach/)

3rd (last) slide show photo on page shows chequerboard pattern on HMDS II

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l261/SpazSinbad/NewerAlbum/squirt_helmet-copy.jpg:original

[glad rag]

What happens to all the [big] bits if the aircraft is say inverted with zero fwd speed and at a high rate of decent?

[CoffmanStarter]

For 'CoffmanStarter':

Another HMDS II view showing decoration variation:

Thanks ...

Very snazzy (Oh that sounds so 70's :eek:) ... Courtney will be so happy that they come pre decorated for 43 Squadron use :ok:

Coff.

[Courtney Mil]

Oh, yes. I love the chequers, but why the two wander lamps in the helmet? To ensure sufficient facial illumination for those tricky poor-weather photos of the pilot looking steely?

[CoffmanStarter]

Possibly new technology so your Authorising Officer can keep an "eye" on one :E

[Courtney Mil]

You can see it in his eyes, he's trying so hard to make it look like it's not really heavy.

[LowObservable]

... not to mention that it's practically screwed into his skull so it stays in one place.

The "wander lamps" are imagery projectors.

The alternate from BAE uses optical waveguide technology (like the Thales, nee Gentex Scorpion) with flat combiners in front of the pilot's eyes. But the tech did not exist when the JSF program started. Nor did the rather similar digital HUD technology that makes a HUD compatible with a panoramic display by eliminating the huge optical package underneath a conventional HUD.

[CoffmanStarter]

Thanks LO ...

My definition of Augmented Reality ... a couple of Family Size G&T's :ok:

[SpazSinbad]

Synopsis of Lecture to RAeS Loughborough Branch on 08 Mar 2011
Martin-Baker: the JSF story so far by Steve Roberts, JSG IPT Lead, Martin-Baker Aircraft Company Ltd

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/john.ollerhead/RAeS/Past_lectures_files/110308%20JSF%20seat.pdf (157Kb)

"...The ejection seat was required to be common to all three aircraft variants. It was also required to have superior ejection performance to all previous seats, meet new neck injury criteria and provide an auto-ejection capability when used in the F-35B (STOVL) aircraft. The last requirement demanded early firing of the ejection seat in the event of an aircraft malfunction in a manner similar to that used in the Russian YAK 36, 38 and 141 aircraft....

...Neck protection is provided by means of a “Catcher’s Mitt” inflatable device which supports both sides of the pilot’s helmet and also provides support to the top and /back of the helmet. This device is also held in a container located behind the pilot’s head. The device is vented before the parachute is deployed. The device has been tested and proved to inflate under simulated 50,000 ft altitude conditions....

...The F-35-B (STOVL) aircraft has additional failure modes associated with Lift Fan, Vane Box, Lift Fan Drive Shaft, Roll Duct and Turbine failures. A typical pilot takes two seconds to react to the ejection klaxon or one second if warned in advance of a likely failure. In the case of a STOVL related failure, ejection must take place within 0.6 seconds. Hence it was necessary to install smart failure sensors on the aircraft to automatically fire the ejection circuit mounted in the back of the seat...."

[Courtney Mil]

and provide an auto-ejection capability when used in the F-35B (STOVL) aircraft. The last requirement demanded early firing of the ejection seat in the event of an aircraft malfunction in a manner similar to that used in the Russian YAK 36, 38 and 141 aircraft....

Does one get the choice? They probably needed it in the old YAK, but that was an old clatter built by the Tractor Builders Collective. This is the state of the art wizard machine.

[PhilipG]

Auto eject, lets hope that the software is 100%, I can just see legal cases, "The plane was fully under my control, then it just ejected me and the plane crashed and burnt" LM can you please give me another one next week. Particularly thinking of rolling landings on a carrier, excuses that it does not happen to Marine planes vertical landing do not wash.

[Courtney Mil]

Or maybe, the plane jetisoned you, because you had "messed" up, therefore you're guity of gross negligence. The robot doesn't lie.

[PhilipG]

I assume that there is no black box on the plane but there is an ability to download data for maintenance purposes, so is the robot economical with the truth always in this networked world?

[SpazSinbad]

YAK-41 Crashes On Carrier landing Test + VIDEO

LiveLeak.com - YAK-41 Crashes On Carrier landing Test

"...On 26 September 1991 the first landing on board Admiral Gorshkov was successfully accomplished. Unfortunately, on 5 October 1991, aircraft '77' white experienced a landing accident aboard the carrier which resulted in it being grounded....

...During the summer of 1995, Lockheed Martin announced a teaming arrangement with Yakovlev to assist in the former's bid for the JAST (Joint Adanced Strike Technology) competition. Yakovlev's knowledge of jet lift technology was to prove invaluable. Lockheed Martin was subsequently selected to build a demonstrator aircraft, the X-35, which went on to win the JSF (Joint Strike Fighter) competition and will soon become a production fighter as the F-35.

One of the key problems with the Yak-41M jet-lift system was the need to engage afterburner for vertical take-off or landing. At land bases this soon resulted in damage to the runway, while the Admiral Gorshkov was fitted with a special water-cooling system to absorb the heat from the jet blast. Hence, the Yak-41M was in no sense a Harrier-style go-anywhere aircraft."

[LowObservable]

Fortunately, the JSF only requires a landing pad made of this stuff:

FIREROK (http://www.ceratechinc.com/Products/FIREROK)

Which as we all know is universally used for 3000 foot runways in all the world's :mad:holes ending in -stan.

[JSFfan]

why would the f-35 vertically land on a 3000 ft runway?

I've forgotten the name, but a google will show what the USMC will use as a vertical landing portable pad

[SpazSinbad]

AM-2 Aloominum Matting is in use for testing at PaxRibber/Rubber VL pads (at last report was OK) with F-35B exhaust footprint similar to Harrier today.
___________________

Aviation Week & Space Technology October 3, 2011 pages 31-32

Vertical Validation by GUY NORRIS

"...Vertical landings at Pax River have been conducted on two pads made from standard extruded AM-2 aluminum tile mats measuring 120 ft. and 150 ft. square, respectively.

“We’ve been recording the points on the pad where the nozzle is pointed and, after initial landings, removed the specific tile and tested it for strength. There was no loss of strength,” Wilson says. “Now we’re waiting for 10 vertical landings on one specific tile before we do the next strength test.” As of late September, fewer than half of the required number of landings on the particular tile had occurred. Overall, results of the testing to date “give no cause for concern for AM-2 compatibility,” Wilson says.

Additionally, ground personnel have gradually moved closer to the pad for each vertical landing, as part of systematic efforts to determine the safest proximity to the touchdown area. Wilson says that so far these tests indicate safe distances similar to those of current Harrier operations...."
_________________

Continuing to “Work” the Problem By Ed Timperlake 30 Aug 2011

SLD Forum: Debating the Future (http://www.sldforum.com/2011/08/way-ahead/)

"...the USMC HQ specialist on the matter Major Brad Alello & he told us that “AM-2 matting has been used by the USMC since BEFORE the Vietnam War.”..."

[JSFfan]

yep, that's the stuff, it's a shame the critical voices know nothing about the programme and think that the f-35b needs a 3000 ft cement runway to do a vertical landing..god knows how they came to that conclusion

[dat581]

Rubber VL pads

The rubber deck? Have they finally got it to work after sixty years!!!!:E

[SpazSinbad]

You missed the 'Ribber'. Good on Winkle Brown. Wot a cool dood. Most carrier landings - eva. 2,407 by all accounts.

[Courtney Mil]

it's a shame the critical voices know nothing about the programme

Of course, anyone that doesn't share every ounce of your overstated blind faith in the platform and its systems is simply ignorant and, therefore, proven to be wrong at a stroke. So you must be right and they must be wrong and the programme is perfectly safe. That's that sorted, then.

[JSFfan]

my mistake

[just another jocky]

.....like LO, you too think that the f-35b needs 3000ft of cement runway to do a vertical landing.....

Not that I wish to get involved in this, but.....LO didn't actually say that, you inferred it.

Fortunately, the JSF only requires a landing pad made of this stuff:

FIREROK (http://www.ceratechinc.com/Products/FIREROK)

Which as we all know is universally used for 3000 foot runways in all the world's http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/censored.gifholes ending in -stan.

your immediate reply:

why would the f-35 vertically land on a 3000 ft runway?

No suggestion the F-35B will need 3000ft of runway to do a vertical landing, just that the Firerok is often used to provide 3000ft of runway in certain parts of the world. Indeed, LO actually said in the quote above: JSF only requires a landing pad made of this stuff:

Just for the sake of clarity, you understand. :)

[JSFfan]

you are right, I read it wrong

[glad rag]

you are right, I am wrong


Fixed it for ya :ok:

[The Helpful Stacker]

Fixed it for ya....

I'm surprised he didn't use "you were right, I was, less right".;)

[Mk 1]

Surely guys, the point is that LO was incorrect. Testing so far shows AM2 as used by Harrier (AV-8B) is sufficient. So, we don't need to stop the war for a week, bring in the concrete mixers and put in place a Firerok pad.:rolleyes:

[CoffmanStarter]

All is well with the Programme ...

Time for the badges :ok:

http://sphotos-g.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/10773_10151515267259885_1445502302_n.jpg

Our man receives his F-35 Joint Strike Fighter ‘patch’ following his first training sortie.

[Snafu351]

"The pads are designed to take repeated beatings from F-35B landings, which generate immense heat and thrust that can erode regular runway surfaces."

Corps preps for F-35 with landing pads, hangars - Marine Corps News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Marine Corps Times (http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2011/12/marine-corps-preps-for-f35b-with-landing-pads-hangars-120611/)

[Mk 1]

SNAFU: That would be at a base where the aircraft are going to be operating from for the next 30 years. They are putting in the infrastructure now to avoid having to fix things in a few years. They are also replacing the hangers - not because they have to, because they chose to.

With austere basing the aircraft will use the AM-2 matting (providing the endurance testing proves it to be sound). It was one of the clubs used for F-35B bashing that it could not just be operated from the same hardstandings that the harriers used - it was also said that it could not operate from naval vessels without significant shielding being provided. It looks like both are being proven wrong.

[CoffmanStarter]

Take a close look chaps ... apparently this is a picture of one of our first UK Production Batch ...

https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/image_data/file/8067/prod_f35uk_b_001.jpg

MOD Press Release UK F-35 (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-stealth-fighters-base-announced)

[peter we]

Its a two year old photo.

[500N]

"Its a two year old photo."

I was going to say the same thing although I haven't seen that photo before.

I seem to recall another photo was released last
year of one of the UK F35's ?

[SpazSinbad]

From the 'Snafu351' redirect there is this selective quote:

"...Despite plans for the vertical landing pads, the F-35B has not proven as unwieldy as critics of the program initially predicted. Some said, for example, that the F-35B would damage decks and injure crew aboard ships.

But successful sea trials conducted aboard the amphibious assault ship Wasp in October proved them wrong. The trials were the first to see the aircraft land on a ship while underway and went without a hitch.

“There was no special pad required for the initial ship trials,” according to Victor Chen, a Naval Air Systems Command spokesman in Patuxent River, Md.

Although the aircraft can operate without them, construction of extra durable pads is also slated at MCAS Miramar, Calif...."

[WhiteOvies]

That's BK-1 (ZM135) rolling out of the Fort Worth factory, prior to her LO coatings. Now happily gracing the Florida skies alongside BK-2 (ZM136).

AM2 matting used at the 'expeditionary airfield' centre field at Pax River, right next to the ski jump. The test fleet have used it for some time now, including using it as a 'dummy deck' prior to initial sea trials.

That badge looks familiar, especially if you used to work on Harriers!

[SpazSinbad]

First International Student-Pilot Flies F-35 Mar/24/2013

First International Student-Pilot Flies F-35 - Southern Maryland News (http://www.thebaynet.com/news/index.cfm/fa/viewstory/story_ID/31478)

"The first international student aviator at the 33rd Fighter Wing, training to be an F-35B Lightning II instructor pilot, completed his first sortie in the joint strike fighter here March 19.

United Kingdom Royal Air Force Squadron Leader Frankie Buchler flew with Marine Fighter Attack Training Squadron-501...."

http://www.thebaynet.com//images/news/full/AC57A2B30C8BDD053CC5156CF72CB171.jpg {original}

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l261/SpazSinbad/NewerAlbum/AC57A2B30C8BDD053CC5156CF72CB171ED.jpg:original