F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
I understood the RN/MoD did not think that it was a good move to have to dump such weapons systems as Storm Shadow, if it had not been safe or necessary to use the weapon, thinking that it weighs in at 2,700 lb, just about the total designed bring back weight for a VL.
You are not going to change your mind about firing a cruise missile, it can be re-targeted in difficult to perceive probability that it becomes unsafe to do so in the hour after leaving the carrier.
Most of the reasons to bring it back would be mechanical issues with the F-35. So give a 10% turnback rate during the life time (10years?) of the 900 Storm Shadows in UK, 99 would have to be returned to ship by SRVL.
Assuming all are fired from the F-35 (they won't) and all have to be returned during a hot day (most/all will be at night).
SRVL is a very nice to have - its not an obstacle or disadvantage. It just about closes the gap with the F-35C which can bring back 9klb and its more than the F-18 (7klb?).
Last edited by peter we; 11th May 2013 at 12:32.
The theory is that you seldom bring back a Storm Shadow, because the CONOPS is such that you don't take off with it unless you are going to use it. It's not like you're going to loiter around waiting for a bunker 200 miles away to pop up.
FiberMat - This is much misunderstood. AFAIK it replaces part of the stealth surface treatment - a conductive layer that deals with surface currents, which can otherwise cause scattering in undesirable directions. There are still spray-on coatings, aperture edge treatments and (most likely) RAS edges on the wings and empennage.
The other innovation is a RAM that has the same kind of base as helicopter blade anti-erosion coatings. That's the stuff (I believe) that is supposed to be damage-resistant and damage-tolerant.
FiberMat - This is much misunderstood. AFAIK it replaces part of the stealth surface treatment - a conductive layer that deals with surface currents, which can otherwise cause scattering in undesirable directions. There are still spray-on coatings, aperture edge treatments and (most likely) RAS edges on the wings and empennage.
The other innovation is a RAM that has the same kind of base as helicopter blade anti-erosion coatings. That's the stuff (I believe) that is supposed to be damage-resistant and damage-tolerant.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Belgium
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ellamy proved that there will be times when you bring back Stormshadow - more so in this brave new world.
I agree with downsizer - we need to worry about getting it on the jet before we worry about getting it off!
Also, it is hard to think of a scenario where our mighty "carrier strike" force of 12 JSF (how many of those will be doing fleet defence?) would be fighting that type of war without land based support. I would suggest getting more capability out of TLAM would be a better use of resources.
I agree with downsizer - we need to worry about getting it on the jet before we worry about getting it off!
Also, it is hard to think of a scenario where our mighty "carrier strike" force of 12 JSF (how many of those will be doing fleet defence?) would be fighting that type of war without land based support. I would suggest getting more capability out of TLAM would be a better use of resources.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I've read, the radar/rcs reduction is mostly within the composite and bog, the spray coats mostly cover other parts of the spectrum, including IR.
Last edited by JSFfan; 11th May 2013 at 15:57.
Re the LO coating, LO (if you see what I mean), the stealth layer is, more of less, an integral part of the skin structure. It's good and it's tough, but it cannot easily be repaired or (as mentioned earlier) be resprayed between sorties. Now, I'm certainly not saying that's a bad thing, it will hugely reduce routine stealth maintenance, but it does make chips a lot more difficult to blend in. As the aircraft design has ad to accept so many compromises to ensure the stealth, it means that the stealth has to be well maintained.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The package is designed to remain stealthy in severe combat conditions, and tests have validated that capability. After obtaining baseline radar cross section (RCS) measurements from a highly detailed, full-scale Signature Measurement Aircraft (SigMA), a team of Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman engineers intentionally inflicted extensive damage – more than three dozen significant defects – on the model. The damage represented the cumulative effect of more than 600 flight hours of military aircraft operations. RCS measurements taken after the damage showed that the stealthy signature remained intact.
“Even operating in harsh carrier-deck conditions, the F-35C will require no special care or feeding. In fact, its stealth adds very little to the day-today maintenance equation,” O’Bryan said. “We’ve come a long way from the early stealth airplanes, which needed hours or even days of attention and repair after every flight. The F-35 not only avoids that intensive level of upkeep, it will require significantly less maintenance than the nonstealth fighters it is designed to replace.”
“Even operating in harsh carrier-deck conditions, the F-35C will require no special care or feeding. In fact, its stealth adds very little to the day-today maintenance equation,” O’Bryan said. “We’ve come a long way from the early stealth airplanes, which needed hours or even days of attention and repair after every flight. The F-35 not only avoids that intensive level of upkeep, it will require significantly less maintenance than the nonstealth fighters it is designed to replace.”
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,581
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
Some Stealthy Maintainable Quotes for youse delectation
Composites Machining for the F-35 Aug? 8/3/2010 Article From: Modern Machine Shop, Peter Zelinski, Senior Editor
Composites Machining for the F-35 : CompositesWorld
"...The F-35 features “supportable” VLO. That is, the VLO on this plane comes with very low maintenance cost. Stealth aircraft of the past couldn’t make that claim. Because radar detects sharp edges, even small mismatches between exterior parts on past VLO planes were smoothed out using epoxy. The epoxy would dry, harden and separate in the field—meaning it had to be frequently inspected and replaced.
By contrast, adjacent parts of the F-35 match so fluidly and precisely that no epoxy is needed...."
_________________
THE F-35 LOW OBSERVABILITY’S LIFELONG SUSTAINABILITY: A REVOLUTIONARY ASSET FOR 21ST CENTURY COMBAT AVIATION
http://www.sldinfo.com/?p=6065
"...Performance-wise, it is a very aggressive capability. From a design standpoint, it is a radical change from legacy systems. In legacy stealth, the stealth in effect is a parasitic application of a multiple stack-up of material systems done in final finish after the actual airframe is built and completed. In the case of the F-35, we’ve incorporated much of the LO system directly into the air frame itself. The materials have been manufactured right into the structure, so they have the durability and lifetime qualities. It makes them much more impervious to damage. It is a much simpler system with fewer materials to contend with....
...From day one, the supportable LO has been a key entity on the program and has had a profound influence on the very design of the airplane. In fact, the element that is manufactured into the skin was an initiative brought about by our LO maintenance discipline....
...SLD: The F-35 program is built around global partnerships and a globally deployed capability. What is the role of partners in the LO repair facility?
Bill Grant: The partners weren’t involved from the very beginning because our technology transfer agreements didn’t permit that for a while. But as of November of 2008, they have participated in what has become a real institution here. We have quarterly two-day hands-on familiarization courses where members from maintainers from all of the services and several partners come in and get some experience with the tools and the processes affecting the restorations and the repairs. That’s been a tremendous plus in terms of their input and shaping our understanding of what works and what doesn’t work, and we’ve modified our designs and our concepts accordingly. But mostly, they’ve provided a high-level validation that these tools and processes do, in fact, work for them, for both experienced and inexperienced LO maintainers, and that it’s doable in their environment.
SLD: So a lot of the LO maintenance will be done by the services and partners in the field?
Bill Grant: Yes indeed: we have no recognized need for any kind of return to depot or return to manufacturer for doing any type of LO maintenance. Our system requirement was for end of life, which means that throughout the 8,000-hour service life of the jet, it is to remain fully mission-capable. So we anticipated that the amount of maintenance that would be done over the life of the airplane and anticipated that in the design. So when we deliver the jet, it’s delivered with a significant margin of degradation that’s allowed for all of these types of repairs over the life of the airplane, again, without having to return to the depot for refurbishment. There may be some cosmetic-based reasons why the jet might go back to a facility to get its appearance improved, but from a performance-standpoint we recognize no need to do that. The unit-level maintenance will be adequate for maintaining the full-mission capability of the jet.
SLD: In entering the facility, I noticed you have a “door mat” of stealth that’s been there for some time. Can you comment on this “door mat?”
Bill Grant: Oh, the slab of stealth? That’s our welcome mat. Yes, we actually have one of the test panels that we use for assessing the stealth of the various materials. It represents a stack-up that’s consistent with the upper surface or the outer surface of the jet. It has the exact same structure and the primer and the topcoat system that you’ll find on the operational jets. And that gets walked upon every time somebody comes in or out of our lab area out there, the repair development center.
Occasionally, we take it up to test to see if there’s any electrical or mechanical degradation to the system and with around 25,000 steps across that system we have not seen any degradation whatsoever. So we have a great deal of confidence, however anecdotal that may be, that we have a very robust system."
____________________________________
The F-35’s Race Against Time Nov 2012 By John A. Tirpak Executive Editor
http://www.airforce-magazine.com/Mag...12fighter.aspx
"...The F-35’s radar cross section, or RCS, has a "maintenance margin," O’Bryan explained, meaning it’s "always better than the spec." Minor scratches and even dents won’t affect the F-35’s stealth qualities enough to degrade its combat performance, in the estimation of the company. Field equipment will be able to assess RCS right on the flight line, using far less cumbersome gear than has previously been needed to make such calculations....”
________________________________
F-35 Stealth Coatings Applied to F-22 Shane McGlaun (Blog) April 7, 2011
DailyTech - F-35 Stealth Coatings Applied to F-22
"..."Some of the [low observables] coatings system and gap-fillers that the F-35 had an advantage on, we have incorporated into the Raptor," said Jeff Babione, vice president & general manager of the F-22 program for Lockheed Martin. Defense News reports that Babione claims that the new coatings don’t change the radar cross section of the F-22. The coatings according to Babione are simply to reduce maintenance costs. He said, "[The F-35 program] had some more robust materials that were more durable & we were able to pull those back on to the F-22. So our system is better, & the life-cycle cost of the F-22 is reduced."..."
_________________________
USAF praises early performance of Lockheed Martin F-35 06 Nov 2012 Dave Majumdar
US Air Force praises early performance of Lockheed Martin F-35
"...Additionally, the F-35's stealth coatings are much easier to work with than those used on the Raptor. Cure times for coating repairs are lower and many of the fasteners and access panels are not coated, further reducing the workload for maintenance crews...."
Composites Machining for the F-35 : CompositesWorld
"...The F-35 features “supportable” VLO. That is, the VLO on this plane comes with very low maintenance cost. Stealth aircraft of the past couldn’t make that claim. Because radar detects sharp edges, even small mismatches between exterior parts on past VLO planes were smoothed out using epoxy. The epoxy would dry, harden and separate in the field—meaning it had to be frequently inspected and replaced.
By contrast, adjacent parts of the F-35 match so fluidly and precisely that no epoxy is needed...."
_________________
THE F-35 LOW OBSERVABILITY’S LIFELONG SUSTAINABILITY: A REVOLUTIONARY ASSET FOR 21ST CENTURY COMBAT AVIATION
http://www.sldinfo.com/?p=6065
"...Performance-wise, it is a very aggressive capability. From a design standpoint, it is a radical change from legacy systems. In legacy stealth, the stealth in effect is a parasitic application of a multiple stack-up of material systems done in final finish after the actual airframe is built and completed. In the case of the F-35, we’ve incorporated much of the LO system directly into the air frame itself. The materials have been manufactured right into the structure, so they have the durability and lifetime qualities. It makes them much more impervious to damage. It is a much simpler system with fewer materials to contend with....
...From day one, the supportable LO has been a key entity on the program and has had a profound influence on the very design of the airplane. In fact, the element that is manufactured into the skin was an initiative brought about by our LO maintenance discipline....
...SLD: The F-35 program is built around global partnerships and a globally deployed capability. What is the role of partners in the LO repair facility?
Bill Grant: The partners weren’t involved from the very beginning because our technology transfer agreements didn’t permit that for a while. But as of November of 2008, they have participated in what has become a real institution here. We have quarterly two-day hands-on familiarization courses where members from maintainers from all of the services and several partners come in and get some experience with the tools and the processes affecting the restorations and the repairs. That’s been a tremendous plus in terms of their input and shaping our understanding of what works and what doesn’t work, and we’ve modified our designs and our concepts accordingly. But mostly, they’ve provided a high-level validation that these tools and processes do, in fact, work for them, for both experienced and inexperienced LO maintainers, and that it’s doable in their environment.
SLD: So a lot of the LO maintenance will be done by the services and partners in the field?
Bill Grant: Yes indeed: we have no recognized need for any kind of return to depot or return to manufacturer for doing any type of LO maintenance. Our system requirement was for end of life, which means that throughout the 8,000-hour service life of the jet, it is to remain fully mission-capable. So we anticipated that the amount of maintenance that would be done over the life of the airplane and anticipated that in the design. So when we deliver the jet, it’s delivered with a significant margin of degradation that’s allowed for all of these types of repairs over the life of the airplane, again, without having to return to the depot for refurbishment. There may be some cosmetic-based reasons why the jet might go back to a facility to get its appearance improved, but from a performance-standpoint we recognize no need to do that. The unit-level maintenance will be adequate for maintaining the full-mission capability of the jet.
SLD: In entering the facility, I noticed you have a “door mat” of stealth that’s been there for some time. Can you comment on this “door mat?”
Bill Grant: Oh, the slab of stealth? That’s our welcome mat. Yes, we actually have one of the test panels that we use for assessing the stealth of the various materials. It represents a stack-up that’s consistent with the upper surface or the outer surface of the jet. It has the exact same structure and the primer and the topcoat system that you’ll find on the operational jets. And that gets walked upon every time somebody comes in or out of our lab area out there, the repair development center.
Occasionally, we take it up to test to see if there’s any electrical or mechanical degradation to the system and with around 25,000 steps across that system we have not seen any degradation whatsoever. So we have a great deal of confidence, however anecdotal that may be, that we have a very robust system."
____________________________________
The F-35’s Race Against Time Nov 2012 By John A. Tirpak Executive Editor
http://www.airforce-magazine.com/Mag...12fighter.aspx
"...The F-35’s radar cross section, or RCS, has a "maintenance margin," O’Bryan explained, meaning it’s "always better than the spec." Minor scratches and even dents won’t affect the F-35’s stealth qualities enough to degrade its combat performance, in the estimation of the company. Field equipment will be able to assess RCS right on the flight line, using far less cumbersome gear than has previously been needed to make such calculations....”
________________________________
F-35 Stealth Coatings Applied to F-22 Shane McGlaun (Blog) April 7, 2011
DailyTech - F-35 Stealth Coatings Applied to F-22
"..."Some of the [low observables] coatings system and gap-fillers that the F-35 had an advantage on, we have incorporated into the Raptor," said Jeff Babione, vice president & general manager of the F-22 program for Lockheed Martin. Defense News reports that Babione claims that the new coatings don’t change the radar cross section of the F-22. The coatings according to Babione are simply to reduce maintenance costs. He said, "[The F-35 program] had some more robust materials that were more durable & we were able to pull those back on to the F-22. So our system is better, & the life-cycle cost of the F-22 is reduced."..."
_________________________
USAF praises early performance of Lockheed Martin F-35 06 Nov 2012 Dave Majumdar
US Air Force praises early performance of Lockheed Martin F-35
"...Additionally, the F-35's stealth coatings are much easier to work with than those used on the Raptor. Cure times for coating repairs are lower and many of the fasteners and access panels are not coated, further reducing the workload for maintenance crews...."
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A lot closer to the sea
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are panels of various F-35 LO coatings mounted on a beach in Florida (I think) to figure out how the maritime environment affects it. Both NAS Pax River and Eglin AFB are on the coast and LO was considered during Initial Sea Trials and will be looked at again for the next trials.
I'm sure the UK maintainers in the US are getting plenty of experience on LO maintenance, although obviously don't have the background on F-22, F-117, B-2 etc of their US colleagues.
I'm sure the UK maintainers in the US are getting plenty of experience on LO maintenance, although obviously don't have the background on F-22, F-117, B-2 etc of their US colleagues.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,581
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
Unsharpen your hooks - Sir Yes Sir!
Earlier there was a bit of info about F-35C hook being redesigned IMHO to look like an A-4 hook and that the A-4 hook had to be unsharpened every now and then (depending on what the metal to metal abrasion effect was over time) to prevent what we see in this VF-805 LineBook page highlighting a frayed no.5 wire onboard HMAS Melbourne (which had 5 arrestor wires during the A4G/S2E-G era whereas earlier in the Sea Venom Gannet era there were 6 wires with the sixth ["JC wire"] removed).
I'm sure whatever the result of the F-35C hook redesign that the USN will continue to regularly inspect all aspects of their arrestor gear / hook / aircraft combinations for any maintenance required. Text of signal seen top right of linebook page repeated:
"2. Day
K. 1. During arrested landing, hook penetrated the strands of NO 5 wire, engaging two of the six strands. Although port tyre burst on touch-down, approach and arrestment considered normal. Film of landing showed first point of contact of hook was on or very close to wire"
Click de thumbs for big pic:
I'm sure whatever the result of the F-35C hook redesign that the USN will continue to regularly inspect all aspects of their arrestor gear / hook / aircraft combinations for any maintenance required. Text of signal seen top right of linebook page repeated:
"2. Day
K. 1. During arrested landing, hook penetrated the strands of NO 5 wire, engaging two of the six strands. Although port tyre burst on touch-down, approach and arrestment considered normal. Film of landing showed first point of contact of hook was on or very close to wire"
Click de thumbs for big pic:
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 11th May 2013 at 20:49. Reason: Add signal text
Back to LO (LO, the poster, not the stealth feature), the point I was making is that the LO application is not just an applied layer. It's actually built into the skin structure and "baked" on in such a way that it bcomes part of the structure.
The technology is't that new, but its use in this application is. Fairly. The issue for me is that any significant damage means there is not coating to reapply, instead it is maintenance work well beyond the flight line. As I said before, the good news is that minor damage or errosion is not going to be an immediate issue for the overall RCS, although there must come a time when there will need to be a deep servicing re-application.
The technology is't that new, but its use in this application is. Fairly. The issue for me is that any significant damage means there is not coating to reapply, instead it is maintenance work well beyond the flight line. As I said before, the good news is that minor damage or errosion is not going to be an immediate issue for the overall RCS, although there must come a time when there will need to be a deep servicing re-application.
Originally Posted by Spaz
I'm sure whatever the result of the F-35C hook redesign that the USN will continue to regularly inspect all aspects of their arrestor gear / hook / aircraft combinations for any maintenance required.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,581
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
F-35 Stealth Damage Graphic
'Courtney Mil' it seems to me that your 'significant damage' needs to be somehow quantified. I'll post some info about tests which damaged the stealth coating - only to be repaired successfully with the line tools available. Text about this 'humans banging on metal' testing in earlier posts.
My apologies URL for the PDF omitted inadvertantly earlier.
LINK for the PDF below [whence came graphic]: http://www.box.com/shared/3uo7o5qt25e2x6ylc294
navyleague2008PDF.pdf (3.2Mb) Created by (ELP) Eric Palmer 18 Jan 2012 FREE download
Click the thumbnail:
________________
And 'Courtney Mil' "...I'm surprised thes is seen as something new." What does surprise you then? How to spell 'this'?
My apologies URL for the PDF omitted inadvertantly earlier.
LINK for the PDF below [whence came graphic]: http://www.box.com/shared/3uo7o5qt25e2x6ylc294
navyleague2008PDF.pdf (3.2Mb) Created by (ELP) Eric Palmer 18 Jan 2012 FREE download
Click the thumbnail:
________________
And 'Courtney Mil' "...I'm surprised thes is seen as something new." What does surprise you then? How to spell 'this'?
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 12th May 2013 at 18:01. Reason: Missing URL for 'navyleague2008PDF' PDF ELP origin
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spaz, this is about your pic....they say that represents 600 flight hours and with the damage not repaired, the RCS signature was up to spec
and it is further said from your link
CM, instead of guessing or making up what you want it to be, why don't you read up on it?
"The package is designed to remain stealthy in severe combat conditions, and tests have validated that capability. After obtaining baseline radar cross section (RCS) measurements from a highly detailed, full-scale Signature Measurement Aircraft (SigMA), a team of Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman engineers intentionally inflicted extensive damage – more than three dozen significant defects – on the model. The damage represented the cumulative effect of more than 600 flight hours of military aircraft operations. RCS measurements taken after the damage showed that the stealthy signature remained intact. "
So when we deliver the jet, it’s delivered with a significant margin of degradation that’s allowed for all of these types of repairs over the life of the airplane, again, without having to return to the depot for refurbishment. There may be some cosmetic-based reasons why the jet might go back to a facility to get its appearance improved, but from a performance-standpoint we recognize no need to do that. The unit-level maintenance will be adequate for maintaining the full-mission capability of the jet.
Last edited by JSFfan; 12th May 2013 at 01:57.
ELP published the recent South Korean F-35 LM Brief PDF FWIW. 