F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,583
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
F-35 FUSL Testing [Full Up System Level]
For the delectation of 'hanoijane' (whereyabin?)....
F-35: First-Ever Fixed Wing Full-Up System Level by Jeff Johnson and Timothy Staley | pp.28-31
http://www.bahdayton.com/surviac/asn..._Fall_2007.pdf (1.6Mb)
____________________________________________
F-35 Live Fire Test: Full-Up Systems Level Testing
http://www.bahdayton.com/surviac/asn...O_Spring10.pdf (3.3Mb)
___________________________
2011 DOTE Report page 5 of 14 pages | numbered page 29
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/...2011f35jsf.pdf (0.6Mb)
______________________________
Aircraft Survivability Journal - Spring 2012 Issue
Published by the Joint Aircraft Survivability Program Office
JSF FULL UP SYSTEM LEVEL TESTING F35 Flight Critical Systems Test Chuck Frankenberger
http://www.bahdayton.com/surviac/asn...012_V9_web.pdf (2.1Mb)
F-35: First-Ever Fixed Wing Full-Up System Level by Jeff Johnson and Timothy Staley | pp.28-31
"After 20 years of the live fire test law (10USC2366), nearly every type of aircraft has undergone testing, paving the way for programs to come. In spite of this long and impressive legacy of testing, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program still marks many firsts....
...The waiver limited full-up system-level (FUSL) testing to a single variant of the JSF and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (OSD/AT&L) granted the waiver in June 2001. The waiver meant that though preceded by the F-22, the JSF will become the first fifth-generation fighter to undergo FUSL testing....
...The focus of the live fire test and evaluation (LFT&E) program is to address the components or systems that have the greatest areas of uncertainty or the greatest amount of risk. This uncertainty includes unique aspects of the design and features that have little or no previous test data available. No aspect of the JSF is more unique than the STOVL propulsion system....
...As a result, these components warrant live fire testing. Thus far, the program has tested the ballistic tolerance of the 3BSM, the shaft, and the clutch, with the lift fan testing to come....
...An interesting design feature of all three variants is the bifurcated inlet duct, which has inlet openings on both sides of the fuselage, merging to a single inlet path just in front of the engine. The two inlets surround a large fuel tank on the CTOL and CV variants. As a result, any ballistic damage to this area can lead to leakage down the inlet and into the engine....
...Perhaps the most significant design change affecting the program’s LFT&E relates to the fire suppression system. Several phases of testing were performed to determine the most lightweight and cost effective fire suppression system. The outcome of some of the testing, such as that performed by the 46th Test Wing at Wright-Patterson AFB (WPAFB), was quite spectacular. However, once again, weight constraints (among other factors) resulted in the removal of the fire suppression system (with the exception of fire detection) from the aircraft....
...The JSF is being assessed against a wide range of threats, from API and high-explosive incendiary (HEI) rounds to fragments from proximity-fuzed surface-to-air missiles (SAM) and man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS) The MANPADS analysis uses the new advanced diverging ray methodology (ADRAM) and a localized area is being assessed, taking into account the areas of the aircraft where an infrared (IR)-guided MANPAD is more likely to impact. This analysis allows for more reasonable trade studies with respect to these threats, and ensures the program gets the most “bang for the buck” with any vulnerability reduction features implemented in the design...."
...The waiver limited full-up system-level (FUSL) testing to a single variant of the JSF and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (OSD/AT&L) granted the waiver in June 2001. The waiver meant that though preceded by the F-22, the JSF will become the first fifth-generation fighter to undergo FUSL testing....
...The focus of the live fire test and evaluation (LFT&E) program is to address the components or systems that have the greatest areas of uncertainty or the greatest amount of risk. This uncertainty includes unique aspects of the design and features that have little or no previous test data available. No aspect of the JSF is more unique than the STOVL propulsion system....
...As a result, these components warrant live fire testing. Thus far, the program has tested the ballistic tolerance of the 3BSM, the shaft, and the clutch, with the lift fan testing to come....
...An interesting design feature of all three variants is the bifurcated inlet duct, which has inlet openings on both sides of the fuselage, merging to a single inlet path just in front of the engine. The two inlets surround a large fuel tank on the CTOL and CV variants. As a result, any ballistic damage to this area can lead to leakage down the inlet and into the engine....
...Perhaps the most significant design change affecting the program’s LFT&E relates to the fire suppression system. Several phases of testing were performed to determine the most lightweight and cost effective fire suppression system. The outcome of some of the testing, such as that performed by the 46th Test Wing at Wright-Patterson AFB (WPAFB), was quite spectacular. However, once again, weight constraints (among other factors) resulted in the removal of the fire suppression system (with the exception of fire detection) from the aircraft....
...The JSF is being assessed against a wide range of threats, from API and high-explosive incendiary (HEI) rounds to fragments from proximity-fuzed surface-to-air missiles (SAM) and man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS) The MANPADS analysis uses the new advanced diverging ray methodology (ADRAM) and a localized area is being assessed, taking into account the areas of the aircraft where an infrared (IR)-guided MANPAD is more likely to impact. This analysis allows for more reasonable trade studies with respect to these threats, and ensures the program gets the most “bang for the buck” with any vulnerability reduction features implemented in the design...."
____________________________________________
F-35 Live Fire Test: Full-Up Systems Level Testing
"The Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) (F-35, Lightning II) Vulnerability and Live Fire Test Team will be conducting Full-Up System Level (FUSL) testing on the 1st JSF System Design and Development (SDD) aircraft (2AA:0001). The F-35 live fire test and evaluation (LFT&E) strategy is to conduct a comprehensive test and evaluation of the system-level vulnerability and lethality of all three F-35 variants against ballistic and advanced threats. The original LFT&E strategy for determining the system-level vulnerability for the F-35 family of aircraft was founded on the FUSL testing of an F-35 short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) variant. The approach for the remaining two variants was to leverage the high degree of commonality between the F-35 family of aircraft by conducting Full-Up testing of the variant unique features and component/system level tests. The waiver approving this live fire (LF) strategy was approved by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD AT&L) on 25 October 2001."
___________________________
2011 DOTE Report page 5 of 14 pages | numbered page 29
"...Live Fire Testing
• FUSL testing conducted on the first flight test aircraft (CTOL aircraft AA-1) provided aircraft flight control, electrical, propulsion, and fuel system vulnerability data. Due to commonality of the three variants, these results are extendable to the STOVL and CV variants as well.
• Contractor Fuel System Simulator tests showed the On-Board Inert Gas Generation System (OBIGGS) performance to be inadequate to support the vulnerability reduction requirements of the aircraft. A two-phase redesign effort is underway to provide protection against threat-induced fuel tank explosion across the entire flight envelope. Engine test articles have been delivered and structural test articles have been identified."...
• FUSL testing conducted on the first flight test aircraft (CTOL aircraft AA-1) provided aircraft flight control, electrical, propulsion, and fuel system vulnerability data. Due to commonality of the three variants, these results are extendable to the STOVL and CV variants as well.
• Contractor Fuel System Simulator tests showed the On-Board Inert Gas Generation System (OBIGGS) performance to be inadequate to support the vulnerability reduction requirements of the aircraft. A two-phase redesign effort is underway to provide protection against threat-induced fuel tank explosion across the entire flight envelope. Engine test articles have been delivered and structural test articles have been identified."...
______________________________
Aircraft Survivability Journal - Spring 2012 Issue
Published by the Joint Aircraft Survivability Program Office
JSF FULL UP SYSTEM LEVEL TESTING F35 Flight Critical Systems Test Chuck Frankenberger
"...FCS Architecture : No cheap Kills [Flight Control System]
One of the newer technologies in the F35 is the Electrohydrostatic Actuators. These actuators contain a self-contained hydraulic system. There are two types of actuators on the aircraft: simplex and dual tandem. The dual actuators have redundancies built in, including dual communication and power paths. The dual actuators were ballistically tested and showed good tolerance to damage. The redundant systems are isolated, and damage on one side did not propagate to the other side....
...Conclusions
The FUSL testing conducted on AA-1 was very successful meeting all defined test objectives and success criteria. Addressing synergistic effects, the electrical power and flight control systems successfully isolated failures and protected the redundancies built into these systems, allowing continued safe flight. The VSN [Vehicle System Network] architecture is robust, providing multiple paths to transfer data. Testing highlighted that fire is a significant threat to flight critical systems.
The test team was able to verify that the actual ballistic damage response correlated very well to previous pilot in the loop simulator testing. Over the course of the test program, the LFT [Live Fire Test] team witnessed firsthand the robustness of the F35 flight critical systems, no cheap system kills."
One of the newer technologies in the F35 is the Electrohydrostatic Actuators. These actuators contain a self-contained hydraulic system. There are two types of actuators on the aircraft: simplex and dual tandem. The dual actuators have redundancies built in, including dual communication and power paths. The dual actuators were ballistically tested and showed good tolerance to damage. The redundant systems are isolated, and damage on one side did not propagate to the other side....
...Conclusions
The FUSL testing conducted on AA-1 was very successful meeting all defined test objectives and success criteria. Addressing synergistic effects, the electrical power and flight control systems successfully isolated failures and protected the redundancies built into these systems, allowing continued safe flight. The VSN [Vehicle System Network] architecture is robust, providing multiple paths to transfer data. Testing highlighted that fire is a significant threat to flight critical systems.
The test team was able to verify that the actual ballistic damage response correlated very well to previous pilot in the loop simulator testing. Over the course of the test program, the LFT [Live Fire Test] team witnessed firsthand the robustness of the F35 flight critical systems, no cheap system kills."
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: UK, VN, TW.
Age: 60
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wherehaveibin? I've been doing interesting things, Spaz. There is life beyond PPRuNu yunno :-)
Yes, its all very wonderful on paper. But you've flown things which have been tested-to-death, quality assured, serviced by saints and have duplex/quadruplex digital flight systems and - by golly - don't they still fail, in unison, and usually at the most inopportune moments?
The more things there are to go wrong, the more things will go wrong. The more flight critical things there are in an airframe to hit, the more will be hit.
The F35 will end up being used by the Marines as a bomb truck. Get a marine in a quiet corner and he'll usually admit it too. And as a bomb truck it has some serious limitations.
Americans have the ability to produce some truly exceptional designs. I'm in awe of the X47. A remarkable step forwards. Degrading the UCLASS specification was crazy. It only makes sense if you're trying to kill the programme to save the F35, which would be the very definition of madness.
I don't know why I care. It's not my air force :-)
Yes, its all very wonderful on paper. But you've flown things which have been tested-to-death, quality assured, serviced by saints and have duplex/quadruplex digital flight systems and - by golly - don't they still fail, in unison, and usually at the most inopportune moments?
The more things there are to go wrong, the more things will go wrong. The more flight critical things there are in an airframe to hit, the more will be hit.
The F35 will end up being used by the Marines as a bomb truck. Get a marine in a quiet corner and he'll usually admit it too. And as a bomb truck it has some serious limitations.
Americans have the ability to produce some truly exceptional designs. I'm in awe of the X47. A remarkable step forwards. Degrading the UCLASS specification was crazy. It only makes sense if you're trying to kill the programme to save the F35, which would be the very definition of madness.
I don't know why I care. It's not my air force :-)
Last edited by hanoijane; 30th Aug 2013 at 19:32.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Heathrow Harry
Quote:
"Carrier aviation is a proven war winner"
the last time it was proven was 1945.....................
it certainly didn't win the war in Vietnam (or Iraq) for example
Er ... Has someone forgotten a little incident in the South Atlantic in 1982?
And that would have been a cinch if they hadn't scrapped the real Ark Royal
----------------------------------------
just remembered there WAS a real aircraft carrier (as opposed to our rather gash jobs) in the Falklands War - HMS Venerable aka ARA Veinticinco de Mayo (V-2)
she never showed up because we had SSN's......... which raises a point about the viability of any modern aircraft carrier against a similarly equipped foe
Quote:
"Carrier aviation is a proven war winner"
the last time it was proven was 1945.....................
it certainly didn't win the war in Vietnam (or Iraq) for example
Er ... Has someone forgotten a little incident in the South Atlantic in 1982?
And that would have been a cinch if they hadn't scrapped the real Ark Royal
----------------------------------------
just remembered there WAS a real aircraft carrier (as opposed to our rather gash jobs) in the Falklands War - HMS Venerable aka ARA Veinticinco de Mayo (V-2)
she never showed up because we had SSN's......... which raises a point about the viability of any modern aircraft carrier against a similarly equipped foe
Last edited by Heathrow Harry; 31st Aug 2013 at 12:20.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 45
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It also raises the point that an SSN can target an airfield with cruise missiles with much greater ease than a carrier which can move at 30kts+. Maybe we should leave that argument for the Sharkey Watch thread.
From other coverage of the sea trials, of possible interest to those looking forward to operating the FifthGenerationTM wonderjet...
An interesting factoid, one of the USMC test pilots mentioned this little tidbit—they have to use a modified Rutowski profile in order to get the F-35B and C up to Mach 1.6. Basically, you do one push over, unload the jet and accelerate, get up to 1.2, turn and repeat until you hit 1.4 Mach, turn and repeat till you hit Mach 1.6. It just barely gets there and barely has any gas left over afterwards. The kinematics are basically F/A-18C-like, though that was apparently exactly what was expected.
F-35B sea-trials aboard the USS Wasp - The DEW Line
That's probably a bit of a libel on the Classic Hornet, especially with the -402 engine. The F-35A will be about the same, with the exception of having a bit more gas left at Mach 1.6.
An interesting factoid, one of the USMC test pilots mentioned this little tidbit—they have to use a modified Rutowski profile in order to get the F-35B and C up to Mach 1.6. Basically, you do one push over, unload the jet and accelerate, get up to 1.2, turn and repeat until you hit 1.4 Mach, turn and repeat till you hit Mach 1.6. It just barely gets there and barely has any gas left over afterwards. The kinematics are basically F/A-18C-like, though that was apparently exactly what was expected.
F-35B sea-trials aboard the USS Wasp - The DEW Line
That's probably a bit of a libel on the Classic Hornet, especially with the -402 engine. The F-35A will be about the same, with the exception of having a bit more gas left at Mach 1.6.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"they have to use a modified Rutowski profile"
I think you will find the above to be factually wrong and the flight tests specs are for level flight. Operationally they may/will chose a Rutowski profile
the other thing is that most planes can't do m1.6 with bombs and missiles
I think you will find the above to be factually wrong and the flight tests specs are for level flight. Operationally they may/will chose a Rutowski profile
the other thing is that most planes can't do m1.6 with bombs and missiles
Last edited by JSFfan; 31st Aug 2013 at 15:06.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,583
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
On previous page 'Rhino power' said:
Is this the one: (from the doodline): http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/th...-5-1200-st.jpg
"In other F-35 news, it was reported this morning that an access panel was opened and the contents there in were fiddled with, upon completion of the fiddling the access panel was successfully closed and no problems were reported. There will now, no doubt, be several hundred links posted to demonstrate just how this procedure proves just how damn fine splendidly the F-35 program is progressing... 
-RP "
-RP "
...the other thing is that most planes can't do m1.6 with bombs and missiles
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: raf
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just noticed in the RAF News a full page advertisement for the F-35 (page 6, 16 Aug 13).
Baffles me why? Can I buy one and keep it in the garden?
No wonder it's so expensive when Lockheed Martin buy full page advert space in random news papers.
Baffles me why? Can I buy one and keep it in the garden?
No wonder it's so expensive when Lockheed Martin buy full page advert space in random news papers.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,583
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
SRVL Video Screenshot + Info
Thanks 't43562'. Looks like an SRVL to me. I like all dem lights. Info about Youtube video above below. Did not hear narration on Youtube but heard it later which explains all I guess. Screenshot (large) from video.
Landing an F35B on HMS Queen Elizabeth [SRVL]
Landing an F35B on HMS Queen Elizabeth - YouTube
SRVV Ship Referenced Velocity Vector graphic from: http://www.hrana.org/documents/Paddl...August2011.pdf (2.2Mb)
Click thumbnail for big pic:
Paddles Monthly August 2011 ‘What the Future Beholds...’ Dan "Butters" Radocaj Test Pilot/LSO VX-23 Ship Suitability
http://www.hrana.org/documents/Paddl...August2011.pdf (2.2Mb)
Landing an F35B on HMS Queen Elizabeth [SRVL]
"Published on Sep 6, 2013
What will it look like of pilots coming in to land, at night, on HMS Queen Elizabeth? This simulation will give you an idea..."
What will it look like of pilots coming in to land, at night, on HMS Queen Elizabeth? This simulation will give you an idea..."
SRVV Ship Referenced Velocity Vector graphic from: http://www.hrana.org/documents/Paddl...August2011.pdf (2.2Mb)
Click thumbnail for big pic:
Paddles Monthly August 2011 ‘What the Future Beholds...’ Dan "Butters" Radocaj Test Pilot/LSO VX-23 Ship Suitability
“...We may also need to add another lens-type glideslope indicator. One idea is called a Bedford Array. You can see in Figure 1 that a Bedford Array is like a lens spread of over the length of the LA. Unlike an IFLOLS which has 12 cells that are always on to create a glideslope reference, the Bedford Array is a set of Christmas lights and only the light corresponding to current position of the touchdown point is illuminated. Just as the dynamic touchdown point moves across the deck on the LSODS screen, the Bedford Array lights would “move” forward and back across the deck corresponding to the dynamic touchdown point. Figure 2 shows what your HUD may look like. You keep the ship stabilized velocity vector on top of the Bedford light that is illuminated. The datum is a reference line in your HUD. As long as the 3 all line up you are on glide path. A Bedford Array & a ship stabilized velocity are indicators of glide-slope that will show you if you are off glide-slope more precisely but they still don’t make the airplane respond differently....”
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 6th Sep 2013 at 13:38. Reason: SRVL Video Screenshot + sound + Add SRVV graphic + text quote
It's actually pretty impressive when you see it in action and a credit to those who worked on it.
I agree it looks pretty ordinary in a still, but when working the 'HUD' it sells itself pretty quickly.
I agree it looks pretty ordinary in a still, but when working the 'HUD' it sells itself pretty quickly.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Courtney - I am unfamiliar with the equipment but the document talks of a 'ship stabilised velocity vector' whereas the VVs we all use (or don't if we're listening to the LSOs) are 'earth stabilised'. So somehow it's accounting for the forward motion of the ship. If you put a classic VV on the Fresnel lens you would drop short...and probably hit the port side of the ship. This needn't necessarily be seen as a bad thing because you would probably hit the LSO platform....
Last edited by orca; 6th Sep 2013 at 19:37.