F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Canceled F-16 Upgrades Put Jet's Combat Value in Doubt
Taiwan, Singapore Were Banking on Now-defunded Program
TAIPEI AND WASHINGTON — As officials in Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) were busying themselves for Chinese New Year celebrations last week, they received potentially devastating news for the Pacific nation’s air defense plans. The US Air Force plans to defund the combat avionics programmed extension suite (CAPES) program, as budget constraints could force the service to move remaining money from CAPES to the F-16 service-life extension program (SLEP), according to sources. While a lower profile program in the US, CAPES has huge implications for Taiwan. The program would upgrade 300 US F-16s and 146 Taiwanese F-16s with top-line avionics. While more US F-16s would receive the upgrade, the Taiwan piece represents a larger percentage of its overall fighter fleet. And without the program, Taiwan could be stuck with an aging fleet of F-16s as it continues to worry over China’s intentions.........
“I would think this would increase the pressure on the US to approve new F-16s for Taiwan, but that option is fast disappearing if it hasn’t already,” said Ed Ross, former principal director, Security Cooperation Operations, US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA). “All that would leave for Taiwan would be F-35s and, frankly, I don’t believe the US will ever approve F-35s for Taiwan.” Ross said the technology is too sensitive, “and there is a growing fear in Washington of US technology falling into Chinese hands one way or the other.” Ross said better relations between Beijing and Taipei has had unintended consequences, “one of which is the reduction in high-tech arms sales to Taiwan.”.......
“My guess is that the [Air Force] will do its best to come up with a solution, but Taiwan may not be able or willing to afford it,” Ross said. “I expect, at best, this will cause a major delay in the program,” he said. “Worst-case scenario, the F-16 upgrade program gets canceled or indefinitely delayed and Taiwan is left with an aging fleet of A/Bs. With no new F-16C/Ds approved for Taiwan, its Air Force is up a creek with not much of a paddle; and I’m not sure there is anyone in the Obama administration that gives much of a damn,” said Ross, president of the consultancy EWRoss International...........
Taiwan, Singapore Were Banking on Now-defunded Program
TAIPEI AND WASHINGTON — As officials in Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) were busying themselves for Chinese New Year celebrations last week, they received potentially devastating news for the Pacific nation’s air defense plans. The US Air Force plans to defund the combat avionics programmed extension suite (CAPES) program, as budget constraints could force the service to move remaining money from CAPES to the F-16 service-life extension program (SLEP), according to sources. While a lower profile program in the US, CAPES has huge implications for Taiwan. The program would upgrade 300 US F-16s and 146 Taiwanese F-16s with top-line avionics. While more US F-16s would receive the upgrade, the Taiwan piece represents a larger percentage of its overall fighter fleet. And without the program, Taiwan could be stuck with an aging fleet of F-16s as it continues to worry over China’s intentions.........
“I would think this would increase the pressure on the US to approve new F-16s for Taiwan, but that option is fast disappearing if it hasn’t already,” said Ed Ross, former principal director, Security Cooperation Operations, US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA). “All that would leave for Taiwan would be F-35s and, frankly, I don’t believe the US will ever approve F-35s for Taiwan.” Ross said the technology is too sensitive, “and there is a growing fear in Washington of US technology falling into Chinese hands one way or the other.” Ross said better relations between Beijing and Taipei has had unintended consequences, “one of which is the reduction in high-tech arms sales to Taiwan.”.......
“My guess is that the [Air Force] will do its best to come up with a solution, but Taiwan may not be able or willing to afford it,” Ross said. “I expect, at best, this will cause a major delay in the program,” he said. “Worst-case scenario, the F-16 upgrade program gets canceled or indefinitely delayed and Taiwan is left with an aging fleet of A/Bs. With no new F-16C/Ds approved for Taiwan, its Air Force is up a creek with not much of a paddle; and I’m not sure there is anyone in the Obama administration that gives much of a damn,” said Ross, president of the consultancy EWRoss International...........
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Some Embarrassing Details From the Pentagon’s Latest Stealth Fighter Report
Delayed, over-budget F-35 still riddled with flaws
The Pentagon’s latest weapons testing report is not kind to the $400-billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the military’s biggest and arguably most troubled program. The annual report by the Office of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation includes 20 pages listing the Lockheed Martin-built JSF’s ongoing problems.
A jack-of-all-trades radar-evading jet meant to replace no fewer than 2,400 existing fighters in the U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps, the F-35 has been dogged by budget overruns, schedule delays and redesigns. Overly complex in order to satisfy the diverse needs of three military branches, the F-35 is slower, less durable and less reliable than many of the planes it’s slated to replace. Most damningly, the 2013 test report predicts months of delays in the development of the F-35’s millions of lines of software, which could cause the Marine Corps and Air Force to miss their planned first deployments of combat-ready JSFs in 2015 and 2016, respectively.
But the DOT&E report also includes lots of other embarrassing details.
Only one third of F-35s are flight-ready
The military manages to keep around three quarters of its warplanes ready for flight at any given time. Even the Air Force’s devilishly complex F-22 stealth fighter—another Lockheed product—is ready 69 percent of the time.
But the roughly 50 F-35s in test or training squadrons in Florida, California, Nevada and Arizona are ready just a third of the time, on average. That’s because the jets need frequent design fixes and because Lockheed’s automated supply system isn’t working.
Now, it’s not uncommon for a new warplane to start out a tad unreliable and get more ready over time. But the F-35 has been flying in one form or another off and on for 14 years. “The design is becoming more stable and opportunities for reliability growth are decreasing,” the report notes. “While the relatively low number of flight hours shows there is still time for program reliability to improve,” the report continues, “this is not likely to occur without a focused, aggressive and well-resourced effort.”
Which is to say, making the JSF more flight-ready is going to also make its development more expensive.
The F-35 will get you lost
The JSF is designed to fly and fight against the most determined foe—even a foe capable of jamming or destroying America’s Global Positioning System satellites, depriving U.S. forces of their preferred way of knowing exactly where they are in the world. But the F-35’s independent “inertial” navigation gear—which determines the plane’s position by constantly computing starting point, direction, speed and time—is off by a few degrees. That’s just enough to make it useless in combat. “These errors prevent accurate targeting solutions for weapons employment in a GPS-denied environment,” the Pentagon warns.
A software fix is in the works, but “further flight testing will be required.” Again, that takes time and money.
The JSF’s main air-to-air missile doesn’t fully work—and it’s not clear why
The F-35 needs three basic weapons in order to be cleared for combat in 2015: a laser-guided bomb, a satellite-guided bomb and the AIM-120 air-to-air missile.
The nav system problems slowed the addition of the satellite bomb—basically, the munition didn’t know where to land. That, at least, was a known unknown—and engineers were able to solve it with a “fix in the mission systems software,” according to the report. But the AIM-120 isn’t working on the F-35, either. And in contrast to the bomb problem, testers have not been able to resolve the missile issue because they can’t quite duplicate it. “Problems involving integration of the AIM-120 medium-range missile have been difficult to replicate in lab and ground testing,” the report notes.
It is, in other words, an unknown unknown. And who can say what the solution is.
The F-35 confuses itself
To defend against increasingly sophisticated Russian- and Chinese-made air defenses, the JSF includes a cluster of high-tech cameras and sensors able to detect incoming missiles—and automatically deploy heat-generating flares or radar-foiling chaff to spoof the enemy guidance. But the so-called “Distributed Aperture System” doesn’t work. “The DAS has displayed a high false alarm rate for missile detections during ownship and formation flare testing,” the testing report reveals. Basically, the system cannot tell the difference between an enemy missile and one of the F-35’s own hot flares.
Imagine the feedback loop that could result. An F-35’s DAS detects an incoming missile and pops flares. DAS then mistakes those flares for another missile and pops more flares, then still more flares to spoof them. So on and so on until the F-35 runs out of countermeasures … and is defenceless.
It takes just one bullet fragment to shoot down an F-35B
The Marines’ F-35B variant includes a built-in vertical lift fan—a downward-blasting engine—to allow the plane to take off of and land on the Navy’s small amphibious assault ships. But adding a bulky lift fan made the JSF heavier, more complex and easier to shoot down.
That’s especially true for F-35Bs flying low to support Marine infantry on the ground. A lone enemy soldier firing a single bullet could seriously damage an F-35B. “Analysis showed that fragment-induced damage could result in the release of more than 25 percent of a single lift fan blade, resulting in a catastrophic … system failure,” the DOT&E report warns. And if the F-35B has to fly through high-tech air defenses in order to reach the beachhead, it’s even more likely to get shot down. “More severe threats, encountered at low altitude or in air-to-air gun engagements, will likely cause catastrophic damage.”
All this means that even if the JSF manages to meet its 2015 deployment deadline, it could fly into combat unreliable, confused, defenseless, toothless and vulnerable.
Delayed, over-budget F-35 still riddled with flaws
The Pentagon’s latest weapons testing report is not kind to the $400-billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the military’s biggest and arguably most troubled program. The annual report by the Office of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation includes 20 pages listing the Lockheed Martin-built JSF’s ongoing problems.
A jack-of-all-trades radar-evading jet meant to replace no fewer than 2,400 existing fighters in the U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps, the F-35 has been dogged by budget overruns, schedule delays and redesigns. Overly complex in order to satisfy the diverse needs of three military branches, the F-35 is slower, less durable and less reliable than many of the planes it’s slated to replace. Most damningly, the 2013 test report predicts months of delays in the development of the F-35’s millions of lines of software, which could cause the Marine Corps and Air Force to miss their planned first deployments of combat-ready JSFs in 2015 and 2016, respectively.
But the DOT&E report also includes lots of other embarrassing details.
Only one third of F-35s are flight-ready
The military manages to keep around three quarters of its warplanes ready for flight at any given time. Even the Air Force’s devilishly complex F-22 stealth fighter—another Lockheed product—is ready 69 percent of the time.
But the roughly 50 F-35s in test or training squadrons in Florida, California, Nevada and Arizona are ready just a third of the time, on average. That’s because the jets need frequent design fixes and because Lockheed’s automated supply system isn’t working.
Now, it’s not uncommon for a new warplane to start out a tad unreliable and get more ready over time. But the F-35 has been flying in one form or another off and on for 14 years. “The design is becoming more stable and opportunities for reliability growth are decreasing,” the report notes. “While the relatively low number of flight hours shows there is still time for program reliability to improve,” the report continues, “this is not likely to occur without a focused, aggressive and well-resourced effort.”
Which is to say, making the JSF more flight-ready is going to also make its development more expensive.
The F-35 will get you lost
The JSF is designed to fly and fight against the most determined foe—even a foe capable of jamming or destroying America’s Global Positioning System satellites, depriving U.S. forces of their preferred way of knowing exactly where they are in the world. But the F-35’s independent “inertial” navigation gear—which determines the plane’s position by constantly computing starting point, direction, speed and time—is off by a few degrees. That’s just enough to make it useless in combat. “These errors prevent accurate targeting solutions for weapons employment in a GPS-denied environment,” the Pentagon warns.
A software fix is in the works, but “further flight testing will be required.” Again, that takes time and money.
The JSF’s main air-to-air missile doesn’t fully work—and it’s not clear why
The F-35 needs three basic weapons in order to be cleared for combat in 2015: a laser-guided bomb, a satellite-guided bomb and the AIM-120 air-to-air missile.
The nav system problems slowed the addition of the satellite bomb—basically, the munition didn’t know where to land. That, at least, was a known unknown—and engineers were able to solve it with a “fix in the mission systems software,” according to the report. But the AIM-120 isn’t working on the F-35, either. And in contrast to the bomb problem, testers have not been able to resolve the missile issue because they can’t quite duplicate it. “Problems involving integration of the AIM-120 medium-range missile have been difficult to replicate in lab and ground testing,” the report notes.
It is, in other words, an unknown unknown. And who can say what the solution is.
The F-35 confuses itself
To defend against increasingly sophisticated Russian- and Chinese-made air defenses, the JSF includes a cluster of high-tech cameras and sensors able to detect incoming missiles—and automatically deploy heat-generating flares or radar-foiling chaff to spoof the enemy guidance. But the so-called “Distributed Aperture System” doesn’t work. “The DAS has displayed a high false alarm rate for missile detections during ownship and formation flare testing,” the testing report reveals. Basically, the system cannot tell the difference between an enemy missile and one of the F-35’s own hot flares.
Imagine the feedback loop that could result. An F-35’s DAS detects an incoming missile and pops flares. DAS then mistakes those flares for another missile and pops more flares, then still more flares to spoof them. So on and so on until the F-35 runs out of countermeasures … and is defenceless.
It takes just one bullet fragment to shoot down an F-35B
The Marines’ F-35B variant includes a built-in vertical lift fan—a downward-blasting engine—to allow the plane to take off of and land on the Navy’s small amphibious assault ships. But adding a bulky lift fan made the JSF heavier, more complex and easier to shoot down.
That’s especially true for F-35Bs flying low to support Marine infantry on the ground. A lone enemy soldier firing a single bullet could seriously damage an F-35B. “Analysis showed that fragment-induced damage could result in the release of more than 25 percent of a single lift fan blade, resulting in a catastrophic … system failure,” the DOT&E report warns. And if the F-35B has to fly through high-tech air defenses in order to reach the beachhead, it’s even more likely to get shot down. “More severe threats, encountered at low altitude or in air-to-air gun engagements, will likely cause catastrophic damage.”
All this means that even if the JSF manages to meet its 2015 deployment deadline, it could fly into combat unreliable, confused, defenseless, toothless and vulnerable.
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
John,
I agree to both 1 and 2. Operators need to spend money on new technology.
However, the F-35 brings two unique capabilities to the party: STOVL, and a degree of stealth that (I think most sources agree) is between that of a Rafale or Advanced Super Hornet and an F-22.
I will even cede that (probably not in Block 3 but possibly in Block 5 by 2024) it will have better sensor-fusion and networking smarts that anything in service today. However, that's something that is retrofittable.
The question "are STOVL and F-35 stealth worth the money?" was never supposed to be relevant, because the F-35 was promised to be cheaper to buy and operate than anything else. Costs are now crucial, because the price of F-35 is cutting force numbers.
So as an operator, I ask "do I want STOVL and how much is it worth?" and "I probably want to exploit stealth - but am I better off with F-35, or with Rafale/ASH levels + good EW + a few very stealthy UCAVs?"
I agree to both 1 and 2. Operators need to spend money on new technology.
However, the F-35 brings two unique capabilities to the party: STOVL, and a degree of stealth that (I think most sources agree) is between that of a Rafale or Advanced Super Hornet and an F-22.
I will even cede that (probably not in Block 3 but possibly in Block 5 by 2024) it will have better sensor-fusion and networking smarts that anything in service today. However, that's something that is retrofittable.
The question "are STOVL and F-35 stealth worth the money?" was never supposed to be relevant, because the F-35 was promised to be cheaper to buy and operate than anything else. Costs are now crucial, because the price of F-35 is cutting force numbers.
So as an operator, I ask "do I want STOVL and how much is it worth?" and "I probably want to exploit stealth - but am I better off with F-35, or with Rafale/ASH levels + good EW + a few very stealthy UCAVs?"
If say we can restart the production of F-22s, and double the # of Raptors in service, that should ameliorate some of the issues of not having stealth LWF and medium range interdiction. Along with purchasing more 4.5 G type aircraft (Superhornet, F-15E, Rafale, etc), seems should be sufficient for US and allies until 2040 or so. Does that sound like a workable solution?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lone enemy soldier firing a single bullet could seriously damage an F-35B.
GK - Not quite true.
There is a vulnerability spec for the F-35 (as for all US fighters since VN, I believe, hence the live-fire testing) that probably includes something to the effect that no single projectile or fragment (from an AAM or SAM warhead) above x grams and y meters/sec shall cause loss of aircraft.
The lift fan is light (no high-speed birdstrike requirement) and relatively exposed. The risk identified by DOT&E is that the fan is damaged and nobody knows it, and consequently fails just when the flight/propulsion control system thinks that it is starting to produce thrust, and as the aft nozzle is moving downwards. Result: large pitch moment that there is nothing to counteract.
How important this is in the big survivability picture, I don't know. But the spec is there and presumably this is a risk of a miss, because that's what DOT&E's terms of rerference are.
There is a vulnerability spec for the F-35 (as for all US fighters since VN, I believe, hence the live-fire testing) that probably includes something to the effect that no single projectile or fragment (from an AAM or SAM warhead) above x grams and y meters/sec shall cause loss of aircraft.
The lift fan is light (no high-speed birdstrike requirement) and relatively exposed. The risk identified by DOT&E is that the fan is damaged and nobody knows it, and consequently fails just when the flight/propulsion control system thinks that it is starting to produce thrust, and as the aft nozzle is moving downwards. Result: large pitch moment that there is nothing to counteract.
How important this is in the big survivability picture, I don't know. But the spec is there and presumably this is a risk of a miss, because that's what DOT&E's terms of rerference are.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
GK/LO.
I believe the comments on survivability relate to the increased risk as a result of removing the fueldraulic valves and PAO shut-off valves and dry bay fire suppression as a weight saving measure. All of which they want restored but without a weight increase.
That's in addition to the OBOGS system not being able to maintain fuel tank inerting through critical portions of a flight profile. Resulting not only in the combat risk, but the F-35 being currently unable to fly in forecast lightning conditions...
But apart from that, it's OK.........
I believe the comments on survivability relate to the increased risk as a result of removing the fueldraulic valves and PAO shut-off valves and dry bay fire suppression as a weight saving measure. All of which they want restored but without a weight increase.
That's in addition to the OBOGS system not being able to maintain fuel tank inerting through critical portions of a flight profile. Resulting not only in the combat risk, but the F-35 being currently unable to fly in forecast lightning conditions...
But apart from that, it's OK.........
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 66
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How does the F35 get signed off to service by the MoD?
Can anyone enlighten me as to how LM is going to get the F35B past the MoD?
Thinking of the software problems with the Chinooks, C130 fuel tanks and the present problems that seem to be arising with the Rivet Joint(s)?
There must be some way that LM have to show that the aircraft is slightly fit for purpose, I would have thought that not being yet able to fire its main armament and not really knowing where it was, if we are to believe the quoted report make the aircraft slightly unsuitable for deployment from a carrier...
Thinking of the software problems with the Chinooks, C130 fuel tanks and the present problems that seem to be arising with the Rivet Joint(s)?
There must be some way that LM have to show that the aircraft is slightly fit for purpose, I would have thought that not being yet able to fire its main armament and not really knowing where it was, if we are to believe the quoted report make the aircraft slightly unsuitable for deployment from a carrier...
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ORAC
“The DAS has displayed a high false alarm rate for missile detections during ownship and formation flare testing,” the testing report reveals. Basically, the system cannot tell the difference between an enemy missile and one of the F-35’s own hot flares.
25 or so years ago, some super smart mathematicians did a camo pattern study for the grunts, using the smartest computers of the time.
The result was that the 'computer' actually managed to construct the worst pattern, as reported from forward observers, the testers in this case.
This is just to illustrate the complexity of the recognition algorithms issue in general. LANTRIN had serious issues in Bosnia and now JSF has 5 of them pointing more or less down.
False alarm rate is bound to be astronomic if you want sensitivity.
In other news,
2015 budget preview ? Army-Guard fight gets ugly ? OSD turns down Navy request to take a ?break? from F-35 - POLITICO Morning Defense - POLITICO.com
Rumor has it...USN wants out?
Nitro - Politico report is the capstone on rumors since last summer - the USN put a three-year delay in F-35C at least (probably the B as well) into its ALT POM, the budget proposal that anticipated the real budget. (The baseline assumed more money that the Pentagon will get.)
Hence also the barrage of propaganda from LMT and its representatives about how cheap the F-35 will be compared to the F/A-18 - that is, as long as production plans are not changed by one iota.
The Navy is not ready to say/has not decided that it wants out completely. However, there seems to be strong feeling that the F-35C will not be much better than F-18 until it gets a couple of blocks beyond Block 3F (which itself does not arrive before 2019-20).
Hence also the barrage of propaganda from LMT and its representatives about how cheap the F-35 will be compared to the F/A-18 - that is, as long as production plans are not changed by one iota.
The Navy is not ready to say/has not decided that it wants out completely. However, there seems to be strong feeling that the F-35C will not be much better than F-18 until it gets a couple of blocks beyond Block 3F (which itself does not arrive before 2019-20).
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,577
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
Reasons to be Cheerful - Part Three
Start of a momentous year for Carrier project 3 February 2014 David Downs
Start of a momentous year for Carrier project | Opinion | The Engineer
"...On the upper deck, the catwalks around the edge of the flight deck are being prepared and will shortly be painted with a heat resistant paint scheme. This will survive the thermal effects of the exhaust of an F35 jet while hovering on the approach to a vertical landing. This work also entails application of the thermal metal spray coating to the edges of the flight deck. This coating system will later be applied across the whole flight deck....
...Meanwhile recognising that access to the ship and craneage is much easier while the ship is in the dry dock, served by the Goliath crane, than when afloat in the non-tidal basin, the chance is being taken to install anything that might be difficult to do later. This includes the platform at the stern for the SPN 41 Precision Approach Radar, the seating’s for the Glide Path Cameras and some CCTV cameras. It looks like 2014 is going to be another busy but very interesting year."
...Meanwhile recognising that access to the ship and craneage is much easier while the ship is in the dry dock, served by the Goliath crane, than when afloat in the non-tidal basin, the chance is being taken to install anything that might be difficult to do later. This includes the platform at the stern for the SPN 41 Precision Approach Radar, the seating’s for the Glide Path Cameras and some CCTV cameras. It looks like 2014 is going to be another busy but very interesting year."
"Queen Elizabeth in drydock, with the [Lower Portion of the] bow section of Prince of Wales alongside"
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 3rd Feb 2014 at 17:45. Reason: Add Caption
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not a huge surprise that flares dazzle IR cameras, no more so than it is that searchlights take away night vision adaption. The direction the flares go is the opposite to that of an incoming missile; however, you still can't see little distant sparks through the big nearby ones. Not firing repeated flares because it can still see flares should be a relatively easy fix.
How does it react to being dazzled with IR lasers? Does it fire off all its flares like a christmas tree, potentially providing a detection method? Then again... from behind it's bright and hot anyway, providing a detection method.
How does it react to being dazzled with IR lasers? Does it fire off all its flares like a christmas tree, potentially providing a detection method? Then again... from behind it's bright and hot anyway, providing a detection method.
The F-35 will get you lost
The JSF is designed to fly and fight against the most determined foe—even a foe capable of jamming or destroying America’s Global Positioning System satellites, depriving U.S. forces of their preferred way of knowing exactly where they are in the world. But the F-35’s independent “inertial” navigation gear—which determines the plane’s position by constantly computing starting point, direction, speed and time—is off by a few degrees. That’s just enough to make it useless in combat. “These errors prevent accurate targeting solutions for weapons employment in a GPS-denied environment,” the Pentagon warns.
A software fix is in the works, but “further flight testing will be required.” Again, that takes time and money.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
DARPA are working on something a bit smaller and internal....
Astro-inertial is making a comeback here and there, with the advent of cheaper and better electro-optics. If the EO-DAS was half as good as they say it is, they could use those sensors as star trackers...
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
New Tests Find Significant Cracking In The F-35
The U.S. Defense Department’s newest and most advanced fighter jet has cracked during testing and isn’t yet reliable for combat operations, the Pentagon’s top weapons tester said in new report.
The entire F-35 fleet was grounded last February after a crack was discovered in a turbine blade of an F-35A. While the order was subsequently lifted, more cracks have been discovered in other areas and variants of the Lockheed Martin Corp.-made plane, according to the latest annual report by J. Michael Gilmore, director of Operational Test and Evaluation.
Durability testing of the F-35A, the Air Force’s version of the plane designed to take off and land on conventional runways, and the F-35B, the Marine Corps’ model that can take off like a plane and land like a helicopter, revealed “significant findings” of cracking in engine mounts, fuselage stiffeners, and bulkhead and wing flanges, according to the document. A bulkhead actually severed at one point, it states.
“All of these discoveries will require mitigation plans and may include redesigning parts and additional weight,” Gilmore wrote in the report.
The F-35C, the Navy’s version of the plane designed to take off and land on aircraft carriers, has also had cracks in the floor of the avionics bay and power distribution center and, like the F-35B, in the so-called jack point stiffener, according to the document.
The hardware problems, along with ongoing delays in software development, among other issues, led Gilmore to conclude that the fifth-generation fighter jet’s “overall suitability performance continues to be immature, and relies heavily on contractor support and workarounds unacceptable for combat operations.”..........
The U.S. Defense Department’s newest and most advanced fighter jet has cracked during testing and isn’t yet reliable for combat operations, the Pentagon’s top weapons tester said in new report.
The entire F-35 fleet was grounded last February after a crack was discovered in a turbine blade of an F-35A. While the order was subsequently lifted, more cracks have been discovered in other areas and variants of the Lockheed Martin Corp.-made plane, according to the latest annual report by J. Michael Gilmore, director of Operational Test and Evaluation.
Durability testing of the F-35A, the Air Force’s version of the plane designed to take off and land on conventional runways, and the F-35B, the Marine Corps’ model that can take off like a plane and land like a helicopter, revealed “significant findings” of cracking in engine mounts, fuselage stiffeners, and bulkhead and wing flanges, according to the document. A bulkhead actually severed at one point, it states.
“All of these discoveries will require mitigation plans and may include redesigning parts and additional weight,” Gilmore wrote in the report.
The F-35C, the Navy’s version of the plane designed to take off and land on aircraft carriers, has also had cracks in the floor of the avionics bay and power distribution center and, like the F-35B, in the so-called jack point stiffener, according to the document.
The hardware problems, along with ongoing delays in software development, among other issues, led Gilmore to conclude that the fifth-generation fighter jet’s “overall suitability performance continues to be immature, and relies heavily on contractor support and workarounds unacceptable for combat operations.”..........