Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

Old 27th Apr 2014, 11:56
  #4341 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Annapolis
Posts: 109
The F-35 / MV-22 refueling pic is a fanboy fake.

Wire data. Although the Navy readily admits it supplied inaccurate wire data, the redesign of the arrestor hook system was more involved than simply sharpening the hook point and adjusting the hold down damper. There were significant structural changes to the aircraft that added over 100lbs to an aircraft that is already close to margins - which was contrary to what LM officials were saying at the time. That said, it is not uncommon for adjustments to be made to the AHS to aircraft in development, and since LM has not designed a carrier aircraft since the 1960's, no doubt that expertise in the company had atrophied. But just looking at the geometries of the F-35, it is hard to understand why nobody predicted that there *might* be a problem. Tom Burbage, a somewhat recently retired LM F-35 executive, has essentially admitted that F-35 engineering could have been more rigorous, which I take to mean that the program turned out to be much more complex, and required far more resources than LM had expected and allocated.

Last edited by Maus92; 27th Apr 2014 at 12:10.
Maus92 is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2014, 03:09
  #4342 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 68
Posts: 226
USN specs

It's very interesting to see the discussion, and to some extent the debate, over how much reliance the DoD contractor for this platform should have placed on the specs for the arresting gear provided by the USN. Interesting because in the eyes of U.S. law, for one particular legal purpose, reliance by a defense contractor on specs provided by the government is the key to the contractor having a special type of legal immunity from negligence lawsuits over injuries or deaths caused by a negligent design. It's known as the "government contractor defense" and it was established as federal law by the US Supreme Court in the case of Boyle v. United Technologies in 1989. If the contractor follows government specs which are "reasonably precise" (IIRC), the contractor cannot be sued under a negligence theory if the design proves defective.

Why or how is this relevant? Well, to those advocating more diligence on the contractor's part, I would ask; 'so following specs insulates the contractor from a damage suit if the weapon system design turns out to be defective and causes the death of one or more servicemembers - but following specs isn't good enough in terms of general attainment of the system's capabilities to fulfill its roles and missions.....Congress could make that policy judgment, of course, but has it done so? It's okay to leave servicemembers and their survivors out of court, even though we turn around as a government and expect the contractor to peer into the specs provided by Uncle Sam and penetrate to find any flaws?'

I'd want to find, read, and analyze legally the rulings of lower federal courts applying Boyle before trying to catch the third wire on this question: if the DoD and/or the Congress in fact do expect LM to redo the data provided by USN, then hasn't the federal gov't canceled the government contractor defense altogether - at least for that specific weapon system; even "reasonably precise" specs no longer would justify reliance. My gut reaction is that the US federal government cannot have it both ways. Even in a multi-role, three-service, fifth generation fighter aircraft.
WillowRun 6-3 is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2014, 15:36
  #4343 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,499
Originally Posted by Whitewhale83 View Post
You would have thought we would have come up with something a bit more 'modern' by now!
Such as? I am sure that tail hookers the world over would welcome your better idea.

The launch side has come up, at long last, with a better idea: mag versus steam cats.

Willow:
before trying to catch the third wire on this question:
The jargon/slang/phrase you were looking for is "catch the three wire."
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 29th Apr 2014, 16:59
  #4344 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
@ WillowRun 6-3

Thanks for that informative post.
glad rag is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2014, 06:48
  #4345 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK
Age: 36
Posts: 15
@Lonewolf_50

I never implied that I had a better idea.
Whitewhale83 is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2014, 07:57
  #4346 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: South East of Penge
Age: 70
Posts: 1,409
All lot to do with relative velocities.......


When the Gannet first appeared at Farnborough, some wit congratulated the guys on the Fairey stand for finally producing an aeroplane that could keep up with the fleet..........
Haraka is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2014, 14:04
  #4347 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: virginia, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 799
Italy To Cut F-35 Order By Half: Reports 23 Apr 2014 Source : Our Bureau

Italy To Cut F-35 Order By Half: Reports


Quote:
"Italy’s new government has decided to halve its procurement F-35 fighters, from 90 to 45, but will stretch out its implementation to limit any losses of related work for its aerospace industry, the Rome daily La Repubblica reported April 22...."
Does anyone know how Italy will split this between the "A" and the "B"? With only 45 in the fleet, it seems like the pooled option between the Air Force and Navy as debated a few years back would be the best option. I recall the Airforce was going to have a small number of "B's" (@15?). Seems just one squadron of B's (say 12-15) would be risky in the long run if you want this to be your sole carrier capable aircraft for the next 25+ years. I recall the Italian Navy was pushing hard for a minimum of @22 B's to keep one squadron fully deployable aboard the carrier. With 45 aircraft split between the A and B they will likely only have one frontline squadron of each type, with a suitable amount left for training (a few in the USA), evaluation and as attrition reserve. Perhaps all 45 as "B's" might be best? I realize this would be a compromise.

Last edited by sandiego89; 30th Apr 2014 at 14:15.
sandiego89 is offline  
Old 30th Apr 2014, 18:08
  #4348 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,549
They'd probably all be Bs at that point. It seems likely that Italy will end up reducing its purchase rate and thereby punt the 90 vs. 45 decision into the lap of some future administration.

If you take Italian politics too seriously (as a non-Italian) you will surely go mad, but my broad understanding is that it is a squabble among leftists who hate all armed forces, Europhiles who mistrust the U.S., and Atlanticists, and that a clear-cut final decision is unlikely.
LowObservable is offline  
Old 2nd May 2014, 10:37
  #4349 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,083
you missed out all those politicians who hope to get a cut of whatever deal is done
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 3rd May 2014, 17:25
  #4350 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 71
Posts: 1,938
Thanks 'Engines' - another recent blast from the past about dat ole 'Shake, Rattle & Roll' which will await the F-35C instrumented CF-3 with production AHS and I'll guess modified nose wheel eventually soonish like....

STRIKE TEST NEWS Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 23 Newsletter 2011 Issue

http://www.navair.navy.mil/nawcad/in...ownload&id=769 (PDF 3Mb)

FIXED WING SHIP SUITABILITY (SHAKE, RATTLE AND ROLL) LT David “La Douche” Hafeman - Page 18
"Every aircraft, store, or sensor that flies off the ship at some point needs to be tested to ensure that it can meet the demanding loads associated with a catapult shot or an arrested landing.

Sometimes referred to as “Shake, Rattle and Roll” testing, this is a unique specialty area of flight test that we do more of than anyone else in the world. Shake testing includes both catapults and arrested landings. Catapults build up in longitudinal acceleration up to 5.5g, and include shots with the aircraft deliberately off center in the shuttle. Arrested landings include high sink rates up to 20 feet per second (which translates to 1200 feet per minute or about a 5 flight path angle), maximum deceleration points, free flight engagements, and 18 foot off center points. There is both art and science involved in flying and waving these demanding test points...."

Last edited by SpazSinbad; 3rd May 2014 at 17:26. Reason: frmt
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 3rd May 2014, 17:49
  #4351 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Planet Claire
Posts: 581
'Designing combat aircraft is hard'

But if anyone could fulfil the US DoDs requirements, Lockheeds must be the boys.
Unfortunately, events, circumstances, timing and physics can conspire to defeat the best.
This a/c is not going well at all. It's clear for all to see who wish to.
Maybe they're still sore about pulling the plug on the Avenger? Who knows...

I think the JSF saga will end badly, just a question of when...
AtomKraft is offline  
Old 4th May 2014, 01:29
  #4352 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 71
Posts: 1,938
NavAir (VADM Dunaway) seems to be contrite?

Tailhook13 HOOK Explanation VADM Dunaway NavAir

Tailhook13 HOOK Explanation VADM Dunaway NavAir - YouTube

SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 7th May 2014, 17:47
  #4353 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 71
Posts: 1,938
VIDEO: F-35 Integrated Test Force 2013 Year in Review

F-35 Lightning II Integrated Test Force 2013 Year in Review Published on May 7, 2014
"Highlights of the flight test accomplishments by the Patuxent River F-35 Lightning II Integrated Test Force (ITF) in 2013. Video produced by the Pax River ITF Lockheed Martin Multimedia Team."
I'll guess the F-35Bs for UK show will use the KC-10 Iron Maiden?



SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 7th May 2014, 22:59
  #4354 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,158
Were any of the F-35B VL's/launches aboard the USS Wasp done with the ship actually underway? All the vids I've seen so far seem to show the ship at anchor or, stationary at least...

-RP
Rhino power is offline  
Old 8th May 2014, 00:11
  #4355 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 71
Posts: 1,938
How fast is the waspydoodledandy going at 4min 40sec in the video just mentioned up top?

SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 8th May 2014, 00:23
  #4356 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 71
Posts: 1,938
This is DT I in 2011 and somewhere there is some detail about 'envelope explansion' for DT II with cross deck landings / reverse landings and you name it they did it it seems. But HEY I was not there so we will have to take a reporters word on it - or someones anyway. Videos lie dontcha know.

Navy Sees Few Anomalies in F-35B Ship Trials 31 Oct 2011 Amy Butler |
Onboard the USS Wasp
"...Kelly acknowledges that the deck motion does impact landing operations, but “the control law you have is so good, you can compensate.”...

...Pilots were qualified using the heart of the Harrier wind envelope. During testing they have expanded that up to a 30-kt. headwind, 10-kt. crosswind and 5-kt. tailwind. Pilots report good handling qualities, Cordell says...."
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...ne=Navy&next=0
___________________________

I guess all of this DT II stuff was not done at anchor with nil WOD but hey again...

F-35 Lightning II Program Status and Fast Facts 17 Oct 2013
“...F-35B accomplishes first night vertical landing aboard the USS Wasp (Aug. 14)

Developmental Test II aboard the USS Wasp completed; 95 VLs, 94 STO, 19 Night VLs; 42 flights each by two aircraft in 17 available flying days (Aug. 30)...”
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_download-id-18223.html (small PDF download)
___________________

STRIKE TEST NEWS Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 23 Newsletter 2013 Issue [produced 11 Oct 2013]
“...F-35B (STOVL) Flight Sciences aircraft
For each variant, Flight Sciences aircraft specifically go after flight test data requirements that would not be av-ailable in production configuration. Each has a unique set of instrumentation that has been incorporated throughout the airframe, and truly make these each one-of-a kind aircraft. They were the first to roll off the production line in Fort Worth, and each one is critical to the completion of the flight test program. The Flight Science jets do not have full sensor suites installed and do not run the block software that provides warfighting capabilities of the jet....”

...USS WASP Second Sea Trials (DT-II, scheduled for August 2013)
Building on the resounding success of the first sea trials for the F-35B on USS WASP in October of 2011, the team has completed significant efforts in preparation for expanding the envelope at-sea for the USMC/UK pilots who will operate F-35B aircraft at-sea. There is no better way to understand the performance of an aircraft than to take into the operational environment and make it work. The purpose of DT-II is to continue to expand the F-35B flight envelope, ultimately enabling fleet operations in operationally realistic wind and sea state conditions, at night, and with operationally realistic weapons load-outs. The first F-35B developmental test (DT-I) allowed the test team to evaluate the aircraft’s flying qualities and performance in conducting L-Class shipboard flight operations, mainly in the heart of the operating envelope.

Additionally, F-35B maintenance and servicing functions will be evaluated. While onboard Wasp, the F-35B and various functions of the ship are instrumented with sensors that will collect data and allow for post-event analysis. Test findings may drive improvements to the F-35B for operations at-sea in preparation for USMC initial operational capability, currently scheduled for 2015....”
http://www.navair.navy.mil/nawcad/in...ownload&id=767
___________________

Perhaps there is some WINDY joy in this video - it has been awhile....

Lightning II jets in vertical night landing tests 13 Sep
“F-35 Operations onboard USS Wasp with interviews. Over the last few weeks, RAF and Royal Navy pilots and ground crew have been involved in the second round of Carrier testing onboard the USS WASP. The testing has been used to expand the operational envelope, with aircraft flown in a variety of air and sea states, landing at day and night, all while carrying internal weapons. This was the first time that vertical night landings had been conducted at sea.”
_______________________

Blue Sky OPS AIR International F-35 Lightning II 26 April 2012
"Mark Ayton spoke with Peter Wilson, a former Royal Navy Sea Harrier pilot and now STOVL lead test pilot at NAS Patuxent River..."
"...Nine Hops
During STOVL testing in February 2010, Peter Wilson flew nine sorties from NAS Patuxent River in about four hours, all of which were less than 5 minutes in duration. Each sortie carried a relatively low fuel load allowing Peter to take off, and fly around for a brief period to ensure the fuel was at the right level in preparation for a landing test. “The highlights on the day were the take-offs. I took off as slow as 50 knots [92km/h] with the STOVL mode engaged, accelerated out to the normal pattern speed of 150 knots [276km/h], turned downwind, and positioned ready for a vertical landing,” he said.

Some of the vertical landings required extreme nose-down attitudes on the aircraft at various weights and phenomenal descent rates. Recounting the landings, Peter Wilson told AIR International: “I was trimming nose down to make the nose gear hit first rather than the main gear coming down as fast as I could, given the control law of the aeroplane. When the nose gear (underneath the pilot’s seat) hits first at that sort of descent rate it gets your attention because it’s a pretty heavy landing and a remarkable experience in the cockpit.”

F-35B Take-off Options
The F-35B STOVL variant has a range of take-off options using different modes to suit the basing. Take-offs from a ship, with either a flat deck or one with a ski jump, are also possible with a mode for each scenario. These are short take-off scenarios that can be achieved at speeds as low as 50kts with a deck or ground run of no more than a 200ft (60m). In the same mode, a take-off as fast as 150 knots is possible if the weight of the aircraft requires that speed. If the aircraft is light it can take off at a slow speed and faster when heavy.

Take-off at speeds as low as 5, 10, 15, 20kts (9, 18, 27 and 36km/h) are also possible, each of which is effectively a vertical take-off while moving forward. There are different ways of rotating the aircraft in STOVL mode, including the usual ‘pull on the stick’. Other ways are by pressing a button or programming a ground distance required after which, the aircraft control law initiates the rotation and selects the ideal angle for climb-out...."

Last edited by SpazSinbad; 8th May 2014 at 01:04. Reason: extrabits
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 8th May 2014, 00:25
  #4357 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,158
Originally Posted by SpazSinbad
How fast is the waspydoodledandy going at 4min 40sec in the video just mentioned up top?
Doesn't really matter, especially since the F-35 in that particular portion of the video is doing neither a VL, or a launch...

-RP
Rhino power is offline  
Old 8th May 2014, 01:01
  #4358 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 71
Posts: 1,938
I guess you did not read any of the text then. Did the wind blow away your specs?

F-35B Shipboard Testing: Phase 2 18 Oct 2013 Andy Wolfe
...The flight tests at sea were critical to clearing the flight envelope to support the Initial Operational Capability trials for the US Marines scheduled for 2015. During the deployment, four F-35B test pilots combined to fly almost 100 short takeoffs and vertical landings between the two aircraft. The flights were made in a variety of conditions that included day and night operations as well as unique crosswind, tailwind, and other dynamic wind-over-deck conditions. The trials expanded the F-35B flight envelope to include internal weapons carriage in a variety of configurations at varying weights and centers of gravity, as well as asymmetric loadings of stores in the aircraft internal weapon bays.

The sea trials also included logistics test and evaluation test points, such as assessing the ease of towing the aircraft in the constrained spaces below deck as well as testing a variety of chaining configurations for the aircraft on deck.
Code One Magazine: F-35B Shipboard Testing: Phase 2
___________________

Slight difference is details compared to previous page but whatever....

Marine Corps demonstrates the F-35B at Sea 18 Oct 2011 Dave Majumdar
"...The team started off the flights by using the flight envelope cleared for the AV-8B Harrier as as starting point before expanding into new territory, Cordell said. From that initial envelope, the testers expanded it up to 30 knots of headwind and down to 10 knots of headwind. The also flew with a 15 degree crosswind..."
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news...at-sea-101811/

Last edited by SpazSinbad; 8th May 2014 at 01:56. Reason: more bumpf
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 8th May 2014, 14:50
  #4359 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,158
Originally Posted by SpazSinabd
I guess you did not read any of the text then. Did the wind blow away your specs?
I didn't read the extra million links and extracts simply because you edited your post and added them AFTER I'd replied!

I just found it odd that no video of ship underway VL's /launches seems to be available if they have done them...

-RP
Rhino power is offline  
Old 8th May 2014, 15:46
  #4360 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,499
Why did you think that the shipboard vids were not from ships that were underway?

Did you see the video? It's pretty obvious to me that the ship was underway.

As a taxpayer, my comment is "it's about damned time."
Lonewolf_50 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.