F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 50
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the F-35 had as much stealth and teflon as this seemingly unsackable idiot, it could survive any mission thrown at it.
Australian F-35s rolled out in Texas
For those who have not yet seen it, an article on Flight Global
Australia’s first pair of F-35 Lightning II combat aircraft have been rolled out, during a ceremony at Lockheed Martin’s Fort Worth final assembly site in Texas. They are the lead examples of at least 72 aircraft to be produced for the nation, under an acquisition worth a projected A$12.4 billion ($11.6 billion).
Following the 24 July event, training aircraft AU-1 and AU-2 are to undergo functional fuel system checks before being transferred to the flight line for ground and flight tests that are due to occur “in the coming months”, says Lockheed.
The two aircraft will be formally delivered to the Royal Australian Air Force later this year before being transferred to the US Air Force’s Luke AFB in Arizona, the main international training base for the stealthy F-35.
“Initial RAAF pilot training will begin in the United States in 2015, and from 2018 the Australian Defence Force will commence ferry flights of JSF aircraft to Australia,” the service says.
Lead operational unit 3 Sqn will become operational in 2021, according to the RAAF, with this being the first of what is currently planned to be three frontline units equipped with the conventional take-off and landing F-35A at the Tindal and Williamtown bases. A training squadron will also operate the type from the latter location, with a total of 72 aircraft scheduled to be fully operational by 2023.
Being acquired via Project Air 6000, Australia’s F-35As will replace its legacy fleet of Boeing F/A-18A/B Hornets.
“In the future, a fourth operational squadron will be considered for RAAF Base Amberley, for a total of about 100 F-35As,” the air force says.
Canberra says 30 Australian companies have so far secured workshare worth $412 million on the F-35 programme.
“The US-Australian alliance and engagement on collaborative defence programmes is crucial to Australia maintaining the capability edge it needs,” says senator Mathias Cormann, who represented its Department of Defence at the roll-out event.
Following the 24 July event, training aircraft AU-1 and AU-2 are to undergo functional fuel system checks before being transferred to the flight line for ground and flight tests that are due to occur “in the coming months”, says Lockheed.
The two aircraft will be formally delivered to the Royal Australian Air Force later this year before being transferred to the US Air Force’s Luke AFB in Arizona, the main international training base for the stealthy F-35.
“Initial RAAF pilot training will begin in the United States in 2015, and from 2018 the Australian Defence Force will commence ferry flights of JSF aircraft to Australia,” the service says.
Lead operational unit 3 Sqn will become operational in 2021, according to the RAAF, with this being the first of what is currently planned to be three frontline units equipped with the conventional take-off and landing F-35A at the Tindal and Williamtown bases. A training squadron will also operate the type from the latter location, with a total of 72 aircraft scheduled to be fully operational by 2023.
Being acquired via Project Air 6000, Australia’s F-35As will replace its legacy fleet of Boeing F/A-18A/B Hornets.
“In the future, a fourth operational squadron will be considered for RAAF Base Amberley, for a total of about 100 F-35As,” the air force says.
Canberra says 30 Australian companies have so far secured workshare worth $412 million on the F-35 programme.
“The US-Australian alliance and engagement on collaborative defence programmes is crucial to Australia maintaining the capability edge it needs,” says senator Mathias Cormann, who represented its Department of Defence at the roll-out event.
MarkD - Useful link. Quote:
So what happens if the sole engine in the new F-35 Lightning fails?
"It won't," Defence Minister Peter MacKay insisted on Friday. It was a bold prediction and one he will be remembered for making.
I do hope so, I really do.
So what happens if the sole engine in the new F-35 Lightning fails?
"It won't," Defence Minister Peter MacKay insisted on Friday. It was a bold prediction and one he will be remembered for making.
I do hope so, I really do.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
With all the attention on low-intensity conflict (LAS, Textron Scorpion, OV-10X, AT-802U, etc.), maybe it's time to revisit the 1960s plans for a souped-up Mustang.
Ford has already developed a test vehicle:
I/C
Ford has already developed a test vehicle:
I/C
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The political side of the Military-Industrial Complex.
From The Washington Post:
From The Washington Post:
How the F-35 boondoggle shows that deficit hawkery is a sham
Yesterday in Fort Worth, officials from the Pentagon, Lockheed Martin, and the Australian government gathered to celebrate the fact that two F-35 fighter jets bound for our ally down under were rolling off the assembly line. The news about this plane over the last few years has largely been buried on the inside pages of newspapers, but if you’d been following it you know that it has been one of the most remarkable boondoggles we’ve ever seen, not only the most expensive weapons system in history, but one that has been plagued by one disastrous problem after another (the latest of which came last month when an F-35 caught fire when taking off and the whole fleet of them were grounded).
The remarkable lack of interest in figuring out how things could have gone so wrong with this plane, especially from people who claim to be so desperately concerned about runaway government spending, tells you something about what a sham deficit hawkery really is.
As many have noted, when Republicans say they want to cut government spending, what they really mean is they want to cut spending on programs they don’t like. You can couch it in abstract principles about the size of government and the debt we bequeath to our children, but when it comes down to brass tacks, they like some things that government does (like military spending), and they don’t like other things that government does (like provide a social safety net), so they want to cut the latter but not the former.
Even so, it’s one thing to say, “Even though I’m deeply concerned about the deficit, this weapons system is so important to our security that I think it’s worthwhile to spend half a trillion dollars on it.” It’s something else to say, “We should spend half a trillion dollars on this weapons system, and not only do I not care how high costs spiral, I don’t really care whether it’s a piece of junk.” But that is, in effect, what most everyone in Congress has said about the F-35.
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter was supposed to extend American air superiority deep into the 21st century. The F-35 was designed to evade not just enemy fighters, but political accountability as well. Its subcontracts were spread out over 1,300 separate companies in 45 states, ensuring that members of Congress from throughout the land have an interest in keeping the project going. It’s an incredibly poor way to create jobs (depending on how you count, a single job supported by the F-35 costs the taxpayer as much as $8 million). We’ll spend around $400 billion to build the planes — nearly twice what the program was supposed to cost when it began. When this happens, nobody gets punished or held “accountable.” We just keep shoveling taxpayer money into the Lockheed coffers. And that doesn’t count the cost of repairing and maintaining the planes, which could push the cost past $1 trillion over time.
The problem is that the F-35 has been a disaster. Bursting into flames is just the latest mishap — it’s been so unreliable that at various points the planes have been forbidden from flying at night, or in the rain, or too fast, or too steep. There have been problems with hardware and software and everything in between.
Now it’s possible that eventually all that will be worked out, the planes will work reliably, and they’ll be ready for combat on schedule next summer. But given the F-35′s abysmal record and the spectacular amounts of taxpayer money being poured into it, you’d think all those deficit hawks in Congress, particularly on the Republican side, would have been holding investigations, demanding accountability, and threatening hell to pay if things didn’t get back on track.
But I guess not. After all, there weren’t any F-35s at Benghazi.
Yesterday in Fort Worth, officials from the Pentagon, Lockheed Martin, and the Australian government gathered to celebrate the fact that two F-35 fighter jets bound for our ally down under were rolling off the assembly line. The news about this plane over the last few years has largely been buried on the inside pages of newspapers, but if you’d been following it you know that it has been one of the most remarkable boondoggles we’ve ever seen, not only the most expensive weapons system in history, but one that has been plagued by one disastrous problem after another (the latest of which came last month when an F-35 caught fire when taking off and the whole fleet of them were grounded).
The remarkable lack of interest in figuring out how things could have gone so wrong with this plane, especially from people who claim to be so desperately concerned about runaway government spending, tells you something about what a sham deficit hawkery really is.
As many have noted, when Republicans say they want to cut government spending, what they really mean is they want to cut spending on programs they don’t like. You can couch it in abstract principles about the size of government and the debt we bequeath to our children, but when it comes down to brass tacks, they like some things that government does (like military spending), and they don’t like other things that government does (like provide a social safety net), so they want to cut the latter but not the former.
Even so, it’s one thing to say, “Even though I’m deeply concerned about the deficit, this weapons system is so important to our security that I think it’s worthwhile to spend half a trillion dollars on it.” It’s something else to say, “We should spend half a trillion dollars on this weapons system, and not only do I not care how high costs spiral, I don’t really care whether it’s a piece of junk.” But that is, in effect, what most everyone in Congress has said about the F-35.
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter was supposed to extend American air superiority deep into the 21st century. The F-35 was designed to evade not just enemy fighters, but political accountability as well. Its subcontracts were spread out over 1,300 separate companies in 45 states, ensuring that members of Congress from throughout the land have an interest in keeping the project going. It’s an incredibly poor way to create jobs (depending on how you count, a single job supported by the F-35 costs the taxpayer as much as $8 million). We’ll spend around $400 billion to build the planes — nearly twice what the program was supposed to cost when it began. When this happens, nobody gets punished or held “accountable.” We just keep shoveling taxpayer money into the Lockheed coffers. And that doesn’t count the cost of repairing and maintaining the planes, which could push the cost past $1 trillion over time.
The problem is that the F-35 has been a disaster. Bursting into flames is just the latest mishap — it’s been so unreliable that at various points the planes have been forbidden from flying at night, or in the rain, or too fast, or too steep. There have been problems with hardware and software and everything in between.
Now it’s possible that eventually all that will be worked out, the planes will work reliably, and they’ll be ready for combat on schedule next summer. But given the F-35′s abysmal record and the spectacular amounts of taxpayer money being poured into it, you’d think all those deficit hawks in Congress, particularly on the Republican side, would have been holding investigations, demanding accountability, and threatening hell to pay if things didn’t get back on track.
But I guess not. After all, there weren’t any F-35s at Benghazi.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
22 buttons to push on HOTAS apparently [known as the 'cowpie' (throttle) and stick] according to this 'travel sim' video & have a look at PCD (Panoramic Cockpit) display cropped screengrab for LHA approach. Nice to have Day/NIGHT eh for all youse CVFers out there:
F-35 helmet display sees everything Published on Apr 25, 2014 AOPALive
F-35 helmet display sees everything Published on Apr 25, 2014 AOPALive
"Super situational awareness with a helmet mounted display that lets the pilot "see" through the aircraft in all directions."
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Johannesburg
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What the F-35 really costs
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/how...t-21f95d239398
This was published in "War is Boring" on Friday. It makes a mockery of the prices quoted by LM.
This was published in "War is Boring" on Friday. It makes a mockery of the prices quoted by LM.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
22 buttons to push on HOTAS apparently [known as the 'cowpie' (throttle) and stick] according to this 'travel sim' video & have a look at PCD (Panoramic Cockpit) display cropped screengrab for LHA approach. Nice to have Day/NIGHT eh for all youse CVFers out there:
F-35 helmet display sees everything Published on Apr 25, 2014 AOPALive
F-35 helmet display sees everything - YouTube
F-35 helmet display sees everything Published on Apr 25, 2014 AOPALive
F-35 helmet display sees everything - YouTube
Again. Your standards are slipping.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
What standards. Meanwhilst youse'll be gladder than a bag of this perhaps?
Engine Problems Still Cloud F-35 Progress 28 Jul 2014 Chris Pocock, AINonline
Engine Problems Still Cloud F-35 Progress | Aviation International News
Engine Problems Still Cloud F-35 Progress 28 Jul 2014 Chris Pocock, AINonline
"...The JPO has not yet completed negotiations with LM for the LRIP 8 batch neither of aircraft, nor with P&W for the LRIP-7+8 engines. “It’s a long process…the Pentagon has raised the standard for FAR Part 15 contracting,” noted Croswell. The lack of agreements has delayed the UK’s commitment to buy 14 F-35Bs for its first squadron. At the recent Farnborough Air Show, former UK Defence Secretary Philip Hammond told AIN that negotiations are continuing. “As you would expect, we’re looking to get the best deal we can for the British taxpayer,” he said."
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
U.S. loosens rules for Lockheed F-35, allows faster flight, tighter curves [???] Andrea Shalal 29 July 2014
U.S. loosens rules for Lockheed F-35, allows faster flight, tighter curves | Reuters
"...Pilots can now fly at speeds of up to 1.6 Mach, up from 0.9 Mach, and carry out turns with a gravitational load of 3.2 Gs, up from 3 Gs, a U.S. defense official and other sources familiar with the program told Reuters on Tuesday....
...Sylvia Pierson, F-35 spokeswoman at a southern Maryland air base, said the Marine Corps' F-35 B-model jets and the Navy's C-model jets were now carrying out five or six flight tests a day.
Officials have determined that the engine failure occurred when a component in the third stage fan blade rubbed too hard against an adjacent seal during a certain flight maneuver, according to a briefing provided to U.S. lawmakers.
Details about the maneuver were not immediately available. A second defense official said other jets in the F-35 fleet that carried out the same maneuver did not exhibit signs of the "excessive rubbing" seen in the engine that failed."
...Sylvia Pierson, F-35 spokeswoman at a southern Maryland air base, said the Marine Corps' F-35 B-model jets and the Navy's C-model jets were now carrying out five or six flight tests a day.
Officials have determined that the engine failure occurred when a component in the third stage fan blade rubbed too hard against an adjacent seal during a certain flight maneuver, according to a briefing provided to U.S. lawmakers.
Details about the maneuver were not immediately available. A second defense official said other jets in the F-35 fleet that carried out the same maneuver did not exhibit signs of the "excessive rubbing" seen in the engine that failed."
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
F-35B Successfully Completes Wet Runway And Crosswind Testing 31 Jul 2014 noodls
Lockheed Martin Corporation (via noodls) / F-35B Successfully Completes Wet Runway And Crosswind Testing
"...F-35B recently completed required wet runway and crosswind testing at Edwards Air Force Base, California.
"This testing is absolutely critical to 2B flight software fleet release and the Marine Corps' IOC," said J.D. McFarlan, Lockheed Martin's vice president for F-35 Test & Verification. "Collectively, the results support clearing the 20 knot crosswind envelope for Conventional Take Off & Landings (CTOL), Short Take Offs (STO) and Short Landings (SL), with ideal handling quality ratings and meaningful improvement over legacy 4th generational fighter aircraft."
The testing, completed in 37 missions during a 41-day period, achieved 114 test points, including 48 of 48 wet runway test points, four of four performance STOs, 12 of 18 unique flight test conditions for STO, 19 of 23 unique flight test conditions for SLs and all directional control and anti-skid wet runway [good for SRVLs on CVFs?] testing. All testing was performed with BF-4, based at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland...."
"This testing is absolutely critical to 2B flight software fleet release and the Marine Corps' IOC," said J.D. McFarlan, Lockheed Martin's vice president for F-35 Test & Verification. "Collectively, the results support clearing the 20 knot crosswind envelope for Conventional Take Off & Landings (CTOL), Short Take Offs (STO) and Short Landings (SL), with ideal handling quality ratings and meaningful improvement over legacy 4th generational fighter aircraft."
The testing, completed in 37 missions during a 41-day period, achieved 114 test points, including 48 of 48 wet runway test points, four of four performance STOs, 12 of 18 unique flight test conditions for STO, 19 of 23 unique flight test conditions for SLs and all directional control and anti-skid wet runway [good for SRVLs on CVFs?] testing. All testing was performed with BF-4, based at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland...."
It looks a little like scratching around for good news. 3.2g? Wow! I like good news, but the only really impressive thing is all that whilst it's grounded. Well done!
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 66
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not 100% sure that I read that correctly, an F35B from Pax River went to California for wet weather testing?
No doubt we will hear when the rest of the tests points that have yet to be accomplished are achieved, hopefully not in a one by one drip feed.
How many hours are the F35s allowed to fly these days? Just thinking that a flight from Edwards to Pax may be outside the allowed envelope and how are the Marine F35s that had been planned to "display" at RIAT etc going to get back to the West Coast, a number of little hops skips and jumps across the continent? Interesting logistical support exercise.
No doubt we will hear when the rest of the tests points that have yet to be accomplished are achieved, hopefully not in a one by one drip feed.
How many hours are the F35s allowed to fly these days? Just thinking that a flight from Edwards to Pax may be outside the allowed envelope and how are the Marine F35s that had been planned to "display" at RIAT etc going to get back to the West Coast, a number of little hops skips and jumps across the continent? Interesting logistical support exercise.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
Looks as though the USMC had this intent - whether they did or not as described? Dunno.
Marine Corps welcomes the decision to return F-35Bs to flight 15 Jul 2014
http://www.hqmc.marines.mil/News/Pre...to-flight.aspx
____________________________
A news report said (or maybe a VX-23 report? or NavAir?) said that Patuxent River runway for wet testing could not be organised - or made suitable - so the Bee went to a suitable runway already set up at Edwards that earlier tested the F-35A (AA-1 where it did emergency arrest testing) for wetness liking.
___________________
Bee testing wet concrete began some time ago now:
http://www.edwards.af.mil/news/story...p?id=123411117
________________
http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=83
Marine Corps welcomes the decision to return F-35Bs to flight 15 Jul 2014
"...On a related note, the Marine Corps will soon conduct a transcontinental redeployment of four F-35Bs from Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland to their home base at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Arizona. The six-hour cross-country mission will include aerial refueling similar to what is required while transiting an ocean. Once back at their home station, the pilots and squadron will continue training and progress toward initial operational capability next summer."
____________________________
A news report said (or maybe a VX-23 report? or NavAir?) said that Patuxent River runway for wet testing could not be organised - or made suitable - so the Bee went to a suitable runway already set up at Edwards that earlier tested the F-35A (AA-1 where it did emergency arrest testing) for wetness liking.
___________________
Bee testing wet concrete began some time ago now:
"...5/15/2014 - EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. -- A Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing (STOVL) variant of the F-35 Lightning II is shown performing Crosswind and Wet Runway testing at Edwards AFB May 6. Pilot Dan Levin and a team from the F-35 Integrated Test Facility at Patuxent River, MD accompanied aircraft BF-4 for the deployment to Edwards April 11. Testing is expected to continue until June 14...."
________________
"19 July 2011 First Wet Runway Landing
F-35A AF-2 became the first F-35 to land on a wet runway at Edwards AFB, California, with Lockheed Martin test pilot Jeff Knowles at the controls. The 0.9-hour mission was Flight 135 for AF-2."
F-35A AF-2 became the first F-35 to land on a wet runway at Edwards AFB, California, with Lockheed Martin test pilot Jeff Knowles at the controls. The 0.9-hour mission was Flight 135 for AF-2."
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 31st Jul 2014 at 10:15. Reason: xtra xtra
Australia F-35
Take it the RAAF F-35 are not the B model are they? There is no B model within the contract are there?
As HMAS Canberra appears to have ski jump ? But its strictly a helicopter carrier unless they will have occasionally USMC AV-8B Harrier II PLus cross decking or detached as Ark Royal did on her last deployment stateside?
NUSHIP Canberra (III) | Royal Australian Navy
Then again one of my former employers, 14 years ago published a report on ADF procurement with talk of having a largish helicopter carrier with ability to even launching the RAAF F/A-18 fleet bringing back the carrier capability they got rid off when selling off HMAS Sydney and the A-4 and MB339 fleet.
Cheers
As HMAS Canberra appears to have ski jump ? But its strictly a helicopter carrier unless they will have occasionally USMC AV-8B Harrier II PLus cross decking or detached as Ark Royal did on her last deployment stateside?
NUSHIP Canberra (III) | Royal Australian Navy
Then again one of my former employers, 14 years ago published a report on ADF procurement with talk of having a largish helicopter carrier with ability to even launching the RAAF F/A-18 fleet bringing back the carrier capability they got rid off when selling off HMAS Sydney and the A-4 and MB339 fleet.
Cheers
Take it the RAAF F-35 are not the B model are they? There is no B model within the contract are there?
As HMAS Canberra appears to have ski jump ? But its strictly a helicopter carrier unless they will have occasionally USMC AV-8B Harrier II PLus cross decking or detached as Ark Royal did on her last deployment stateside?
As HMAS Canberra appears to have ski jump ? But its strictly a helicopter carrier unless they will have occasionally USMC AV-8B Harrier II PLus cross decking or detached as Ark Royal did on her last deployment stateside?
Australia could buy F-35B - IHS Jane's 360
I think the ski jump on the Canberra is a major hint of a B purchase.
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Annapolis
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I think the ski jump on the Canberra is a major hint of a B purchase."
The ski jump was too expensive to remove from the design, even though it hinders rotary winged operations somewhat. And having it intact certainly opens the possibility of operating -Bs in the future, whatever their utility in small numbers brings to the party.
The ski jump was too expensive to remove from the design, even though it hinders rotary winged operations somewhat. And having it intact certainly opens the possibility of operating -Bs in the future, whatever their utility in small numbers brings to the party.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
'chopper2004' said in this weird segue about Oz LHDs (there are other threads with at least one recent [ http://www.pprune.org/military-aviat...ml#post8529349 ] where some of this stuff is discussed but anyway...).
Just for the record: HMAS Sydney the axial deck aircraft carrier operating only fixed wing props was sold for scrap in 1975 [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Sydney_(R17) ]. HMAS Melbourne with angle deck operating A4Gs and S2E/Gs in last go around was sold for scrap in 1985 : HMAS Melbourne (II) | Royal Australian Navy Macchi MB326Hs were the training jet aircraft of the RANFAA and RAAF.
___________________________
Q:
Lockheed Martin rebuts F-35 critics on cost, progress Chris Pocock 15 Jul 2010
Lockheed Martin rebuts F-35 critics on cost, progress | Aviation International News
"... when selling off HMAS Sydney and the A-4 and MB339 fleet..."
___________________________
Q:
"How do all the automatics cope with a ski jump?"
“...When asked how the F-35B compared to the Harrier in terms of ease of takeoff/landing, Tomlinson replied: “It’s chalk and cheese–and so it should be! This is a single-button operation with no special controls–much easier than the Harrier. For short takeoffs you just power up; the system takes care of everything else. On the ski-jump, for instance, the system detects the change in deck angle & doesn’t apply any rotation as it would on a flat deck.”...”
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 31st Jul 2014 at 19:52. Reason: fmt