F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 66
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have thought that as the technical standards of the F35s keep changing and that there will I understand be a technical refresh before Software Version 3F, the IOC standard for the UK and USN, that data on the MTBF of earlier models will not be much help.
Also the lack of a fully functioning Alis system, that should have helped populate the MTBF database cannot have helped.
Also the lack of a fully functioning Alis system, that should have helped populate the MTBF database cannot have helped.
@Biggus: KenV's answer is a gritty reality with which I am familiar. I confess that I was being very optimistic, perhaps overly so, in the "maybe" response and accept that KenV's answer is a far better breakdown of PBL as it works ... or doesn't.
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Annapolis
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oshkosk debut
I'm attending Oshkosh this year, and was on hand for the F-35A demo / arrival early this afternoon. Pretty tame stuff: a few low speed passses and breaks, culminating with a landing and taxi to the VIP area. The pilot kept the plane spooling for a 15 minute fashion show, then taxied to the other (non-pubic) side of the field for parking. Apparantly no static display, unlike the F-22 yesterday, under armed guard.
Some observations: this is not a small aircraft like the F-16. In fact it looks as big as a F-22 (in the air at least), and the cockpit sits pretty high up, F-105 like high. It's also louder than F-22, but about the same as a Super Hornet.
Some observations: this is not a small aircraft like the F-16. In fact it looks as big as a F-22 (in the air at least), and the cockpit sits pretty high up, F-105 like high. It's also louder than F-22, but about the same as a Super Hornet.
Last edited by Maus92; 23rd Jul 2015 at 04:02. Reason: clarified "in the air"
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd expect a relatively tame display from a jet that is currently limited to almost half its design Gz as well as being limited to below its max KCAS at SL.
How could the pilot refuse to "park his jet" in a pubic area - fnaar.....
How could the pilot refuse to "park his jet" in a pubic area - fnaar.....
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Annapolis
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm assuming that there was some housekeeping to perform on the jets after landing - maybe something sensitive IDK. Anyway, they've moved one aircraft over to Boeing Plaza for static display - next to a F-22 and a P-38.
Last edited by Maus92; 23rd Jul 2015 at 04:02. Reason: Fixed editing errors
MSOCS - I would not expect a relatively tame display for a jet that's been in full-scale development for >13 years, and whose supporters will be letting off fireworks and dancing in the streets in a few days' time to celebrate its initial "operational" capability date.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LO,
I would expect you to have the maturity and sense to appreciate that, were it not for the loss of AF-27's engine last year, the "13 year" development nightmare mantra -which you seem to wheel out over, and over, and over again on this forum - would be flying a full up display.
Some times stuff happens that isn't anticipated (A400M loss, for instance) in Programs.
Please, get some real perspective and shelve the hate for some common sense.
I would expect you to have the maturity and sense to appreciate that, were it not for the loss of AF-27's engine last year, the "13 year" development nightmare mantra -which you seem to wheel out over, and over, and over again on this forum - would be flying a full up display.
Some times stuff happens that isn't anticipated (A400M loss, for instance) in Programs.
Please, get some real perspective and shelve the hate for some common sense.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
it may not build a fully representative picture of training missions (although there have been some of those) or ops, but the data could get it started?
Problems plaguing F-35's next-gen maintenance system
The F-35's highly touted, next-generation software system designed to detail maintenance issues on the jet is plagued with problems that could lead to more delays with the jet's development.
The F-35's Autonomic Logistics Information System is a program that a maintainer plugs into the jet, and it is expected to outline what is wrong and what is working, and to streamline the process of identifying replacement parts. It has been a touted as a game-changing technology to simplify the maintenance process for the new jet. But members of the House Armed Services tactical air and land subcommittee who spoke with maintainers last month at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, heard a different story. Maintainers there said 80 percent of issues identified by ALIS are "false positives." Additionally, the program is sluggish, slowing down maintenance instead of streamlining it, subcommittee chairman Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, said during a hearing Tuesday.
"When we asked them how many false positives, I thought it would be a high number because it is a new system," Turner said. "But when they said 80%, I was taken aback.".......
The system is not meeting requirements for service members operating the jets, said Sean Stackley, the assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition. "The issue of false positives is very real," Stackley said. "The concerns with regards to the reliability, responsiveness, the timeliness of ALIS informing the war fighter is at the top of our priority list."........
MSOCS - The entire fleet is supposed to be retrofitted by 1Q16. I'd lost track, however, and thought that the restrictions had been lifted.
F135 Fix Nears Completion As Production Ramps Up | Defense content from Aviation Week
And there wasn't (AFAIK) a sea-level KCAS restriction due to AF-27 incident. Where'd that come from?
F135 Fix Nears Completion As Production Ramps Up | Defense content from Aviation Week
And there wasn't (AFAIK) a sea-level KCAS restriction due to AF-27 incident. Where'd that come from?
Originally Posted by Maus92
...Pretty tame stuff: a few low speed passses and breaks, culminating with a landing and taxi to the VIP area...
Originally Posted by ORAC
..."When we asked them how many false positives, I thought it would be a high number because it is a new system," Turner said. "But when they said 80%, I was taken aback."...
Maus92Oshkosk debut
I'm attending Oshkosh this year, and was on hand for the F-35A demo / arrival early this afternoon. Pretty tame stuff.....
I'm attending Oshkosh this year, and was on hand for the F-35A demo / arrival early this afternoon. Pretty tame stuff.....
MSOCS I'd expect a relatively tame display....
If we are just talking about the arrival I would not judge an act by their arrival- yes some announce their arrival with a bit more flair than others, but we should not expect a full on demo upon arrival. It is an arrival day after a long cross country flight, briefs to attend, checks on the jet as others mention, etc.
I agree it will likley be tame compared to full burner turns by a F-16 or the like, but perhaps after the weekend flying we can then better pronounce the calls of "worst demo ever, tame, boring, late, can't make a turn...."
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LO,
I've reviewed my previous two posts and can see how one could intimate the KCAS limit being due to the engine incident. It isn't. KCAS is below final design limit in Block 2B/3iR due to DT schedule - it will be full-up at Block 3F. I don't see the display needing more than the current limit anyway so apologies for the red herring there.
Now, the Gz IS due to the engine and will limit what the pilot can do, hence my comment on the previous "tame" comment. There will be nothing tame about the jet when the pilots are allowed to throw her around and demonstrate its agility in future. Think Super Hornet style of display and you won't be far off. Then, if it's a B variant, finish with the spectacle of hovering and almost no-speed flight manoeuvring. Loud, bold, in your face.
Can't wait for RIAT 16!
I've reviewed my previous two posts and can see how one could intimate the KCAS limit being due to the engine incident. It isn't. KCAS is below final design limit in Block 2B/3iR due to DT schedule - it will be full-up at Block 3F. I don't see the display needing more than the current limit anyway so apologies for the red herring there.
Now, the Gz IS due to the engine and will limit what the pilot can do, hence my comment on the previous "tame" comment. There will be nothing tame about the jet when the pilots are allowed to throw her around and demonstrate its agility in future. Think Super Hornet style of display and you won't be far off. Then, if it's a B variant, finish with the spectacle of hovering and almost no-speed flight manoeuvring. Loud, bold, in your face.
Can't wait for RIAT 16!
Last edited by MSOCS; 23rd Jul 2015 at 16:11. Reason: Sp faff
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Annapolis
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are we talking about the jets arrival at the airshow or have we actually seen the full rehersal/actual F-35 display that will be flown on the key display dates at Oshkosh?
If we are just talking about the arrival I would not judge an act by their arrival- yes some announce their arrival with a bit more flair than others, but we should not expect a full on demo upon arrival. It is an arrival day after a long cross country flight, briefs to attend, checks on the jet as others mention, etc.
I agree it will likley be tame compared to full burner turns by a F-16 or the like, but perhaps after the weekend flying we can then better pronounce the calls of "worst demo ever, tame, boring, late, can't make a turn...."
If we are just talking about the arrival I would not judge an act by their arrival- yes some announce their arrival with a bit more flair than others, but we should not expect a full on demo upon arrival. It is an arrival day after a long cross country flight, briefs to attend, checks on the jet as others mention, etc.
I agree it will likley be tame compared to full burner turns by a F-16 or the like, but perhaps after the weekend flying we can then better pronounce the calls of "worst demo ever, tame, boring, late, can't make a turn...."
Last edited by Maus92; 23rd Jul 2015 at 23:23.
Niemi - the name is familiar.
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/d...ec/F-Niemi.pdf
I think we can take a guess at his "favorite airplane" as cited by Maus92.
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/d...ec/F-Niemi.pdf
I think we can take a guess at his "favorite airplane" as cited by Maus92.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not that I would expect you to divulge a personal conversation but I hope that your candid discussion was enlightening in all respects.
There is no denying the F-35 Program has its issues and challenges. There are priorities and challenges for all the respective US Services and foreign partners alike as they try to modernise their fleets. That said, I do also hope that the Col gave you some positive news from the F-35 world, Maus because as I've said for my entire time on this forum, there is a lot of excellent work and achievements that go unsung all too often.
Hope you enjoy Oshkosh!
There is no denying the F-35 Program has its issues and challenges. There are priorities and challenges for all the respective US Services and foreign partners alike as they try to modernise their fleets. That said, I do also hope that the Col gave you some positive news from the F-35 world, Maus because as I've said for my entire time on this forum, there is a lot of excellent work and achievements that go unsung all too often.
Hope you enjoy Oshkosh!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having had a quick canter through the article I wouldn't be so sure, his conclusion seems to argue for a mixed force of LO & 4th Gen aircraft:
The ATF’s overly specialized design constituted a fundamental flaw in the uncertain post–Cold War environment. The Air Force subsequently missed the best opportunity to adapt the F-22 when it issued the EMD contract without modification to ATF requirements. Throughout EMD, the service remained overly focused on the F-22 at the expense of A-10, F-15E, and F-16 recapitalization. When acquisition eventually shifted to the F-35, the Air Force largely ignored its F-22 experience and failed to plan for inevitable developmental problems with the F-35. Despite massive cost overruns and schedule delays, the Air Force continues to hope that the F-35 can solely recapitalize 1,770 aging F-15Es, F-16s, and A-10s. However, continuing developmental problems and the emerging national fiscal crisis threaten to undermine this strategy.
Although stealth is a powerful enabler for offensive systems, its greatest advantage lies in its ability to dramatically increase aircraft survivability against radar-dependent threats. Consequently, stealth’s utility depends on the presence of those threats. By insisting on acquiring only stealth fighters (regardless of the cost), the Air Force assumes that future adversaries will not counter stealth technology and ignores the fact that many air combat operations continue to occur in low-threat environments. For example, allied fourth-generation fighters operated freely over large portions of Iraq (both in 1991 and 2003),
Serbia, and Libya from the beginning of those conflicts. Future hostilities likely will continue this long-standing historical trend, and currently fielded stealth assets can mitigate risk to operations in high-threat environments where fourth-generation fighters are most
vulnerable.
An all-stealth Air Force fighter fleet deserves reconsideration even today. Stealth technology demands significant trade-offs in range, security, weapons carriage, sortie generation, and adaptability. Stealth provides no advantage in conflicts such as those in Afghanistan or Iraq
(since 2003), and (despite its obvious utility) it cannot guarantee success in future struggles with a near-peer adversary. Most importantly, the cost of F-22s and F-35s threatens to reduce the size of the Air Force’s fielded fighter fleet to dangerously small numbers, particularly
in the current fiscal environment. These facts suggest that the Air Force should reconsider its long-standing position that fifth-generation fighters are the only option for recapitalizing its fighter fleet.
Although stealth is a powerful enabler for offensive systems, its greatest advantage lies in its ability to dramatically increase aircraft survivability against radar-dependent threats. Consequently, stealth’s utility depends on the presence of those threats. By insisting on acquiring only stealth fighters (regardless of the cost), the Air Force assumes that future adversaries will not counter stealth technology and ignores the fact that many air combat operations continue to occur in low-threat environments. For example, allied fourth-generation fighters operated freely over large portions of Iraq (both in 1991 and 2003),
Serbia, and Libya from the beginning of those conflicts. Future hostilities likely will continue this long-standing historical trend, and currently fielded stealth assets can mitigate risk to operations in high-threat environments where fourth-generation fighters are most
vulnerable.
An all-stealth Air Force fighter fleet deserves reconsideration even today. Stealth technology demands significant trade-offs in range, security, weapons carriage, sortie generation, and adaptability. Stealth provides no advantage in conflicts such as those in Afghanistan or Iraq
(since 2003), and (despite its obvious utility) it cannot guarantee success in future struggles with a near-peer adversary. Most importantly, the cost of F-22s and F-35s threatens to reduce the size of the Air Force’s fielded fighter fleet to dangerously small numbers, particularly
in the current fiscal environment. These facts suggest that the Air Force should reconsider its long-standing position that fifth-generation fighters are the only option for recapitalizing its fighter fleet.