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 20th Jul 2017, 09:11
  #10661 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,736
300 indicated at 34650' (M0.86) for routine AAR must be interesting...

But that big, expensive helmet still looks like a significant risk to me. Yes, it's very clever with the distributed vision system and all the projected symbology, but how often would the average fighter pilot find him/herself clouting it against the canopy when moving his/her head to look out normally? And if the pilot drops it whilst walking out or crewing-in, is it tough enough to cope?
BEagle is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2017, 09:21
  #10662 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 72
Posts: 1,938
IF the HMDS was fragile we would have heard about it by now. There are concerns during catapulting that are being sorted. With new lightweight HMDS the pilot will carry a visor for day or night depending on situation to have only one visor fitted (a cockpit space for other visor needs to be found). Does the cockpit look roomy to you and have you any stories that indicate your worst HMDS fears? OMG the pilot is put in charge of a 100 million dollar airyplane - wot if he fckus up? 100 mil down the drain - wattle they think of next?
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2017, 09:39
  #10663 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,736
You really think we would have heard about it?

Has it been deliberately knocked off a table or dropped during simulated everyday use? Or are such tests on a $400k helmet deemed unnecessary. I hope that the first time someone finds out won't be when a pilot slips on a wet deck.

As for having to change visors when it gets dark / light, how many hands does that take? Day visor off, where do I put that? In the night visor stowage...which is still occupied. OK, I'll balance it on my knees whilst faffing about with the night visor....oops, it's now somewhere on the floor which I cannot reach whilst I'm wearing this damn helmet...and now it's down by the rudder pedals.

Having to change visors in flight is frankly ridiculous.
BEagle is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2017, 09:56
  #10664 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 72
Posts: 1,938
I give in - so many unanswerable questions. Just provide some evidence please. My common sense informs me that the HMDS is rugged enough for every day use whilst that would have been part of the specifications for it. Everything about military equipment is that it is designed for the rugged outdoors (can't say about Brit equp butt). Do night vision goggle peeps wear their night vision goggles during daylight? Just flip 'em down I suppose and get rid of them before ejecting - yeah right.

We are told the F-35 has a good auto pilot which pilot can control very easily with simple switchology - so hands free flying is a no brainer. I'll guess fumblebum pilots are weeded out long before they get to the F-35. Shirley Frankly is my ridiculous middle name.

By the by with one switch the pilot can view behind with HMDS via the DAS - targets are tracked through 360 degrees - they know where youse are at and they keep track within at least ten miles and can differentiate between bogies & goodies which many stories relate is very difficult with modern aircraft having seemingly similar visual characteristics.

As for the HMDS tests. By golly gee they test a 100 million dollar airyplane thoroughly over many years - ya think they will get around to testing the HMDS under many conditions? OH NO they have to treat it as though it is a FABERGE EGG!
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2017, 10:17
  #10665 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 72
Posts: 1,938
For 'BEagle': the very first F-35A has been destroyed (eventually) during Live Fire Evaluation tests LFE. I think destroying one or several HMDS for testing purposes is easy enough but I have no information that this was done. This 2.5Mb PDF has a tonne of info about it from 2010: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a528013.pdf
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2017, 11:10
  #10666 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 72
Posts: 1,938
'BEagle' I'm hoping we do not lose a pilot or airyplane to this ongoing OBOGS/oygen supply mystery. This latest incident cause was soon found but not previous. However 'help is on the way' and it seems will be tested and retested - any volunteers? Pick Me Pick Me Pick Me!

Fix Elusive As Another F-35 Pilot Reports Trouble Breathing | Defense content from Aviation Week
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2017, 22:20
  #10667 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,631
So everything just going swimmingly then.....
glad rag is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2017, 08:22
  #10668 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lon UK
Posts: 276
No. Does it ever on complex equipment?


You really think we would have heard about it?
How many helmets and how long have they been used? With the number of operational aircraft, hour flown, and critics ready to jump on every known weakness before now, it would most probably have been highlighted. It was after all designed, in part, for protection.
Brat is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2017, 11:46
  #10669 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,631
Project to big to cancel?

"You can fix everything with time and money"

Nope!

Just ask Musk!!

Well it is "his" money after all......

https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comm...ead_elon_musk/
glad rag is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2017, 04:31
  #10670 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 72
Posts: 1,938
A few years back an Australian Federal Parliament Enquiry into the F-35 consistently spelt helmet 'HELMUT'. I like it. Often this vital bit of info about the helmut liner being the part which is individually fitted to the pilot noggin is left out - therefore the helmut liner is transferable to another suitable helmet (in case the original needs some work). HANCHE

Attached Images
File Type: jpg
HMDStitleSMALL.jpg (132.2 KB, 3 views)
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2017, 05:07
  #10671 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 72
Posts: 1,938
One year ago a Gen Bogged Down explanation about HELMUT wait time / 2 visors etc.

SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2017, 19:58
  #10672 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,617
"Too big to cancel" happened a long time ago.
Fancy helmet. I hope it is fit for purpose. (See what I did there? )
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2017, 22:47
  #10673 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: key biscayne
Age: 58
Posts: 110
Still less expensive than a formula one car's steering wheel.
IcePaq is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2017, 23:14
  #10674 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 72
Posts: 1,938
How much does the latest whizbang wide view HUD cost? Buehler? Anyone? Dunno. Head Hanche from Norway has an answer for the view (from an F-35A I will guess).
"...A negative in training one on one has been that the view out of the cockpit is not as good as on the F-16. The visibility in a F-16 is especially good, better than in any other fighter I've flown. I could turn all the way around in my seat and see the opposite wingtip. In the F-35 I can't do that because the seat blocks some of the view. This made me a bit frustrated after the first flights. I had to learn to move different. Now I move forward in the seat before I lean a bit sideways and turn my head to look back. That way I can look around the sides of the seat. In the F-35 you learn to work around the issue and it's not a real disadvantage once you know how to do it...." http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=23004 (PDF 0.8Mb)
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 00:32
  #10675 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,617
Originally Posted by SpazSinbad View Post
How much does the latest whizbang wide view HUD cost? Buehler? Anyone? Dunno. Head Hanche from Norway has an answer for the view (from an F-35A I will guess).
The PT regime for this fighter means more neck exercises, if this gentleman's observation is the gospel. That and strong abs, strong core, if you are moving your whole body during a fight with a G load on.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 01:20
  #10676 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
Only one kind of g load to undergo in a turning fight. High, rapid onset, but brief.
George K Lee is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 01:27
  #10677 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 72
Posts: 1,938
Doc! My Neck Hurts PDF 1Mb from APPROACH Lt. Mark Jacoby and Tina Avelar in USN Flying Safety Magazine APPROACH March/April 2007: http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=17656 (1Mb 2 page PDF)

The A-4A to A-4F had abysmal rear views and my neck still hurts. Apparently yonks ago in 2008 a future change to the F-35s was a wider, more capacious canopy. The pilot can still look rearwards via HMDS to 6 o'clock view with a button press.

From 2008 Canopy Expansion Notional BLOCK 6: http://norway.usembassy.gov/root/pdf...rt-1_dista.pdf NOT WORKING

NOW at : http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_download-id-14514.html (PDF 3.5Mb) [see page 15 / 9 of 11 wide pages]
SpazSinbad is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 14:14
  #10678 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lon UK
Posts: 276
With Red Flag 2017-3 ending shortly, the USAF and USMC F-35 types that have been taking part will soon be providing some feedback for the UK on how to split the forthcoming buy.
https://theaviationist.com/tag/red-flag/
Brat is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 14:32
  #10679 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The back of beyond
Posts: 1,608
With Red Flag 2017-3 ending shortly, the USAF and USMC F-35 types that have been taking part will soon be providing some feedback for the UK on how to split the forthcoming buy.
I can't see anything in the link you have provided that relates to briefing the UK on any split buy.
melmothtw is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 15:51
  #10680 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 72
Posts: 16,612
Interestingly, even though it will probably not embed simulated shipborne or remote base operations (that are what the F-35Bs, in spite of the limited range and internal weapons capacity, was somehow designed to conduct) the Marine Corps will expand the role of the 5th Gen. aircraft in RF, covering also EW and CSAR support tasks.
A RF mission is usually made of 20-25 adversaries: not only aircraft, but also ground-to-air threats, moving and unknown threats etc. In other words, the old fixed scenario has become much more “dynamic” requiring a real-time “combat battlefield” coordinator.

Therefore, the most recent RF scenarios aim to develop the ability to fuse all the combat capabilities. In this context, the F-35 brings to the package the ability to penetrate deep into the most complex and “unknown” environments providing the “overall control” of the battlefield. The F-35, as well as any other modern aircraft with similar sensor fusing ability, can also work in a complementary fashion with the 4th generation fighters, sharing the information with all the other “players” while providing its own amount of fire power to the team.

Stealth technology (capability to survive and operate effectively where others cannot) combined with 5th generation features (i.e. superior information management), were pivotal to achieve the overall RF’s mini-campaign results.

But no SpecOps involvement, Terrorist Attacks....Airborne Air Field seizures allowed by Opposing forces?

Just a very narrowly designed scenario that affords the Good Guys a chance to test their new kit and tactics in a controlled environment?

Are the Opposition allowed to wage war based upon known and suspected capabilities of potential enemies like the Russians, Chinese, and North Koreans or combinations of potential combinations of enemy forces where the "Bad Guys" might prevail no matter how the Friendlies operate?

I remember when Exercises were scripted and we found out how bad an idea that was....then there was far more ability for the "Bad Guys" to be....Bad Guys with freedom to be good at what they did and that model paid off handsomely.

As Red Flag morphs......is it regressing in seeking a desired outcome over being a genuine test of the gear and crews to determine weaknesses and failures?
SASless 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.