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 29th Jan 2018, 13:36
  #11081 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: virginia, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 792
Originally Posted by Fonsini View Post
Has anyone improved their opinion of the F-35 since this thread began, I sense a slight change in the wind, just slight mind you.

Perhaps like most (all?) controversial weapons programs, once the type starts seeing operational service in sizable numbers the furor goers down a notch. In the US we saw this with the V-22 and other programs. Lots has happened since this thread started, and while there is still a ways to go we have seen:


- 265+ F-35 deliveries
- 66 built in the last year
- Ever increasing customers achieving milestones (first crews, deliveries, new orders...)
- Operational service declared (yes with pages of back and forth of what that means)
- New assembly and support facilities- not just LM Fort Worth anymore
- Some cost control on the F-35A (if you believe it)
- Some positive reports (if you believe it)
- Participation in increasingly advanced exercises.
- Deployments overseas.
- Ever increasing capabilities (with still much to go)


I opine that once the product hits the fleet, and at least shows it brings some capability, the furor lessens. Note I did not say the costs or questions lessen.
sandiego89 is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2018, 20:03
  #11082 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
Well, actually, since the USAF started receiving and flying substantial numbers of airplanes, they have cut their planned full-rate production tempo from 80 to 60 jets a year, and their senior acquisition officer has expressed increasing concern about the need to upgrade the current jets with the next-gen processor and has actually asked Congress to not fund more jets than the AF has requested.

A deep dive into the DOT&E availability, reliability and maintainability numbers will tell you more about this than any 237 updates of LockMart's happy-talk Fact Facts.
George K Lee is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2018, 19:27
  #11083 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lon UK
Posts: 276
Originally Posted by George K Lee View Post
Well, actually, since the USAF started receiving and flying substantial numbers of airplanes, they have cut their planned full-rate production tempo from 80 to 60 jets a year, and their senior acquisition officer has expressed increasing concern about the need to upgrade the current jets with the next-gen processor and has actually asked Congress to not fund more jets than the AF has requested.

A deep dive into the DOT&E availability, reliability and maintainability numbers will tell you more about this than any 237 updates of LockMart's happy-talk Fact Facts.
What a piss dripping misery-guts you are George.

Deep dive investigation indicates that these online, active, service aircraft, that are technically ahead of whatever is being fielded by Russia or China.

They are front line weapon systems, presently in operation. Do tell us what is better???

Yup not perfect, what weapon system is. They are in development.
Brat is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2018, 23:34
  #11084 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
They sure have been.
glad rag is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 01:40
  #11085 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
piss dripping misery-guts

That's how you spell "realist" and "taxpayer", correct?

They are in development.

You don't need to remind people here of that fact, because development started 21 years ago last November, and (unlike most other contemporary fighter programs) has always been fully funded.
George K Lee is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 04:31
  #11086 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lon UK
Posts: 276
The B-52 is still 'under development’, and been around just a little while.
Brat is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 10:49
  #11087 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
No it isn't "under development" at all lolol.

MEANWHILE to illustrate GKL's point..

https://www.theregister.co.uk/AMP/20...ftware_snafus/

“The [F-35] program is using test point data from older versions of software to sign off capability specifications and justify baseline test point deletions, even though the old data may no longer be representative of the latest version of Block 3F software.”

Britain’s 14 F-35Bs are all thought to be running Block 3F software of various sub-versions. Yet the all-singing, all-dancing jet still can’t talk to its guided air-to-ground bombs properly, even with the latest patches installed.

“For Block 3F, the pilot is now able to see what coordinates are sent to the bomb, but is still not able to see what coordinates are actually loaded in the bomb,” noted DOTE. “The [US] Services are assessing if this correction meets the requirements directed by the rules of engagement in specific areas of operation.”

Even more worryingly, trials identified that the AIM-120 AMRAAM missile, which the Royal Air Force and Royal Navy intend to use as the F-35B’s main air-to-air weapon, cannot currently be used to its full potential by the supersonic stealth jet. After six test firings in simulated combat scenarios, test pilots identified “key technical deficiencies in the ability of the F-35 to employ the AIM-120 weapons”.

And there's plenty more, read it and inwardly digest.

Having worked in civil aircraft production, you have specific production markers to meet then the customer pays some more etc etc.
If you were to lie or otherwise deceive the customer, that would be fraudulent ....

Last edited by glad rag; 31st Jan 2018 at 11:26.
glad rag is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 13:26
  #11088 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
By that standard the 737 is still under development, even though nearly 10,000 have been delivered. And the B-52, in 21 years, went from a balsa model in a Dayton hotel suite to operations, a massive redesign and combat over Vietnam.
George K Lee is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 14:34
  #11089 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 80
Posts: 1,153
Brat,
What a piss dripping misery-guts you are George.
Maybe you ought to begin to critique the subject, which is far from perfect and IMHO, will never be perfect because of the mistakes made in the beginning of the program. If you are hung up with the words "development phase", replace it with the words "discovery phase", it's the phase that occurs after when development was done incorrectly.

Currently, the USAF is ordering more replacement wings for A-10 Warthogs as they begin to see through the fog and now are facing reality:

ACQUISITION, AIR, INTEL & CYBER
F-35 Problems: Late IOTE, F-35A Gun Inaccurate, F-35B Tires, Threat Data, Cyber…

By COLIN CLARK on January 26, 2018 at 4:59 PM

From the Behler report:

There’s another important problem which will make it very difficult for the Air Force to argue that it can replace the A-10 with the F-35A, as planned: “The F-35A gun has been consistently missing ground targets during strafe testing; the program is still troubleshooting the problems.” The gun shoots “long, and to the right.” The Marine’s F-35B and the Navy’s F-35C guns, which are not built in, are apparently performing better. “Initial accuracy testing of the F-35B and F-35C podded guns showed better results than that of the F-35A model,” Behler writes. “Both the F-35B and the F-35C gun pods exhibited the same right aiming bias as the F-35A, however the long bias is not manifested in the podded gun systems.”

The other bad news here is that “delays in completing the remaining gun testing and correcting gun-related deficiencies within SDD, especially for the F-35A, are adding risk to the IOT&E schedule,” the report says.
Turbine D is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 15:06
  #11090 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 62
Posts: 371
Originally Posted by glad rag View Post

Britain’s 14 F-35Bs are all thought to be running Block 3F software of various sub-versions. Yet the all-singing, all-dancing jet still can’t talk to its guided air-to-ground bombs properly, even with the latest patches installed.
Not the I am questioning the understanding that the British F-35Bs are all running 3F software however I have yet to see a photo of a not test and development aircraft with external stores, an incremental capacity with 3F, unless it has been pushed back a generation?
PhilipG is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2018, 06:31
  #11091 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Johannesburg
Posts: 43
The F-35 is all a hoax! See what Duffelblog says.....
https://www.duffelblog.com/2018/01/f...yamalan-movie/
Baron 58P is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2018, 08:06
  #11092 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 61
Posts: 534
I don't think that situation with F-35 is dramatically different (in negative sense) as compared with many previous aircraft programmes of that sort. The main difference is that in the current "era" of Internet media and social networks, millions of laymen generate gigabits of rubbish texts that circulate on the Net. And, as usual, negative news are the most attractive for non-specialists who think they have "finally found the truth that was previously covered".
A_Van is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2018, 13:39
  #11093 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,269
What’s that funny word on the Typhoon thread again? Oh yes - stochastic.

More data analysis is a sure fire way to save money.........

Pentagon ‘can't afford the sustainment costs‘ on F-35, Lord says

WASHINGTON – Sustainment costs on the F-35 are poised to become unaffordable, and that’s a big challenge for Ellen Lord, the Pentagon’s newly christened undersecretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment. As a result, Lord is focused on testing new business and data processes on the fifth-generation stealth fighter, including leveraging big data analytics for sustainment purposes.

“Right now, we can’t afford the sustainment costs we have on the F-35. And we’re committed to changing that,” Lord told reporters at a Jan. 31 roundtable, adding that the plane is the “most significant” program in the Department of Defense.....

With just over 250 joint strike fighters absorbed into the fleet already, the Defense Department is experiencing a number of problems sustaining the aircraft. In an October report, the Government Accountability Office laid out numerous challenges, including long maintenance times for parts, a spare parts shortage and delayed updates to the F-35’s logistics system.

After the report was released, the F-35 joint program office stated that although it was factually accurate based on the data gathered at the time, it “does not fully account for the critical work the F-35 sustainment team has led over the past several months to accelerate depot capability and capacity, implement solutions to increase spare parts and reduce overall sustainment costs.”

Lord said her team is “in the process” of detailing six acquisition professionals from her team just to focus on the sustainment issue for the jet, working hand in hand with the F-35 joint program office. The goal, she said is to go to the basics of how sustainment is done and to try new methods for driving costs down. “It’s really deconstructing a program, as you always would, but [F-35] being a large complex program with international partners, [foreign military sales] coming up, there’s a complexity to it that benefits from fresh eyes that are familiar with the program routinely looking at and asking questions,” she explained.

Because F-35 is such a massive program, the hope is to prove out these fresh approaches and then drag them onto other sets of major defense acquisition programs, including the use of data analytics to find ways to cut costs. “One of the things we’ve been talking about a lot is that we will be data driven. So we are frankly wasting people’s time if we sit around with opinions and concepts,” Lord said. “If that is not backed up by analytical rigor and the data behind it. So, we’re practicing all of that on the F-35. I think we’re getting a little sharper in all the areas.”
ORAC is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2018, 14:46
  #11094 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 80
Posts: 1,153
A_Van,
I don't think that situation with F-35 is dramatically different (in negative sense) as compared with many previous aircraft programmes of that sort.
One that kinda sticks in my mind is the F-111...
Turbine D is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2018, 15:52
  #11095 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 641
Originally Posted by Turbine D View Post
A_Van,

One that kinda sticks in my mind is the F-111...
That airplane served rather well in Australia, iirc. The replacement Hornets were a downgrade in capabilities in terms of range and payload.
etudiant is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2018, 16:46
  #11096 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Originally Posted by etudiant View Post
That airplane served rather well in Australia, iirc. The replacement Hornets were a downgrade in capabilities in terms of range and payload.
Just like the F35!!
glad rag is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2018, 16:56
  #11097 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 61
Posts: 534
I recall F-104 "Starfighter". A revolutionary plane for mid 50's. The total number built was about 2500 that is somewhat similar to the planned amount of F-35. About 15 countries used it. It was called "flying coffin" in Germany because some 30% of about 900+ machines were lost (in peace time). Can anybody imagine such numbers now, or, better say, with current public attitude? I assume that the designer and program management would be crucified (and the world would not see SR-71 because both planes were designed by Kelly Johnson).
A_Van is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2018, 19:45
  #11098 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lon UK
Posts: 276
[quote=glad rag;10037353]No it isn't "under development" at all lolol.

It most certainly is. lolol!

Development:- the process of developing or being developed.
"she traces the development of the novel"
evolution, growth, maturing, expansion, enlargement, spread, buildout, progress.

https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...ization-06583/

By that standard the 737 is still under development,
Yes George, it is still evolving, growing, getting bigger better, maturing.
Brat is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2018, 19:50
  #11099 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,525
Because F-35 is such a massive program, the hope is to prove out these fresh approaches and then drag them onto other sets of major defense acquisition programs, including the use of data analytics to find ways to cut costs. “One of the things we’ve been talking about a lot is that we will be data driven. So we are frankly wasting people’s time if we sit around with opinions and concepts,” Lord said. “If that is not backed up by analytical rigor and the data behind it. So, we’re practicing all of that on the F-35. I think we’re getting a little sharper in all the areas.”
Which means ----?
jindabyne is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2018, 21:59
  #11100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 80
Posts: 1,153
Which means ----?
It means that analytical rigor and data they didn't have when concurrent engineering was the plan used supposedly to shorten the development cycle time and reduce costs. Some of this data knowledge isn't yet available today, and we continue in the discovery mode...
Turbine D 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.