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 9th May 2019, 23:59
  #11861 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 1
Intergranular corrosion...I bet I can't post URLs...

.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-07/williamtown-joint-strike-fighters-susceptible-to-corrosion/11085220?pfmredir=sm&fbclid=IwAR3YmEn4CtnjrMZPRmrVhqFSyIJeVr kTzjpn9pgBE6kXJT8WgwE_Oz2-pUY

.machinedesign.com/what039s-inside/aluminum-forgings-alcoa-help-joint-strike-fighter-lose-pounds

Yep. Wrong metal used to replace "the" major bulkhead after titanium was too heavy.
Do not wish to incur further wrath of the mod so you may have to adapt above to work. maybe.

tootlepip, and merry groundings; bring back THE FIN.

Last edited by weemonkey; 10th May 2019 at 15:52. Reason: Further info on scale of possible issues
weemonkey is offline  
Old 10th May 2019, 07:45
  #11862 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,812
Now we know the answer to the question of whether it is feasible, or cost effective, to upgrade early batch F-35s to a combat capable condition. The USAF, at least, isn’t going to waste the money.

Hell of an expensive Aggressor unit mind you.......

https://www.nellis.af.mil/News/Artic...f-35-training/
ORAC is offline  
Old 10th May 2019, 07:52
  #11863 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,812
https://theaviationist.com/2019/05/0...messaging-off/

F-35A “Explodes” in New USAF Video Promoting Teamwork......

ORAC is offline  
Old 10th May 2019, 09:38
  #11864 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by gums View Post
Salute!
Thanks, ORAC. I am not upset with those numbers.

We would have to look at the criteria for all the levels of "capability", huh?

For example, in a very simnple plane like the A-37, we would report 80% or a bit higher as fully mission capable. We would have been 100%, but our X-band beacon used for blind bombing was missing or inop. That doofer was tracked by a ground unit and was like a GCA. Some dude gave us left right and then "pickle" - Combat Sky Spot ( which we called Combat Sky Dump). A great war story surrounds Lima Site 85, which had one of the ground stations and allowed dumps over Hanoi when wx was piss poor. A "company" helo got an A2A kill on a AN2 there!!
Another unit on our plane that kept us from FMC was a broken encryption doofer -KY-28 or 38. We only used it for SAR when up in North VietNam where bad guys heard everything we ever said.

So the F-35 numbers look about right for this stage.

Gums sends...
"Production of the F-35 began in 2007 while development was in its early stages and before developmental flight testing had started. As a result of this concurrent development, the 357 aircraft delivered through 2018 will need retrofits to fix deficiencies and design issues found during testing.9 The program’s total estimated cost of concurrency is $1.4 billion.10 The program office plans for over 500 aircraft to be procured by the time operational testing is completed. Until operational testing is complete, there is a risk that additional problems with the aircraft may be identified. As a result, the concurrency costs of retrofitting delivered aircraft could increase.."

Page 6 of GAO report ...
weemonkey is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 07:49
  #11865 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,812
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ks-data-rights

F-35 Spare Parts Funding at Risk as Pentagon Seeks Data Rights

The House panel that approves defense spending intends to withhold half of next year’s funding for F-35 spare parts until the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin Corp. agree on the sale of technical data for spare parts to improve the tracking of items and allow purchases from other suppliers.

Struggling to resolve spare parts shortages and bottlenecks for the fighter plane worldwide, the Defense Department this month requested that Lockheed offer a proposal to sell it cost and technical data rights to the parts. That would give the Pentagon the ability to seek its own suppliers for parts or even produce some at its maintenance depots. But the panel said the department has yet to hear back from Lockheed, the No. 1 U.S. defense contractor.

With the issue unresolved, the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee said it will only allow spending of $364 million of $728 million requested for Navy and Marine Corps jet parts in fiscal year 2020 until the Pentagon has “received an adequate cost proposal” from Lockheed.

“I assume Lockheed Martin will fight this as consensus growth expectations for the company include a healthy increase in revenues from sustaining the F-35 fleet,” said Byron Callan, a defense analyst with Capital Alpha Partners. “If the government gets data rights they can compete spares and software or do some of this at their own depots and software labs.”...........

Air Force Magazine

House Appropriators Scrutinize Air Force Fighter Plans

........
“The plan that has been submitted to the committee requests 48 F-35A aircraft in fiscal year 2020 and every year thereafter through 2024, a reduction of 30 aircraft compared to the 2017 Selected Acquisition Report profile for the F-35 program.” When 18 F-15EXs are added to the mix each year, total fighter procurement would grow to only 66 jets annually—still six short of where the service says it needs to be.

“The Department of Defense, and the Air Force in particular, have sent conflicting and confusing signals with respect to the F-35 program,” appropriators continued. “The fiscal year 2020 request repeats a pattern of shifting aircraft quantities to future years, reducing the planned procurement from 84 to 78. Further, the Air Force submitted a fiscal year 2020 budget request that flattens F-35A procurement at 48 aircraft per year through the future years defense program despite the F-35A program of record remaining stable at 1,763 aircraft.”

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein said in February the service can’t afford its 72-jet goal. Air Force acquisition chief Will Roper also noted in early May the F-35 buy plan shrinks over the next few years “in order to align the procurement timeline with capability development and reduce retrofit costs.........
ORAC is offline  
Old 21st May 2019, 18:07
  #11866 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 1,040
UK F-35B Exercise Deployment to Akrotiri

RAFEngO74to09 is offline  
Old 22nd May 2019, 06:58
  #11867 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 1



Doesn't Marham look desolate....
weemonkey is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2019, 07:15
  #11868 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,812
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...easy-fix-60672

The Big F-35 Flaw That Won't Be Easy to Fix

“.........
Unfortunately, this process is hampered by a crippling shortage of thousands of spare parts, as described in a new report by the Government Accountability Office. The shortfall has left only half of the brand-new stealth fighters in mission-capable condition, forcing operational F-35 units to cannibalize aircraft as they wait weeks for replacement parts to be delivered. For several years, the Pentagon has attempted to address the shortage, but according to the GAO, these incoherent measures have so far failed to keep up with the increasing pace of new airframe production.........

Another problem afflicting spare part distributions is that F-35 parts are built and used by operators across Europe and Asia, but those parts are reportedly being routed through the United States instead of being deposited to depots in regional hubs. This inefficiency is resulting in overseas F-35 operators having to wait over ten days on average to receive replacement parts, with 28 percent of parts having yet to arrive after thirty days. This will likely to lead to complaints with foreign F-35 operators further confused by clashing protocols over who gets spare parts first based on “business rules” versus operational priorities.

Eventually, a more dispersed network of regional supply depots is intended to alleviate this logistical bind, but the effort to stand up those depots with the necessary parts is reportedly three to five years behind schedule.

Furthermore, the GAO reports claims that although the Pentagon spent $2 billion on F-35 parts since 2016 (including $960 million in 2018 alone), it has no unified accountability as to what that money was spent on, how many parts were acquired, and where those parts are currently located. Only a single program official had been dedicated to parts accounting, and December 2018 a spare parts database had yet to be populated with any data..........”






ORAC is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2019, 22:29
  #11869 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,423
weemonkey,

Marham has ALWAYS looked desolate. It wasn't called El Adem with grass for nothing.
pr00ne is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2019, 22:57
  #11870 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 0
Japan is buying 107 F-35 stealth fighter jets and Poland is considering buying 32 F-35 fighter jets. F-35 has been a success as the business.
LehMehh is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2019, 23:05
  #11871 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 1
Wink Re post # .. 871

"Put this away will you Jeeves."

"Sure thing Piles"
weemonkey is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2019, 12:31
  #11872 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The sunny South
Posts: 784
Latest news about production and flying hours:

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/400t...-flight-hours/

Still wondering when it will be cancelled.
FODPlod is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2019, 16:47
  #11873 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 1
And how many of that 400 will be forming the backbone of the largest aggressor sqn to be ever formed.
weemonkey is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2019, 20:19
  #11874 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 806
Still think it looks a pig, fat and lumpy.
Really is the Curtiss P 40 of our day, not great, but profitable.
Do not believe a future conflict would last long enough to generate a Mustang or a Tempest.
etudiant is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2019, 21:26
  #11875 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: ESSEX
Posts: 272
Or a FW 190. Tick tock
SARF is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2019, 15:04
  #11876 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: hong kong
Age: 46
Posts: 113
Great Footage - All in Burner!


Never saw one clip of Typhoons, F15s or Tornados flying the Mach Loop at speed with the burners plugged in.
subsonicsubic is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2019, 18:21
  #11877 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Welsh Marches
Posts: 65
Originally Posted by subsonicsubic View Post

Never saw one clip of Typhoons, F15s or Tornados flying the Mach Loop at speed with the burners plugged in.
One of my retirement hobbies is low level Aviation photography and living near to the Mach Loop I've spent quite a bit of time sitting on the side of a hill waiting for a fast jet to appear round the corner. Occasionally if the pilots spotted photographers they might plug in the burners for a few seconds to give us that special shot, but there was an unwritten code that "what happened in the Loop stayed in the Loop" and such shots were rarely published. With the advent of Facebook the Loop became much more popular and the code started to be ignored so you can probably find burner shots if you Google.

As I said, burners were only normally plugged in for a few seconds while they were near the photographers, although there was one rather special occasion when a pilot on his "fini" Tornado flight was supposed to have done the entire Loop on burners - certainly for the 1/3rd of the Loop that was in my field of view at least😀

I was fortunate to be at Rainbow when the above video was taken. It was actually a photo shoot by the Dutch F35 323 TES Squadron based at Edwards AF base and received quite a bit of publicity in the aviation press, couldn't see the RAF doing that with one of their F35's in the Loop!
Alchad is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2019, 18:25
  #11878 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: virginia, USA
Age: 53
Posts: 840
Originally Posted by FODPlod View Post
Latest news about production and flying hours:

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/400t...-flight-hours/

Still wondering when it will be cancelled.
Some interesting nuggets in there: ".....The production total is comprised of 283 F-35A, 87 F-35B and 30 F-35C deliveries. The 200,000 flight hours includes all F-35s in the fleet comprised of developmental test jets, training, operational, U.S. and international aircraft. Among the three variants, approximately 125,850 hours were flown by the F-35A, 52,410 hours by the F-35B and 22,630 by the F-35C...."

Seems like the C's are flying a lot. With 22,000+ hours on 30 airframes....
sandiego89 is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2019, 23:56
  #11879 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Originally Posted by subsonicsubic View Post
Never saw one clip of Typhoons, F15s or Tornados flying the Mach Loop at speed with the burners plugged in.
So? What's your point?

-RP
Rhino power is offline  
Old 6th Jun 2019, 00:01
  #11880 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by subsonicsubic View Post
Never saw one clip of Typhoons, F15s or Tornados flying the Mach Loop at speed with the burners plugged in.
Nice shots!!

Notice how the flight refueling receptacle markings make a pretty good aiming point!!!
weemonkey 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.