F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
As to the Canadians, they have the sense to question They know what they want from their aircraft and remember they were badly bitten by the US with classified material with the CF18. They are a liberal country that demand compliance with their requirements. Think EU and then some.
Before you jump on that, it's not my view, just my understanding.
Before you jump on that, it's not my view, just my understanding.
Beags, Typhoon's fuel uptake rate is a legacy of the other aircraft that begins with "T" from which much of its fuel system is inherited.
I can confirm your comments about Rafale.
I can confirm your comments about Rafale.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
My mother said.... To get things done.... You better not mess with Major Tom...
Straight from the horses ass:
F-35 Achieves Three Major Flight Test Milestones On Same Day · Lockheed Martin
"...Flying from Edwards Air Force Base, an F-35A flew a 1.9 hour mission with the first-ever load of Block 3i hardware and software. Block 3i is the next level of capability and is planned to support U.S. Air Force F-35A IOC in 2016...."
Courtney - unfortunately, the current Canadian Government has a fine track record of ignoring the professionals in every field - and muzzling them. Basically, the PM does what the heck he likes as long as it won't lose him the next election, and he luuurves big business. The problem of senior military men going along with whatever the poli's want is a worldwide problem, and Canada is not immune. I don't know whether the current top brass agree with the PM, or disagree and will speak their minds, or will shut up and change the threat to meet the capability. This is why I wondered about Beag's source.
Personally, I'd take the Rafale offer. It fits what Canada needs in almost every respect, and I think we can live without 5th gen.
Personally, I'd take the Rafale offer. It fits what Canada needs in almost every respect, and I think we can live without 5th gen.
Fox3, yeah, I get that entirely. Hence my remark about another reason. I hadn't really thought about Rafale as a replacement for the CF18, but I'm starting to see the sense of it.
I understand the PM thing, but I don't think it's a new phenomenon in Canada. Not a terrible thing, mind you. An interresting issue to follow, I think.
I understand the PM thing, but I don't think it's a new phenomenon in Canada. Not a terrible thing, mind you. An interresting issue to follow, I think.
Not terrible, hence the reason he keeps getting elected. After all, we've all still got jobs and the budget goes into surplus sometime later this year. I can think of a lot worse places to be...in fact, I can't think of a better place to be 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For Canada, IF you're going to discount single engined ops and go down the twin route instead, the surely Super Hornet makes more sense.
It's cheaper than a Rafale for a start, the RCAF already has support arrangements and relationships with Boeing, US Navy (PMA-265), GE, Raytheon etc for its CF-18 systems, and the jet would be much easier for CF-18 flight and maintenance folks to convert to.
Further, it already has AESA and a near fully-defined spiral upgrade path, plus other notional enhancements coming down the line.
No brainer really...
It's cheaper than a Rafale for a start, the RCAF already has support arrangements and relationships with Boeing, US Navy (PMA-265), GE, Raytheon etc for its CF-18 systems, and the jet would be much easier for CF-18 flight and maintenance folks to convert to.
Further, it already has AESA and a near fully-defined spiral upgrade path, plus other notional enhancements coming down the line.
No brainer really...
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rh200, I don't disagree with your point at all, the discussion was mearly about the Candian position. It has long been their feeling that they would rather have two engines for the northern areas where survival can be be a real challenge.
Courtney Mil
Whilst each country can be different, they will all have to apply weightings to all the pro's and cons. So I suppose it will come down to the statistical projections of what the failures and outcomes will be against the others.
The United States bases many of its F-22s in Alaska," he adds. "The F-35s will not be based in Alaska because a single-engine plane is inappropriate for the Arctic — the United States Air Force has decided that
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
I guess I'll have to dig out a reference for the hardware?
DOTE FY 2011 Annual Report | Page 28:
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/...nualReport.pdf (42Mb)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/76973783/A...2011-JSF-brief
DOTE FY 2011 Annual Report | Page 28:
“...Block 2 and Block 3 Software Development Progress
-- The program intends to provide Block 2 capability for production lot 4 and lot 5 aircraft; lot 4 aircraft should begin to deliver in mid-2012. In the new plan, the program intends Block 2 to contain the first mission systems combat capability – including weapons employment, electronic attack, & interoperability.
-- Concurrent with Block 1 development and integration, the program began integration of initial Block 2A software using the Cooperative Avionics Test Bed (CATB) in early October 2011. The development team augmented the mission systems integration lab, which was busy supporting Block 1 tasks, with the CATB as an integration resource. The new plan calls for the beginning of Block 2A flight test on F-35 mission systems aircraft before the end of November 2011. However, initial Block 2 integration task execution has fallen behind the new plan, having completed approximately half of the planned schedule, and leaving approximately 70 percent of integration tasks to go.
-- Block 3 development is slightly behind the new plan with only 30 percent of initial Block 3 having completed the development phase. In the new plan, the program simplified Block 3 to two production releases instead of three in prior planning and schedules. The program plans the first release, Block 3i, to contain no substantive increase in functions or capability. It will re-host the final Block 2 capability on the upgraded “Technical Refresh 2” processor hardware set. The program intends Block 3i capability for production lot 6 and lot 7 aircraft.
Block 3f, the final increment, includes new capability. The program in-tends to deliver Block 3f for IOT&E & the final lots of low-rate production...."
-- The program intends to provide Block 2 capability for production lot 4 and lot 5 aircraft; lot 4 aircraft should begin to deliver in mid-2012. In the new plan, the program intends Block 2 to contain the first mission systems combat capability – including weapons employment, electronic attack, & interoperability.
-- Concurrent with Block 1 development and integration, the program began integration of initial Block 2A software using the Cooperative Avionics Test Bed (CATB) in early October 2011. The development team augmented the mission systems integration lab, which was busy supporting Block 1 tasks, with the CATB as an integration resource. The new plan calls for the beginning of Block 2A flight test on F-35 mission systems aircraft before the end of November 2011. However, initial Block 2 integration task execution has fallen behind the new plan, having completed approximately half of the planned schedule, and leaving approximately 70 percent of integration tasks to go.
-- Block 3 development is slightly behind the new plan with only 30 percent of initial Block 3 having completed the development phase. In the new plan, the program simplified Block 3 to two production releases instead of three in prior planning and schedules. The program plans the first release, Block 3i, to contain no substantive increase in functions or capability. It will re-host the final Block 2 capability on the upgraded “Technical Refresh 2” processor hardware set. The program intends Block 3i capability for production lot 6 and lot 7 aircraft.
Block 3f, the final increment, includes new capability. The program in-tends to deliver Block 3f for IOT&E & the final lots of low-rate production...."
http://www.scribd.com/doc/76973783/A...2011-JSF-brief
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 11th Jun 2014 at 00:28. Reason: textad
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
Lockheed: Marine Joint Strike Fighter on Final Approach to Initial Operational Capability
10 Jun 2014 Dave Majumdar
Lockheed: Marine Joint Strike Fighter on Final Approach to Initial Operational Capability | USNI News
10 Jun 2014 Dave Majumdar
"...Meanwhile, the government-company integrated test force has flown five sorties with the Block 3i software–which is the configuration the U.S. Air Force requires for its August 2016 IOC date. Block 3i, with the exception of a new third generation helmet-mounted display, offers the same capability as Block 2B other than the fact it runs on newer, faster computer hardware. The new helmet fixes issues with night vision found on the older version of the hardware.
“We did have some integration issues with the hardware itself,” Martin said.
“Once we ported the software over, we made no software changes to the application software. It ported clean, but we did have some integration issues that are now behind us.”
She said that the hardware and software are performing extremely well thus far.
The Marines do not need the new hardware for their IOC, but eventually their aircraft will be retrofitted with the new processors...."
“We did have some integration issues with the hardware itself,” Martin said.
“Once we ported the software over, we made no software changes to the application software. It ported clean, but we did have some integration issues that are now behind us.”
She said that the hardware and software are performing extremely well thus far.
The Marines do not need the new hardware for their IOC, but eventually their aircraft will be retrofitted with the new processors...."
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bannock
The author goes on to state
.....
As an example, he notes the U.S. has a much higher density of airports on its territory — providing greater options for emergency landing in the event of engine failure.
.....
As an example, he notes the U.S. has a much higher density of airports on its territory — providing greater options for emergency landing in the event of engine failure.
Oh, yes - there are so many airports near the &*&^%^$$# aircraft carriers in the middle of the ocean, so the USN doesn't need to worry about its constantly-failing single engine on the F-35C.
That author has his head up his arse, and is completely lacking in credibility, as far as I'm concerned.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
'GK121': From same sauce (unprofread) we have this unpooread guffaws: 
I frikin' hope so.
"...10. F-35 Fleet Will Require Much-Improved Search and Rescue
"...Lockheed Martin argues that F-35s are appropriate for the Arctic because Norway flies F-16s in the Arctic, while the United States flies F-16s off aircraft carriers.[82]...
...The United States uses F-16s in Alaska and off aircraft carriers for one purpose only, namely, to use as mock enemy aircraft during training exercises. Significantly, a large portion of the United States’ F-22 fleet is based in Alaska, providing twin-engine safety to fighter pilots operating in the American Arctic. The F-16s, in contrast, are kept relatively close to the airports and aircraft carriers, where search and rescue is readily available....
"...Lockheed Martin argues that F-35s are appropriate for the Arctic because Norway flies F-16s in the Arctic, while the United States flies F-16s off aircraft carriers.[82]...
...The United States uses F-16s in Alaska and off aircraft carriers for one purpose only, namely, to use as mock enemy aircraft during training exercises. Significantly, a large portion of the United States’ F-22 fleet is based in Alaska, providing twin-engine safety to fighter pilots operating in the American Arctic. The F-16s, in contrast, are kept relatively close to the airports and aircraft carriers, where search and rescue is readily available....
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 11th Jun 2014 at 05:19. Reason: Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before - Antartic?
Yes, Spaz, I get that 3i offers no increase in capability. My point is that it's not idendical code and it is currently in testing with the new hardware that it's designed for. Simple as that. But thanks for the slide.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 66
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To sum up the software and hardware situation, 2B it would seem is possibly nearly as per specification, 3i is meant to do the same as 2B on a different hardware platform. Having an aircraft that has flown with 3I does not mean it is tested, implicitly it cannot be signed off till 2B is fully signed off, as it is meant to mimick it. 3I was meant to be a stepping stone to 3F that all users were planned initially to declare IOC with.
Neither version is ready for fleet release.
Neither version is ready for fleet release.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 66
Posts: 6,995
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Whack in MS DOS 5 and it'll go like a rocket 
As an aside ... it would appear PDA has now been granted for our man to display at Farnborough and RIAT this year.
As an aside ... it would appear PDA has now been granted for our man to display at Farnborough and RIAT this year.
Last edited by CoffmanStarter; 11th Jun 2014 at 20:39.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
Well then, apart from assertion, any proof what you say CM is the case? I can assert a bunch of stuff. Your assertions are becoming less believable as they are asserted.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 66
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spaz, do you have an issue with the post that I put up about 2B and 3i's progress? It seemed to me to be a summation of a number of your posts with a little thought linking them together.
Or do you have irrefutable evidence that 3i is working as well as 2B on new hardware and it has all been proven in under 10 test flights?
Or do you have irrefutable evidence that 3i is working as well as 2B on new hardware and it has all been proven in under 10 test flights?