F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
price and mills are the repsim boys that had their company delisted. a part of the apa clown club.
Your obsessional, subliterate sliming of anyone who disagrees with you is revolting, Mr JackJack, JSFfan, Jack412 and "Jack Warner". Particularly since you have never once brought any unique or positive insight to bear.
Your obsessional, subliterate sliming of anyone who disagrees with you is revolting, Mr JackJack, JSFfan, Jack412 and "Jack Warner". Particularly since you have never once brought any unique or positive insight to bear.
Last edited by LowObservable; 26th Feb 2016 at 21:57.
Originally Posted by A1Bill
So, now we know what his motivation for the writing really is... Maybe somebody should make this info known to Australians
As for the simulations he's discussing, I can confirm that the limitations he is describing were extant during those trials. There were reasons for doing it that way, but what he is saying basically true.
Now, a few days ago, I asked you a question that you have chosen not to answer twice. Because you singled me out among other former F-15 pilots as having a different view about the F-35, I ask you again,
Originally Posted by Courtney
And what do you assume my opinion of the platform to be?
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am wondering what the real state of the P&W F-135 engine is these days? While the relevancy of simulations are debated, some of the relevance depends on what the engine is really capable of delivering. What makes me wonder is this information from the commercial engine business side as stated to Aviation Week by the new President of P&W regarding their new GTF engine for the A-321neo:
I might add, the rotor shaft bending can also be due to the weight of components attached to either end, the dumbbell effect. Regardless of where the rubbing takes place, be it blade tips or internal seals, it isn't an easy problem to deal with. It results from miscalculation of structural support design. It is true all engines do have some rotor bow, but the ones that have the least have good structural support throughout the length of the engine. Opened clearances to solve the rubbing problem reduces engine efficiency, and that effects performance items such as range of operation and true developed engine thrust, items that remain to be confirmed on the F-35. BTW, the CFM56 LEAP engine starts in 50 seconds per engine.
Rotor bow, or thermal bowing, is normally due to asymmetrical cooling after shut-down on the previous flight. Differences in temperature across the shaft section supporting the rotor lead to different thermal deformation of the shaft material, causing the rotor axis to bend. This results in an offset between the center of gravity of the bowed rotor and the bearing axis, causing a slight imbalance and potentially reducing the tight clearance between the rotor blade tips and the compressor wall. Maintaining this clearance as closely as possible is critical to engine efficiency. Slower starting allows more even heating, eliminating differential thermal deformation.
“On an A320 it takes about 150 to 160 seconds to start both engines, and those are (IAE) V2500 kind of numbers,” says Leduc. “The initial PW1100G engines we put into service on Lufthansa take about 350 seconds. All engines have a bit of rotor bow. The V2500 had it, the PW2000, PW4000 and the CFM(56) had it, there’s not an engine built that doesn’t have a certain amount of rotor bow. We have taken an incredibly conservative approach here. We basically have dictated start times to ensure ourselves we will never rub a rotor out,” says Leduc.
Pratt is adopting a two-pronged attack on the issue. All production standard engines now feature a damper on the third and fourth shaft bearings to help stiffen the shaft. “The engines we are building in the factory today are to this bill of material and the first 20 engines we built were not. With these 20 we have a plan with the customers to go back and modify them as needed,” says Leduc.
The second prong is to collect data from engines in service and under accelerated testing, and to gradually reduce the start time based on real experience. “We are basically going to be able to match rotor clearance, engine by engine. And we are going to do it with an algorithm that will have greater and greater fidelity over time. By the time we get to June, it will be down to 200 seconds for start time and by the time we get to December we will be down to 150 seconds for start time. It’s all about how much data we accumulate and the level of fidelity in the algorithm,” he adds.
“On an A320 it takes about 150 to 160 seconds to start both engines, and those are (IAE) V2500 kind of numbers,” says Leduc. “The initial PW1100G engines we put into service on Lufthansa take about 350 seconds. All engines have a bit of rotor bow. The V2500 had it, the PW2000, PW4000 and the CFM(56) had it, there’s not an engine built that doesn’t have a certain amount of rotor bow. We have taken an incredibly conservative approach here. We basically have dictated start times to ensure ourselves we will never rub a rotor out,” says Leduc.
Pratt is adopting a two-pronged attack on the issue. All production standard engines now feature a damper on the third and fourth shaft bearings to help stiffen the shaft. “The engines we are building in the factory today are to this bill of material and the first 20 engines we built were not. With these 20 we have a plan with the customers to go back and modify them as needed,” says Leduc.
The second prong is to collect data from engines in service and under accelerated testing, and to gradually reduce the start time based on real experience. “We are basically going to be able to match rotor clearance, engine by engine. And we are going to do it with an algorithm that will have greater and greater fidelity over time. By the time we get to June, it will be down to 200 seconds for start time and by the time we get to December we will be down to 150 seconds for start time. It’s all about how much data we accumulate and the level of fidelity in the algorithm,” he adds.
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: aus
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CM, it was a copy paste from f16, as I said "re : Sørensen..hat tip to hornetfinn on f-16" and I gave the link.
re : "CM, you are ex f-15 and was involved in some of the typhoon stuff. you are the only one's attitude I don't understand here, when compared to what other f-15 and typhoon pilots say"
This is the search string I used, "f-15" "F-35" pilot interview "f-15"
first one I found..here is an x F15 guy, he has a different attitude to you, that was the point I was making.
Shaping the F-35 Combat System Enterprise | SLDInfo
In this interview, Pete “Toes” Bartos of Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems, a former F-15/F-18 pilot and Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) requirements officer at the Air Combat Command, explains the nature of the F-35 combat systems and how they work together.
no doubt you have read the typhoon pilots now flying the f-35?
re : "CM, you are ex f-15 and was involved in some of the typhoon stuff. you are the only one's attitude I don't understand here, when compared to what other f-15 and typhoon pilots say"
This is the search string I used, "f-15" "F-35" pilot interview "f-15"
first one I found..here is an x F15 guy, he has a different attitude to you, that was the point I was making.
Shaping the F-35 Combat System Enterprise | SLDInfo
In this interview, Pete “Toes” Bartos of Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems, a former F-15/F-18 pilot and Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) requirements officer at the Air Combat Command, explains the nature of the F-35 combat systems and how they work together.
no doubt you have read the typhoon pilots now flying the f-35?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In case you forgot we are talking weapon safety now..
But how can they issue weapon clearances when the testing paradigm were not met due to weapon system inadequences.
You can keep on throwing those little internet snippetts in but the FACT is the aircraft did not complete it's full sanctioned clearances.
Now shall we discuss F35B [the bastard offspring?] AtG internal weapon capacities viz the other variants??
You can keep on throwing those little internet snippetts in but the FACT is the aircraft did not complete it's full sanctioned clearances.
Now shall we discuss F35B [the bastard offspring?] AtG internal weapon capacities viz the other variants??
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CM, it was a copy paste from f16, as I said "re : Sørensen..hat tip to hornetfinn on f-16" and I gave the link.
re : "CM, you are ex f-15 and was involved in some of the typhoon stuff. you are the only one's attitude I don't understand here, when compared to what other f-15 and typhoon pilots say"
This is the search string I used, "f-15" "F-35" pilot interview "f-15"
first one I found..here is an x F15 guy, he has a different attitude to you, that was the point I was making.
Shaping the F-35 Combat System Enterprise | SLDInfo
In this interview, Pete “Toes” Bartos of Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems, a former F-15/F-18 pilot and Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) requirements officer at the Air Combat Command, explains the nature of the F-35 combat systems and how they work together.
no doubt you have read the typhoon pilots now flying the f-35?
re : "CM, you are ex f-15 and was involved in some of the typhoon stuff. you are the only one's attitude I don't understand here, when compared to what other f-15 and typhoon pilots say"
This is the search string I used, "f-15" "F-35" pilot interview "f-15"
first one I found..here is an x F15 guy, he has a different attitude to you, that was the point I was making.
Shaping the F-35 Combat System Enterprise | SLDInfo
In this interview, Pete “Toes” Bartos of Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems, a former F-15/F-18 pilot and Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) requirements officer at the Air Combat Command, explains the nature of the F-35 combat systems and how they work together.
no doubt you have read the typhoon pilots now flying the f-35?
In fact ditch the care-o-meter buddy and read and internally digest this..
http://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/568163-whistle-blower.html
Last edited by glad rag; 28th Feb 2016 at 14:44. Reason: reality check for A1B
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh that's such a shame LO. It would have been a great capability.
I guess LM told the customers that it was possible but needed money; having none, I guess those customers said 'no thanks' and walked away from a great capability.
The power of suggestion eh?!
I guess LM told the customers that it was possible but needed money; having none, I guess those customers said 'no thanks' and walked away from a great capability.
The power of suggestion eh?!
There's no record of customers being formally offered that capability so it is far more likely that it was found impractical. If I had to guess I would surmise that if you stacked and staggered two weapons in the outer bays, a failure of one to launch would have fouled the second.
As for the EO-DAS issue, this has been asked and answered many times in this thread. But the disgusting troll's MO is to keep repeating the same points, rather like a whiny two-year-old answering everything with "Whyyyy?" until he is spanked and sent to bed.
As for the EO-DAS issue, this has been asked and answered many times in this thread. But the disgusting troll's MO is to keep repeating the same points, rather like a whiny two-year-old answering everything with "Whyyyy?" until he is spanked and sent to bed.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Annapolis
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@LO ....Long ago (2007-08) there was marketing puff about 6 internal AMRAAM. The fact that it's gone away suggests that it was found to be impractical.
I suppose this is why LM wants/needs to develop the Cuda missile, although one of its own test pilots is calling for a longer range AIM-120 / AARAM class missile for the F-35. Hard to imagine a smaller missile having the range necessary for the JSF - JPO "first to see / first to kill" meme. Likewise, it's unlikely that you could cram more than four longer ranged missile into the internal bays - maybe only two? I think the mock ups of the Meteor load out only shows one per bay, but four are planned.
I suppose this is why LM wants/needs to develop the Cuda missile, although one of its own test pilots is calling for a longer range AIM-120 / AARAM class missile for the F-35. Hard to imagine a smaller missile having the range necessary for the JSF - JPO "first to see / first to kill" meme. Likewise, it's unlikely that you could cram more than four longer ranged missile into the internal bays - maybe only two? I think the mock ups of the Meteor load out only shows one per bay, but four are planned.
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Annapolis
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ glad rag "How is the weight situation these days, esp for the "B" variant??"
Still underweight by 132lbs or so as of May 2015, measured on a Lot 7 aircraft. Whether this will still be the case when the additional structural mods are designed and installed is the undisclosed question, and there are two more years of SDD. But I'm positive that if the weight must grow beyond currently stated goals, it will be accepted, and operational parameters will be adjusted until a more powerful / efficient F135 variant (or replacement) is developed sometime way, way into the future (like after Block 4.3/5.)
F-35A is under by 372lbs.
F-35C is (projected) to be 286lbs under for a Lot 8 aircraft.
Still underweight by 132lbs or so as of May 2015, measured on a Lot 7 aircraft. Whether this will still be the case when the additional structural mods are designed and installed is the undisclosed question, and there are two more years of SDD. But I'm positive that if the weight must grow beyond currently stated goals, it will be accepted, and operational parameters will be adjusted until a more powerful / efficient F135 variant (or replacement) is developed sometime way, way into the future (like after Block 4.3/5.)
F-35A is under by 372lbs.
F-35C is (projected) to be 286lbs under for a Lot 8 aircraft.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the link ORAC, however I stopped reading as soon as I saw Sprey as a contributor. The man is locked in the 70s and 80s when it comes to what makes a jet good and bad and, whereas I agree with him and enthusiastically applaud his design philosophy for the F-16, he is (and it is purely my opinion) way behind the doctrine and rudiments of modern combat in much the same way as Alexander Graham Bell wouldn't "get" the smart phone.