F-35 Up Close @ Nellis

[JSFfan]

it's a hard call to either listen to a dozen air forces or a forum guy

RAF - F-35 (Joint Strike Fighter)
The JCA will place the RAF at the forefront of fighter technology and will give it a true multi-role air system that will surpass the majority of other weapons systems in production today.
This will give the UK a world-beating land-based and sea-based joint expeditionary air power capability well into the middle of the century. When the JCA enters service, it will be able to conduct deep strike missions, into contemporary Integrated Air Defence Systems, against a myriad of target sets. Moreover, by conducting robust Integrated Air Operations, JSF will support friendly ground forces with close air support, long-range interdiction, anti-surface warfare and tactical reconnaissance.

[ftrplt]

If anyone thinks they are getting anything near a realistic picture, on either side of the good or bad fence, from this unclas website and the associated unclas links then they are just a little naive.

[SpazSinbad]

F-35 Program Status March 14, 2013

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_download-id-17262.html (120Kb)

"...Helmet/Software
- Pilots have flown more than 4,000 flights and 5,000 hours with the helmet and our feedback from pilots at Edwards, PAX River, Eglin and Ft. Worth, is they love this helmet. During the fall, dedicated tests were performed testing the improvements we’ve made and the results are positive.

- Block 1 and 2A software is supporting pilot training at Eglin.The same software will also be used to support flight operations at Yuma. Successful test results in flight test are seen at both Edwards and PAX.

- Only 10 percent of the software is still in development...."

[ColdCollation]

Re. post 21:

Well done JSFfan on regurgitating a policy aspiration. Now do the same with a reality.

[Bastardeux]

When the JCA enters service, it will be able to conduct deep strike missions, into contemporary Integrated Air Defence Systems, against a myriad of target sets.

I'll fix the quote for you:

When the F35 enters service, it won't be able to conduct deep strike missions, into contemporary Integrated Air Defence Systems until the software has actually been developed, heck it won't even be able to carry storm shadow or meteor inside it, never mind launch them.

[Courtney Mil]

Originally Posted by JSFfan

The JCA will place the RAF at the forefront of fighter technology and will give it a true multi-role air system that will surpass the majority of other weapons systems in production today. This will give the UK a world-beating land-based and sea-based joint expeditionary air power capability well into the middle of the century.

Yep! Straight out of someone's sales brocheur.

How about coming up with some facts instead? As we're discussing the helmet and its capability for mitigating the lack of rearward vis, why not take the opportunity to show us just what it can do. This is not particularly new technology, albeit a huge development of it. So, what picture does the pilot get whilst staring backwards at the seat headbox or the rear cockpit firewall? How well can he/she gauge target aspect, range, range rate and control surface deflection?

Do you think you might actually come up with some real answers or will this fall into your "too-difficult" box and remain ignored?

[SpazSinbad]

Fly the F-35 with a Bag Over Your Head

Ooops - info is for 'JSFan' (Mike Skaff is 'lead designer' of the F-35 cockpit)

A White Paper By: Lockheed Martin An Overview of The F-35 Cockpit

An Overview of The F-35 Cockpit | SLDInfo

"...Currently, the helmet is working well but with any new technology there are developmental challenges. Mitigation pathways for the issues facing the helmet have been developed and are being implemented. The fact is that the helmet is already in use and the reviews from the pilots are overwhelmingly positive. One pilot went so far as to say, “I could fly the whole mission with a helmet bag over the top of my head and just look through the sensors and fly the airplane safely.”

Another pilot recently stated, “I wouldn’t go back to a fixed HUD (Head-Up Display). It is clear that the potential of the helmet and what it’s going to be able to do for the war fighter is overwhelmingly positive and I would never want to go back."..."

The F-25 Cockpit: Enabling the Pilot as a Tactical Decision Maker
Michael L. Skaff | F-35 Pilot Vehicle Interface

Graphics from the .PPTX file at:
http://www.slideshare.net/robbinlair...ckpit/download
OR
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_download-id-15870.html (2.4Mb PDF)
__________________

Graphics will follow and in the meantime they can be viewed here:

Helmet-mounted displays :: F-16.net

[JSFfan]

Courtney Mil said Yep! Straight out of someone's sales brocheur.

that's not a nice thing to say about your RAF
RAF - F-35 (Joint Strike Fighter)

[WhiteOvies]

Another F-35 thread that quickly descends to a slanging match between those who are supporters of the jet and those that hate it. The F-35 is clearly a 'marmite' aircraft!

However, there are some elements of this programme that are classified for good reasons. What is released or leaked will always push the agenda of the individual who released it, sound bites from reports can be twisted either way.

Asking for the 'facts' is unlikely to get the response sought as no-one who actually works on this programme is going to just put all the details on a forum.

A lot of BS is out there on the F-35 and views are so entrenched that positive press releases from the JPO or LM will get dismissed as PR, whilst negative press will be seized on.

[Bastardeux]

Whiteovies, maybe because we've sacrificed so much for such a small number that anything other than exceptional will be unacceptable...

[WhiteOvies]

Bastardeaux - true, but then people need to give it a chance to become exceptional before writing it off. Typhoon has become a good aircraft for the UK but only because of a lot of hard work, expense and time delays. Should we have pulled out of Eurofighter in the 90's to invest more money into Jaguar or Tornado F3? The arguments are the same just for the next generation of aircraft.

[Rhino power]

JSFfan, how about Courtney's last sentence in post #26 then?

-RP

[Bastardeux]

Whiteovies, you're absolutely right, but how many people would honestly go through the whole typhoon saga again, instead of building a super F15E under license and in bigger numbers...and much faster? I think people recognise that we're about to go through it all over again, but on typhoon on steroids scale...it's got the vast majority of its testing to achieve and we're supposed to be putting in an order next year. Ask yourself "would a private company be buying this product before 2020?" And the answer is of course, no.

[JSFfan]

rhino, spaz put up the answer which some ignore

[WhiteOvies]

Bastardeaux,

Maybe, 20/20 hindsight etc! Of course 'buying American' in the form of JSF was supposed to mitigate against issues such as happened to Typhoon. Something ironic about that!

[LowObservable]

WO - Classified or not, the fact remains that the JSF has set records for overruns in cost and time, still has no announced IOC (having passed its original IOC date), and is likely to become "operational" with lots of capability missing and unpaid-for. And it doesn't have the 'Phoon's excuse that the Germans spent four years trying to scrap it.

And do I buy the line that there are all kinds of miraculous capes on this thing that have not been disclosed? Not really. Why? Because that wasn't the goal at the start of JAST - the goal was stealth + everyday fighter missions at a low LCC.

And after 16 years of development and the thick end of $50 billion, asking to be "given a chance to become exceptional" is a bit cheeky. I'd respect those involved more if they conceded that they had presided over a monstrous FUBAR, and asked very nicely for a second chance.

And press releases will always be picked apart, as are the speeches of politicians, and for the same reason.

[Courtney Mil]

Originally Posted by JSFfan

that's not a nice thing to say about your RAF

Of course, the RAF PR portal (I'd be delighted if anyone would show me otherwise) is hardly likely to be a reliable, "warts and all" account of a multi-billion pound program that the tax payers are funding, is it?

I would say that's very much an online PR brochure. You have reinforced my view.

For the record, AGAIN, I am not anti-JSF. I would love to see it work. My position here is that it isn't shaping up (or, maybe and hopefully hasn't YET shaped up) to be the all-singing, all-dancing master of all (FJ) trades. I know it does get slagged here occasionally, but I think some of the extremely pro lobby seem a little overly defensive, short on tolerance for any valid criticism of the program and failing to address fully the questions with anything other than the same old, somewhat unsubstantiated claims - claims that often read like a company, Government or Defence PR release.

I would rather see acknowledgements of the failings and real evidence of fixes. Real evidence does not mean phrases like

Mitigation pathways for the issues facing the helmet have been developed and are being implemented.

Which basically means we want you to believe that it's all going to be fine so that people don't start pulling out.

Now, how can that excellent helmet picture make up for all the visual cues that a pilot might want in what should be visual combat? Control surface deflection for example. The picture is good (actually excellent info to have on a guy outside a HUD FOV), but not a complete alternative to (ideally "also") being able to see the other guy.

[JSFfan]

Don't you read the links Spaz puts up?
April is when we find out about the helmet, they either continue with the bae one or not. indications are that they will drop it because the Israeli one is on track.
Oh by the way, I think it's night time, you can see the land at the bottom of the picture and the plane in sight would be very small

Fair and balanced isn't the first thing that comes to my mind when I read your posts

If you have followed it, software is the issue


@LO, as a percentage there are much better fubars and the f-35 is almost a model programme in comparison

[Archimedes]

Fair and balanced isn't the first thing that comes to my mind when I read your posts

Pot, kettle, radio check. Over.

[Courtney Mil]

Originally Posted by JSFfan

Don't you read the links Spaz puts up?

Yes, I did.

Originally Posted by JSFfan

If you have followed it, software is the issue

Yes, I know.

Originally Posted by JSFfan

the plane in sight would be very small

Yes it would and that is one reason why I am a fan of HMS/HMD/etc. But you you still won't see it for what it is through the rear cockpit wall when it gets closer.

Originally Posted by JSFfan

Fair and balanced isn't the first thing that comes to my mind when I read your posts

No need for that. In my previous post I thought I was setting out my stall in a very fair and balanced way. At least you read them, but you still ignore the difficult questions.