F-35 Program - General Discussion

[John Fedup]

This article speculates on the purpose of the mirror chrome like coating found on F-35C and also on a couple of Raptors. An interesting mystery that will likely take sometime to understand.

Check Out These Amazing Photos Of The Second F-35C Sporting A Mirror-Like Coating

The second "chrome" F-35C was photographed at Point Mugu recently. A new F-35C, airframe BuNo 168842, Modex 105, sporting a mirror-like coating, was

theaviationist.com

 

[Terran]

I gotta say, I am loving the retro aspect of the Metallic finish. I know that they have to have a practical reason though.

 

[John Fedup]

A good example of the rare earth problem wrt China. I wonder if China was aware the alloy was being used in the F-35.

F-35 deliveries suspended after finding Chinese alloys in magnets - Breaking Defense

It is unclear when F-35s with magnets made from the new alloy will begin rolling off the production line, and if the Chinese alloy is found to violate defense acquisition regulations, it would take a national defense waiver for deliveries to resume.

breakingdefense.com

 

[seaspear]

This article suggests that the U.S.A.F may have to make a choice between a more advanced engine for the F35-A bringing increased capabilities to the aircraft into its fleet which would mean seventy less fighters ,but of course there is some controversy over this and Pratt and Whitney have their own plans for the international operators of the f35 there will be some interesting choices ahead
New adaptive engine or fewer F-35s? Kendall says it’s time to choose (defensenews.com)
The F-35 engine is at a crossroads, with billions of dollars for industry at stake (defensenews.com)
Pratt Pushes Alternative to New Adaptive Engine for F-35 - Air & Space Forces Magazine (airforcemag.com)

 

[StingrayOZ]

The advanced cycle engine IMO is easily worth it.

Particularly for any sort of Pacific conflict where the range of basically any modern fighter just isn't enough, and the US is likely to have a bit of a bomber shortage if they started running high intensity ops at pacific ranges (particularly if SK, Japan and Guam are high risk bases and most air has to be located further away) with their older bomber fleet. Also problematic if they aren't being escorted.

Shame that the B will have to be left behind. But the A and C variants will benefit tremendously.

I don't see 70 planes dramatically changing the the state of play for the USAF. I am sure many international customers like Japan, Australia, etc will want to take up options on advanced cycle engines if they were made available.

IMO I think there is too much focus on the European theatre and its needs tend to dominate acquisition thinking. Fighters today are very short ranged. How many modern fighters could match a P-51 nearly 3000km range? Back in WW2 the US had access to more airfields and more carriers. The F-35 has generally a range improvement over some of the earlier aircraft, but we are still only catching up to a P-51 with drop tanks.

J-20 would seem to have a much greater range than most western fighters. Regardless of what its airframe or stealth technology, if you don't have the range, you can't fly there.

Adaptive cycle engines would go a long way to addressing that shortfall.

 

[John Fedup]

The advanced cycle engine IMO is easily worth it.

Particularly for any sort of Pacific conflict where the range of basically any modern fighter just isn't enough, and the US is likely to have a bit of a bomber shortage if they started running high intensity ops at pacific ranges (particularly if SK, Japan and Guam are high risk bases and most air has to be located further away) with their older bomber fleet. Also problematic if they aren't being escorted.

Shame that the B will have to be left behind. But the A and C variants will benefit tremendously.

I don't see 70 planes dramatically changing the the state of play for the USAF. I am sure many international customers like Japan, Australia, etc will want to take up options on advanced cycle engines if they were made available.

IMO I think there is too much focus on the European theatre and its needs tend to dominate acquisition thinking. Fighters today are very short ranged. How many modern fighters could match a P-51 nearly 3000km range? Back in WW2 the US had access to more airfields and more carriers. The F-35 has generally a range improvement over some of the earlier aircraft, but we are still only catching up to a P-51 with drop tanks.

J-20 would seem to have a much greater range than most western fighters. Regardless of what its airframe or stealth technology, if you don't have the range, you can't fly there.

Adaptive cycle engines would go a long way to addressing that shortfall.

The advanced cycle engine is coming (NGAD and probably B-21 eventually as well) regardless of whether it will find its way into the F-35. Clearly there are benefits for its use in the A and C versions of the F-35. Perhaps there is a case for both the advanced cycle and the enhanced F135. If the enhanced F135 is less expensive then some A users who don’t need the extra range may opt for it and the F-35B gets a better engine as well. Two engine programs is more expensive but having an improved manufacturing base is essential and having a backup option in case of vendor screw ups is a good thing.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Fighter supremacy is one of the key strengths of western/US military supremacy.

The original plan was for the enhanced engine to be fitted to all US F-35's by 2027. That magical date, 2027, which seems to be a magical date for dozens of programs, seem very difficult to meet.

It may be worth pursuing both programs so there is perhaps a faster solution that can be put in play.
AFAIK neither solution will work with the F-35B. One of the key issues is an additional 1000lb of weight. But that doesn't mean benefits from either program can't filter down at a later stage even if it doesn't get the full package. It doesn't mean at some stage, that 1000lb of weigh from the payload might not make it a priority. If it is about CAS, then carrying lighter weapons for longer may be a useful option.

The F-35B is also more or less a shorter ranged fighter, with the advantage, it can be located closer to the action by its vertical lift advantage.

For the Pacific its a huge problem. China has the kind of stand off capability that will keep US carriers operating quite far from its coast in a conflict. China wants to project power outwards past Japan, Philippines, Guam, Borneo. Having the US be out of range its a great way to neutralise the USAF and the USN.

China is developing long ranged fighters, vertical take off fighters and extremely long ranged missiles for air to air and air to ground. China has a significant number of Island bases and will have a significant number of carriers and a huge fleet of 5th gen fighters by 2030. The US will for the first time since WW2 face a numerically similar sized force, with peer level capability, with probably a significant edge in range. Not sure how the US army or marines feel about fighting without air supremacy or naval supremacy and perhaps not even dominance, perhaps more like parity.

I dunno, given the fairly low costs of the programs and the sales success of the F-35 and the fact the F-35 engines will probably power 6th gen aircraft and drones, it seems like they should be green lighting this ASAP.

 

[John Fedup]

Fighter supremacy is one of the key strengths of western/US military supremacy.

The original plan was for the enhanced engine to be fitted to all US F-35's by 2027. That magical date, 2027, which seems to be a magical date for dozens of programs, seem very difficult to meet.

It may be worth pursuing both programs so there is perhaps a faster solution that can be put in play.
AFAIK neither solution will work with the F-35B. One of the key issues is an additional 1000lb of weight. But that doesn't mean benefits from either program can't filter down at a later stage even if it doesn't get the full package. It doesn't mean at some stage, that 1000lb of weigh from the payload might not make it a priority. If it is about CAS, then carrying lighter weapons for longer may be a useful option.

The F-35B is also more or less a shorter ranged fighter, with the advantage, it can be located closer to the action by its vertical lift advantage.

For the Pacific its a huge problem. China has the kind of stand off capability that will keep US carriers operating quite far from its coast in a conflict. China wants to project power outwards past Japan, Philippines, Guam, Borneo. Having the US be out of range its a great way to neutralise the USAF and the USN.

China is developing long ranged fighters, vertical take off fighters and extremely long ranged missiles for air to air and air to ground. China has a significant number of Island bases and will have a significant number of carriers and a huge fleet of 5th gen fighters by 2030. The US will for the first time since WW2 face a numerically similar sized force, with peer level capability, with probably a significant edge in range. Not sure how the US army or marines feel about fighting without air supremacy or naval supremacy and perhaps not even dominance, perhaps more like parity.

I dunno, given the fairly low costs of the programs and the sales success of the F-35 and the fact the F-35 engines will probably power 6th gen aircraft and drones, it seems like they should be green lighting this ASAP.

This link says P&W’s EEP will be applicable to all three variants. Like GE, they also have an an AETP engine. Unlike the USN’s LCS, two engine variants has merit.

Can GE finally break through on the F-35 engine at a ‘critical decision point’? - Breaking Defense

GE sees new F-35 performance demands and a refocused American defense strategy as a chance for its new XA100 engine.

breakingdefense.com

 

[StingrayOZ]

This link says P&W’s EEP will be applicable to all three variants. Like GE, they also have an an AETP engine. Unlike the USN’s LCS, two engine variants has merit.

Can GE finally break through on the F-35 engine at a ‘critical decision point’? - Breaking Defense

GE sees new F-35 performance demands and a refocused American defense strategy as a chance for its new XA100 engine.

breakingdefense.com

There definately seems to be two opposite statements by those defence suppliers, to which one of them said...

Pratt & Whitney, meanwhile, is adamant that neither the XA100 nor its own AETP engine, the XA101, will work on the F-35B.

“No matter what anyone tells you, it’s not going to fit inside a STOVL,” Latka said. “There’s a third duct in the XA engines, both ours and our competitor’s, and that physically doesn’t work. … There’s still a tremendous amount of design work to do on the aircraft because the new engine is 1,000 pounds more, and all of that structural analysis hasn’t been done yet.”

Tweedie declined to confirm how much heavier the XA100 is but said GE has worked with F-35 maker Lockheed Martin and the Air Force to ensure that the added weight will be “certainly tolerable and not a challenge from an integration perspective.”

GE, Pratt & Whitney Publicly Pitch F-35 Engine Plans as Decision Looms | Air & Space Forces Magazine

Engine makers GE Aviation and Pratt & Whitney are competing for the future of the F-35 engine, as the Air Force considers a change.

www.airforcemag.com

So it would seem any upgrade for the F-35B would be later on and face its own challenges, but A and C should be drop in replacements, nearly. I guess this is to be expected the F-35B taking off short and landing vertically is quite a feat. Certainly adding weight, would be a challenge for that platform, where on the others it would be pretty much a non-issue.

Interesting to see the focus on thermal management. IMO we will probably see the F-35 develop into a 5.5 gen platform during its life. Where we start to see advances over conventional 5th gen, like advanced cycle engines with significantly longer range, power and thermal capabilities, putting it truely into a different class over 4.5/5 th gen.

 

[John Fedup]

Both vendors’ AETP options are still works in progress. Highly unlikely either can be easily modified for the F-35B. The most urgent requirement is a significant power increase for the Block IV upgrade. The EEP F135 offers this along with some kinematic improvements. More importantly EEP supposedly is F-35B compatible. The AETP versions provide significant kinematic performance improvements in addition to extra power output for Block IV. The JSF concept seemed a great idea at time but this engine upgrade shows otherwise. The B needs an engine that meets the power requirements for Block IV but AETP offers huge advantages for the A and C versions. IMHO this requires both engine programs to go forward.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Both vendors’ AETP options are still works in progress. Highly unlikely either can be easily modified for the F-35B. The most urgent requirement is a significant power increase for the Block IV upgrade. The EEP F135 offers this along with some kinematic improvements. More importantly EEP supposedly is F-35B compatible. The AETP versions provide significant kinematic performance improvements in addition to extra power output for Block IV. The JSF concept seemed a great idea at time but this engine upgrade shows otherwise. The B needs an engine that meets the power requirements for Block IV but AETP offers huge advantages for the A and C versions. IMHO this requires both engine programs to go forward.

There may be advantages to funding both developments.

I don't see why the F-35 needs kinematic improvements and more power. Particularly for the A and C. Its 5th gen, its already pretty fast, quick acceleration and as agile as a F-16. More important imo is the blk IV EW capability, long range muntions and improvements to range.

IMO range is the greatest weakness of western fighters, if you can't get there a WW1 bi-plane wins. F-35's aren't going to get carved up burning and turning, they will get carved up when they struggle to operate at maximum range and flying past bingo fuel and come under pressure when trying to refuel while in range of opposing forces.

I know, not a concern for Europe. But no one other than western powers are fielding 5th fighters in Europe. Who are they fighting? Themselves?

If Taiwan kicks off, they won't by flying F-35's from Taiwan to defend it. They will unlikely be flying in from lower Japan, Guam or South Korea either. US carriers won't be able to be nearby (within the F-35 combat radius) either. E3 and E2 are not able to detect J20's either. So the US will be effectively flying blind, against an aircraft that out ranges them, has superior ranged weapons, while maybe not F-22 stealthy, far stealthier than than a SU57, and they will be meeting them in number with over 200 already operational and ~75-100 being added every year. Being supported by hundreds of 4th gen fighters, land and sea based missile systems and radars..

US has a real effort on its hand to get its new E7's, the advanced engines in service, blk IV in service by 2027. Even if they do, that, they will then only reaching near parity from a space of deficit.

From an Asia pacific point of view, the US has some real challenges, and adaptive cycle engines, E7's and munitions as well as other technologies are urgent programs. In that context, F-35B's will more likely defensive home fighters taking off from damaged and shortened runways in Japan/ Guam, range will likely be less of a focus for them, but A & C will be essential, particularly with the shelving of F-22 (late 2020) and likely wind down of B1 programs (starting later 2020's). Meeting that 2027 timeframe for so many ambitious projects will be challenging.

 

[John Fedup]

Agree about range, the 30% increase provided by AETP is the biggest reason why an engine change is even being considered.

 

[John Fedup]

Thompson lists five reasons why the enhanced F135 engine should become the only choice for the F-35. While cost and supply chain hassles will result in an adaptive cycle engine selection, a 30% range increase will place a 14 billion CVN at a safer distance. Don’t think China will be abandoning jet engine development any time soon either.

Five Reasons Buying An All-New Engine For The Air Force’s F-35 Fighters Is A Real Bad Idea

Replacing the F135 engine on Air Force F-35 fighters would impose a huge cost burden while undermining efficiencies built into the joint program.

www.forbes.com

 

[moon_light]

Some super detail F-35 RCS simulation

F-35A Radar scattering simulation

Introduction F-35 is the backbone of American stealth fighter fleet, it is intended to replace F-16, F-18C/D, Harrier and A-10. There are currently 3 versions of F-35 which are F-35A, F-35B and F-3…

basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com

@moon_light

Nice images….. but this is essentially a one liner with no content. If you are going to post such images please provide comments on what it means

alexsa

 

[John Fedup]

Some updated information about GE’s AETP program. GE thinks a F-35B variant XA100 engine is doable and fully meets want B operators would like to see in the future. Despite the likely additional cost and some risks, if the performance gains are realistic AETP should have a future in the F-35. Regardless, the XA100 and P&W’s XA101 will be part of the NGAP program which parallels the NGAD program….probably some other NG?? programs out there as well.

XA100 Next Generation Adaptive Engine Could Now Power F-35B, Too

General Electric is now pitching its advanced XA100 engine for all three F-35 variants and has an eye on future aircraft programs, too.

www.thedrive.com

 

[At lakes]

Stuff

www.stuff.co.nz

Digital media outlet "Stuff" had an article on a USMC F35 landing at Fort Worth unfortunately things did not go as planned the pilot is safe and well and most likely filling out of mountain of paper work

 

[OPSSG]

New AN/APG-85 radar for the F-35

One of the first mentions of the AN/APG-85 appeared in a Defense News. Reporter Stephen Losey noted that US$921 million had been added to the USAF’s wishlist for FY2023 to procure 7 more “Block 4 F-35As with the AN/APG-85 radar from Lot 17.”

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1610396005467566080

F-35 Build Rate will drop from Lot 15 to Lot 17

• 145 Lot 15
• 127 Lot 16
• 126 Lot 17 (USAF option for 7 with AN/APG-85)

The AN/APG-85 is currently slated to be installed only on all Block 4 A/B/C jets. This would also line up with the USAF FY2023 unfunded priority list presentation slides.

The latest DoD agreement includes 145 aircraft for Lot 15, 127 for Lot 16, and up to 126 for the Lot 17 contract option, including the first F-35 aircraft for Belgium, Finland and Poland.

 

[SolarisKenzo]

Lot 15 Is basically close to full-capacity production.
An article from RID 1/23 ( paper ) by G.Barone visiting Forth Worth and Cameri reported an annual production capacity of 180 planes ( 140/y Forth Worth, 26/y Cameri, 14/y Japan ).
The drop in build rate, while not being a huge cut, Is still an interesting news...

 

[seaspear]

Since 2017 when the R.A.A.F confirmed all of its F35-A fighters had been upgraded to block 3f have further upgrades been planned , and is there a long term plan to upgrade to block 4?

 

[StingrayOZ]

Technical refresh starts next year. Which is the basic hardware block 4 will need.

So as I understand it there is a big gulf and gap between blk 3f and Blk 4.
The new computer is 40 times faster with 20 times more memory. So you can't just backport it onto the older hardware. It is a huge hardware/software leap. Think Windows 2000 to Windows 7. blk3 is a dead end, there isn't much more it can do.

Crucial F-35 Computing Upgrade Sees New Cost Overrun and Delay

Cost overruns on a project to upgrade Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35 cockpit computer have risen another $236 million, nearly doubling the size of the original $712 million contract, US officials said.

www.bloomberg.com

The RAAF in theory could start updating hardware late next year. The TR3 is in flight qualification, but that isn't expected to be particularly risky or slow. I would expect they might wait for the Americans to work out the TR3 upgrade details and any issues, so possibly from 2024-5. But there may be snags if it requires new display and other components that are still being finalised.