F-35 Program - General Discussion

[RobWilliams]

Europe invested heavily in the Typhoon, I'll be interested to know what the UK and other duel F-35/Typhoon customers think once they start juggling both in their force mix. I know it was the STOVL that sold the Poms on the F-35 direction (Naval Air Requirement etc) but can't help but wonder if they will start to see more and more advantages once

Well partly it looks as though Italy sees the F-35 as their ground strike platform as they're unwilling to pay for the integration of systems like Storm Shadow. The UK on the other hand doesn't have a choice due to the gap created by their withdrawal so need PGMs like Storm Shadow and Brimstone 2.

It has been said by DefMin that if we were to do a split buy of F-35 with A/B then that only would be considered as a replacement for Typhoon in the 2030s. Once we have the pair in operation and test them against each other then we will get a better idea.

 

[ADMk2]

Well partly it looks as though Italy sees the F-35 as their ground strike platform as they're unwilling to pay for the integration of systems like Storm Shadow. The UK on the other hand doesn't have a choice due to the gap created by their withdrawal so need PGMs like Storm Shadow and Brimstone 2.

It has been said by DefMin that if we were to do a split buy of F-35 with A/B then that only would be considered as a replacement for Typhoon in the 2030s. Once we have the pair in operation and test them against each other then we will get a better idea.

The UK's integration of those systems also makes the Typhoon more competitive on the international market too...

 

[Air Force Brat]

The UK's integration of those systems also makes the Typhoon more competitive on the international market too...

From todays AFM Daily Report, Northrop Grumman delivers the 150th center fuselage section, AF68, on June 2, 2014. That's just 15 months after the 100th fuse section, AF46, thanks to its IAL, I believe that's in the Long Beach plant, and that folks is hustling, and that saves us all money. Go Northrup Grumman, and Go Long Beach. With the Marines bringing up IOC shortly and the Air Force bringing it up in 2016, things are moving right along for our little bird!

 

[aussienscale]

Here are a couple of interesting interviews with US Air Force General Hostage, with some comments pointing towards some of the not much talked about EW capability of the JSF

Gen. Mike Hostage On The F-35; No Growlers Needed When War Starts « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary

‘A God’s Eye View Of The Battlefield:’ Gen. Hostage On The F-35 « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary

Edit: Sorry just saw these posted on the USAF News Thread, playing catch ups on reading

 

[jack412]

It's f-35 stuff so it's ok here. It would be interesting to know how much of the flying computer is dedicated to EW stuff

On another matter, can you imagine the internet journalist/bloggers if this had happened to a f-35? Their silent acceptance over this incident will be telling.
Update: Russian T-50 PAK-FA fighter prototype catches fire - IHS Jane's 360

 

[gf0012-aust]

USNI feed:

Lockheed Martin has begun testing the final version of the F-35’s Block 2B software that the US. Marines need to declare the jet operational starting on June 9, company officials told reporters on Monday.

“We are putting the final capability version of the software on the aircraft today and expect to be flying today with 2B in its final drop of software,” Lorraine Martin, Lockheed’s F-35 executive vice president said. “It is possible we will learn things as we go through flight test throughout the summer and into the fall and we have provisioned with the JPO [Joint Program Office] that if we find something we’ve got capacity to go update the software.”

That means all of the capability needed for the U.S. Marine Corps’ initial operational capability (IOC) date with the F-35B short take-off vertical landing variant of the jet in July 2015 is currently flying in test. The software will be verified by the end of the year and released to the fleet in the second quarter of 2015, Martin said

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.

Martin says that the final Block 3F version of the software will be delivered on time despite concerns from the Joint Program Office that there could be a six-month delay. Martin said the Block 3F code is 80 percent complete with only 170,000 lines of code remaining. “We have plenty of time in my estimation to get the 3F software complete,” she said.

Martin said she has full confidence in the company’s current schedule because the plan is based on the “actual” past performance of the program in developing and testing the 2B software.

“We hit 2B essentially on the nose,” she noted.
If all goes as planned, the final Block 3F will finish testing at the end of 2016 and should be released to the fleet in the third quarter of 2017. The U.S. Navy will declare the F-35C operational with Block 3F software.

Meanwhile, Lockheed anticipates an eighth low-rate initial production contract to be signed in the summer of this year. Martin said that the price of the F-35 drop compared to the last production lot.

 

[colay]

It appears JPO's confidence in getting 2B ready for the Marines' IOC target date will be borne out, in stark contrast to gloomy predictions by the GAO and DOT&E. The main challenge now is retrofitting various fixes to F-35Bs so they can constitute a squadron of 10 aircraft at IOC.


Bogdan Says F-35B’s Modifications Main Risk To Marine IOC « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary
modifications-main-risk-to-marine-ioc/

...But he was much less confident that he could deliver the 10 aircraft by July next year. They all need modifications — some 96, a whole lot of them — and they also need to be flying and undergoing the tests necessary to qualify them at virtually the same time.

Bogdan and Lt. Gen. Robert Schmidle, the Marine’s deputy commandant for aviation, made clear it’;s going to be very challenging to deliver the planes on time. They need significant changes, such as new roll posts, before they can meet the qualifications of being ready for war...

 

[ADMk2]

It's f-35 stuff so it's ok here. It would be interesting to know how much of the flying computer is dedicated to EW stuff

On another matter, can you imagine the internet journalist/bloggers if this had happened to a f-35? Their silent acceptance over this incident will be telling.
Update: Russian T-50 PAK-FA fighter prototype catches fire - IHS Jane's 360

Yes but according to ELP we all missed the important point that it was capable of landing despite having one engine shut down...

No mention from ELP (of course) that the entire F-35 test program to date absolutely dwarfs the PAK-FA program in terms of hours flown and every single landing (thousands of them) has been 'code one' without an engine fire to be seen, nor any need to ever shut down the engine, except when the mission and taxiing is complete and I would hope that even ELP can see that the F135 engine has to be capable of performing in a far greater range of operating conditions than the PAK-FA...

Or perhaps in his world, vertical landing (and take off) as well as carrier ops doesn't place any extra strain on an engine over CTOL ops...

 

[gf0012-aust]

Yes but according to ELP we all missed the important point that it was capable of landing despite having one engine shut down...
.

thats a standard test for any twin.... hallelujah. so it passed a standard test vector albeit with a real dud engine

 

[jack412]

perhaps they will pertray it as a planed test point


edit dual post, I can't find the delete button

 

[weegee]

thats a standard test for any twin.... hallelujah. so it passed a standard test vector albeit with a real dud engine

Why is it taking so long for proposed engines to be installed and run with the PAKFA? Are they a brand new design? Or just an evolution? Was the f35 ever run without its current engine in the early days?

 

[John Fedup]

Why is it taking so long for proposed engines to be installed and run with the PAKFA? Are they a brand new design? Or just an evolution? Was the f35 ever run without its current engine in the early days?

The big advantage the West continues to have is superior jet engine technology, both commercially and militarily although the greed and stupidity of Western companies is eroding the commercial advantage with respect to China. Russia, has better tech than China and Russia is now reluctant to share their best technology. Russia has an aggressive engine upgrade plan for future Sukhoi jets but the status is not known (to me anyway). The F135 is derived from the F119 engine used in the Raptor, I don't know if a F-35 prototype was flown with a F119 engine...doubtful.

 

[ADMk2]

The big advantage the West continues to have is superior jet engine technology, both commercially and militarily although the greed and stupidity of Western companies is eroding the commercial advantage with respect to China. Russia, has better tech than China and Russia is now reluctant to share their best technology. Russia has an aggressive engine upgrade plan for future Sukhoi jets but the status is not known (to me anyway). The F135 is derived from the F119 engine used in the Raptor, I don't know if a F-35 prototype was flown with a F119 engine...doubtful.

The X-35 demonstrators flew with F119 derivative engines as the F135 had not yet been invented...

 

[colay]

IIRC the Russian attempts to build a 5Gen engine back to the USSR era in the early 80s and the AL-41F. This would have been a contemporary of the F119 that powers the Raptor. But the engine never made it to production and Russia says it's 5Gen motor for PAK-FA should be ready by the end if the decade, some 40 years having passed. Quite a bit of catching up to do.

 

[John Fedup]

IIRC the Russian attempts to build a 5Gen engine back to the USSR era in the early 80s and the AL-41F. This would have been a contemporary of the F119 that powers the Raptor. But the engine never made it to production and Russia says it's 5Gen motor for PAK-FA should be ready by the end if the decade, some 40 years having passed. Quite a bit of catching up to do.

I read an article somewhere stating that China was committing 20-30 billion dollars over the next decade or so develop world class military and commercial jet engines. As they are even further behind than the Russians it will be interesting to see what progress they make. I am guessing it will be faster the Russian progress as they seem to be better at stealing technology.

 

[Volkodav]

It is far harder to steal engineering processes that provide superior metallurgy and materials in general than it is to steal designs. That's why Russia is confident in maintaining their lead over China in jet engines and also why the West is still in front.

 

[John Fedup]

It is far harder to steal engineering processes that provide superior metallurgy and materials in general than it is to steal designs. That's why Russia is confident in maintaining their lead over China in jet engines and also why the West is still in front.

Yes, your comment is probably right with respect to materials engineering which in turn explains why China needs to invest so many billions into this endeavour.

 

[Volkodav]

Yes, your comment is probably right with respect to materials engineering which in turn explains why China needs to invest so many billions into this endeavour.

Just look at the recent industrial espionage case involving Chinas theft of a paint pigmentation process Dupont wouldn't sell or license to them. If you can't work it out yourself steal it.

 

[John Fedup]

Just look at the recent industrial espionage case involving Chinas theft of a paint pigmentation process Dupont wouldn't sell or license to them. If you can't work it out yourself steal it.

Like I said before, China seems to be much better stealing stuff than Russia ever was, at least from a cyber point of view.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Like I said before, China seems to be much better stealing stuff than Russia ever was, at least from a cyber point of view.

Don't know about this. Russia has been historically very good at acquiring (nuclear technology for example). However they need to do it less these days as they were near parity (generation behind?) in many areas with the west during periods of the cold war and have lots of unfinished development which is closer to completion than trying to steal designs etc. Russia is more about modernizing/finishing rather than copying. Russia has never really been short on intel when it required it, they aren't as clumsy as the Chinese when doing it either.

No one seems to have matched the F-135 or F119. China hasn't really demonstrated its free of Russian engines. I would imagine that may change in the next 10 years.