F-35 Multirole Joint Strike Fighter

[shanes_world_05]

A little too eager

Yeah sorry Gerry,

a bit of a stupid question.
I'll email them and see what the marketing arm of LM has too say.
Put it down to newbie over enthusiasm.
Having said that I think the maintainence aspect is one of the last things people thing of when they discuss these types of acquisitions.
Wondering what part of an aircraft typically consumes the most in man hour maintanence?
Again apologies for the silly previous post.

If i get anything worthy from LM I'll post it here (if i work that out).

Cheers,

Shane

 

[Gerry301]

Yeah sorry Gerry,

a bit of a stupid question.
I'll email them and see what the marketing arm of LM has too say.
Put it down to newbie over enthusiasm.
Having said that I think the maintainence aspect is one of the last things people thing of when they discuss these types of acquisitions.
Wondering what part of an aircraft typically consumes the most in man hour maintanence?
Again apologies for the silly previous post.

If i get anything worthy from LM I'll post it here (if i work that out).

Cheers,

Shane

Shane, no need to apologize, it was a good question that I am sure many wish they knew the answer to, including me. I wouldn't write to LM (I was being facisious) as the figures are at a minimum confidential and probobly not for public release.

Another way to gauge supportability would be the "mission capable" rates. Every airforce uses them and easy comparisons could be made. Then again the issue is usually confidential as it gives readiness rates. (what % of the fleet at any given time is able to complete its mission)

As I said before it will be at least a couple years before the MTBF (mean time between failure) that engineers subscibe to a part and the actual figures are known. If new parts fail faster than expected they will determine why and issue modifications to be done to correct the problem in the future. It happens often in a new system and becomes less often over time, but a normal sequence of events.

My guess on the item requiring the most man hour maintenance would be the engine. Avionics would be up there as well. But avionics covers a wide list of different items. Being new, wear and tear would not become a factor for several years at least, but would climb over the years.

I agree, maintenence is something most people don't take into consideration, but I can assure you the maintainers do and have had a lot of input for the F-35. So you will probobly have to wait and see over time the reports that will be made public and how well the aircraft is holding up.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Shane, no need to apologize, it was a good question that I am sure many wish they knew the answer to, including me. I wouldn't write to LM (I was being facisious) as the figures are at a minimum confidential and probobly not for public release.

Another way to gauge supportability would be the "mission capable" rates. Every airforce uses them and easy comparisons could be made. Then again the issue is usually confidential as it gives readiness rates. (what % of the fleet at any given time is able to complete its mission)

As I said before it will be at least a couple years before the MTBF (mean time between failure) that engineers subscibe to a part and the actual figures are known. If new parts fail faster than expected they will determine why and issue modifications to be done to correct the problem in the future. It happens often in a new system and becomes less often over time, but a normal sequence of events.

My guess on the item requiring the most man hour maintenance would be the engine. Avionics would be up there as well. But avionics covers a wide list of different items. Being new, wear and tear would not become a factor for several years at least, but would climb over the years.

I agree, maintenence is something most people don't take into consideration, but I can assure you the maintainers do and have had a lot of input for the F-35. So you will probobly have to wait and see over time the reports that will be made public and how well the aircraft is holding up.

You never know.

Someone on another forum asked L-M about internal A2A missile carriage on the F-35 and was given a response:

RE: A2A weapon load of the F-35

The F-35 will be able carry 4 missiles on internal stations and up to 10 additional missiles on external stations. To look at potential future increases in internal carriage capability, studies have been done to explore the use of advances in launcher technology, however, current mission analysis does not necessitate further exploration of these capabilities at this time.


Thanks,
Cheryl

Cheryl Limrick
F-35 Lightning II Program Office
Assistant Public Affairs Officer
200 12th S, Suite 600
Arlington,VA 22202
(o) 703-601-5503
(c) 703-608-8965
[email protected]

if one doesn't ask, one will most likely never know...

 

[wtsimpson7]

It will, the project is relied on by too many nations, the US included.

I don't see any indications of it not making it too production.

The B and C variants are guarantted to come into production at the very least.

Well cool.

 

[wtsimpson7]

I'm glad that the F-35 will make it through.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

RE: A2A weapon load of the F-35

The F-35 will be able carry 4 missiles on internal stations and up to 10 additional missiles on external stations. To look at potential future increases in internal carriage capability, studies have been done to explore the use of advances in launcher technology, however, current mission analysis does not necessitate further exploration of these capabilities at this time.


Thanks,
Cheryl

Cheryl Limrick
F-35 Lightning II Program Office
Assistant Public Affairs Officer

Its a good thing the PAOs at the F-35 PO aren't running the AFRL... Someone should tell them to stop designing >4 internal missile carriage options for the F-35. F-35As from Block V (>2020) should have 8 internal JDRADM stores.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Its a good thing the PAOs at the F-35 PO aren't running the AFRL... Someone should tell them to stop designing >4 internal missile carriage options for the F-35. F-35As from Block V (>2020) should have 8 internal JDRADM stores.

say what??? 8??? two dual launchers? I've heard there's a dual launcher in the works for the A2G pylon.

P.S. i read one of your pieces in ADBR on the AWD, are you still writing?

 

[Feanor]

If I email L&M will they respond? Or just ignore it?

Here's an interesting DID article covering the F-35 Israeli options.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/israel-plans-to-buy-over-100-f35s-02381/#more-2381

In particular this part looks like a major obstacle.

Feb 10/09: Aviation Week’s Ares publishes “JSF Secrets to Stay Secret”:

“After a long period of obtuse answers about whether foreign customers would be able to put their own systems in F-35 or customize the software themselves, the issue has been clarified.

“No,” says Maj. Gen. Charles Davis, program executive officers of the Joint Strike Fighter program…. They are going to buy aircraft that have basically the same capability as all the others,” Davis says. “They are trying to do a requirements analyses for future missions. Those mission [refinements] would be submitted through Lockheed Martin [and other contractors]. That [customization] is doable through software. It is not doable by Israelis sticking boxes in the airplane. [Elbit and Elta being involved] is not an option…”

The Jerusalem Post notes that this is a significant departure; Israeli F-15s and F-16s have all been modified to carry Israeli electronic warfare, radars, munitions, and command and control systems. Israel believes that electronic warfare in particular must be local and flexible, in order to counter local, evolving threats in a timely way, rather than suffering on someone else’s schedule. Its weapons are another significant area of departure, and have become successful exports while offering their own form of insurance against both countermeasures and foreign diktat. In this case, however:

”....the US refused to conduct the negotiations [on these issues] with the [Israeli] MOD until an announcement that it would procure the plane had been made. The announcement was made in October in an official request to the Pentagon.

A defense industry source familiar with the negotiations between Israel and the US said that the talks were “tough” but predicted that a deal would be reached in the coming months and that Israel would finally place an official order.”

Feb 7/09: In a talk at the Brooking Institution, JSF program head USAF Maj.-Gen. Charles R. Davis has admitted that that the average cost of F-35 fighters will range from $80 – 90 million in current dollars, but IDF sources tell the Jerusalem Post that they believe the cost per aircraft will exceed $100 million, “making it very difficult for Israel to follow through with its initial intention to purchase 75 aircraft.” Jerusalem Post.

 

[Aussie Digger]

If I email L&M will they respond? Or just ignore it?

Only one way to find out.

I suspect you will most definitely receive AN answer. Whether it is the one you were looking for or not is the question.

Others, who have no greater involvement in Defence matters than us, have received answers to direct questions about the F-35, as I illustrated, earlier...

 

[Grand Danois]

The Israelis wants to get an industrial/commercial backdoor into the most important fighter project around.

This without participating in the SDD or PFSD phases. They've effectively had no say in the definition and have had no entitlement to it. They have no entitlement through the procedural processes, nor does the F-35 lend itself to being modded by the Israelis on the technical level (integrated 5th gen core vs federated 4th gen). And of course also trying to shift US mil aid dollars from being spent in Israel instead of the US of A.

So the Israelis are getting a no on every level hence the whinging.

 

[wtsimpson7]

I wonder when the aircraft will really go into service. Maybe 2010? 2011? Idk.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

say what??? 8??? two dual launchers? I've heard there's a dual launcher in the works for the A2G pylon.

Four AMRAAM sized stores per bay in one configuration (I said nothing about two dual launchers) and in another "rule breaking" configuration six AMRAAM sized stores per bay. There is heaps of volume in each of those F-35A/C bays (less in the F-35B). There is also structural support for other options than the current inboard AMRAAM store and outboard JDAM/JSOW store.

P.S. i read one of your pieces in ADBR on the AWD, are you still writing?

Yeap all the time, though haven't had anything to do with ADBR since October 2007.

 

[OPSSG]

Looks like the Koreans are also considering the F-35B to fly from its 14,000-ton Dokdo large-deck landing ship, along with the F-35A air force version, as part of mid- and long-term force improvement plans, a source said (Korean news link in English provided).

"The move comes as the country's arms procurement agency, Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), is preparing to open the third-phase F-X fighter acquisition program in the coming years, he said. DAPA said earlier that it would launch the next-phase F-X bid by 2011, with the aim of deploying the planes between 2014 and 2019...

South Korea's Navy launched its first Dokdo Landing Platform Helicopter (LPH 6111) in 2005 and wants to have one more Dokdo-class carriers by 2016. The 199-meter-long, 31-meter-wide vessel is the largest helicopter transporter in Asia and will serve as a light aircraft carrier to orchestrate the Korean Navy's future strategic mobile squadron.

Experts have said when the landing ship is equipped with a ski jump module, vertical or short takeoff and landing aircraft such as the Harrier or the F-35B will be able to be launched from the deck."​

If Korea acquires the F-35B, they will be a major naval power too (given their ambitions naval building program). Looks like the prior Israeli sticker price shock on the F-35B quoted price has not put them off.

 

[nevidimka]

The Israelis wants to get an industrial/commercial backdoor into the most important fighter project around.

This without participating in the SDD or PFSD phases. They've effectively had no say in the definition and have had no entitlement to it. They have no entitlement through the procedural processes, nor does the F-35 lend itself to being modded by the Israelis on the technical level (integrated 5th gen core vs federated 4th gen). And of course also trying to shift US mil aid dollars from being spent in Israel instead of the US of A.

So the Israelis are getting a no on every level hence the whinging.

Could this indicate a change of tactic by US? The Israeli's does a lot on the F 15/F16 platform, that maybe US is not very happy about and they do not want the same to happen with the F 35?

 

[Grand Danois]

Could this indicate a change of tactic by US? The Israeli's does a lot on the F 15/F16 platform, that maybe US is not very happy about and they do not want the same to happen with the F 35?

I don't think it has anything to do with US unhappines with the Israelis, but rather tough bargaining, and a product which doesn't lend itself very well to being modded.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Only one way to find out.

I suspect you will most definitely receive AN answer. Whether it is the one you were looking for or not is the question.

Others, who have no greater involvement in Defence matters than us, have received answers to direct questions about the F-35, as I illustrated, earlier...

I sent them emails before but they did not respond.....

I must have not said it right or something.

 

[PeterCrisp]

Has any decision been made as to exactly when the UK will start to get the F-35?

 

[Grim901]

Has any decision been made as to exactly when the UK will start to get the F-35?

The UK hasn't placed an order yet so it could all change, but as tier 1 partner it was given an early delivery slot, which it then gave to someone else. I think initial production of the UK's fighters is starting in 2015 with full scale deliveries planned for 2017.

 

[energo]

On another note, a good article by Andy Nativi in the latest issue of Aviation Week & Space Technology. An overview of the F-35s capabilites and a couple of interesting performance metrics. For instance a previous (though not conclusive) estimate for dash speed is Mach 1.67 and a 55 degree AOA capability, or roughly twice the F-16. Lockheed Martin, likely using conservative numbers until the envelope is fully explored. Who said it couldn't fly?

B. Bolsøy
Oslo

 

[Grim901]

On another note, a good article by Andy Nativi in the latest issue of Aviation Week & Space Technology. An overview of the F-35s capabilites and a couple of interesting performance metrics. For instance a previous (though not conclusive) estimate for dash speed is Mach 1.67 and a 55 degree AOA capability, or roughly twice the F-16. Lockheed Martin, likely using conservative numbers until the envelope is fully explored. Who said it couldn't fly?

B. Bolsøy
Oslo

The Australians. No one else seems to have been moaning much about it's performance, if you ignore the defpro articles that are so far up the F22 they can see out of it's cockpit .

It's not going to be as manoeuvrable as some fighters, but it's primary mission is a strike fighter, so dogfighting capability is a secondary consideration. I don't care how manoeuvrable an Su-35 is, I wouldn't want to be up against an F35 with a bay full of Meteors.