This is the trap that DOT&E has set. He said that the only way that they can meet the deadline is to cut corners. So it's either meet schedule & give DOT&E fuel for the fire or make them happy and delay the F-35. Lose, Lose
F-35 Program - General Discussion
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
There is no reason for delay. At this point it's all software and the JPO will meet at the end of SDD to determine if they want to do an interim "patch" after 3F.
It can depend on the configuration of the aircraft. Say both aircraft are clean (that is to say, no pylons/external stores such as drop tanks, missiles etc), then there could be scenarios where say the F-16 might be at a turning advantage to the F-35. However, the reality of the situation is that this is not how air to air combat works - see, the F-16 has to bring along external stores to do its job. So everything from its turn rate to acceleration to everything else is going to be affected by the fact that, in an air-to-air configuration, it's probably going to be carrying 2-4 AMRAAM missiles, a pair of Sidewinders, and most likely a 2-3 drop tanks of fuel. All of this is carried externally, and as I said, all of it will affect the performance of the aircraft.
On the other hand, the F-35 will be capable of entering a similar situation with a much greater internal fuel load than the F-16, thus minimising the need for external tanks, along with an internal carriage capacity of 4 AMRAAMs (and I believe there's a plan to increase this capacity to 6). So the F-35 will enter the engagement with similar fuel and weapon loads, only without having to carry external stores and thus negatively impact performance. So yes, a clean F-16 might out-turn a clean F-35, but the difference is a clean F-16 is significantly limited in what it can actually do, while the F-35 can maintain performance while also carrying a useful payload.
Honestly these days it's the performance of short-range missiles that is becoming the deciding factor in any kind of dogfight. Missiles like AIM-9X and ASRAAM are moving at Mach 3.5+, and are capable of turns in excess of 40 Gs. When you consider most manned fighters are limited to 9 Gs by default, and that in a turning fight a manned fighter is certainly not going to be moving anywhere near the speeds achieved by modern missiles, "winning" really becomes a case of who shoots first, which naturally follows who sees who first. In that particular competition, I'll put my money on the aircraft with cutting edge sensor fusion and wide band signature management, regardless of who can out-turn the other. We live in an age of helmet mounted missile sights and lock on after launch capability - you don't have to get on their tail, just make sure you see them first, and let your missile do all the hard work.
This is a pretty low-quality video, but it should give you an idea of what we're talking about with these missiles, and what's called "high off-boresight" capability.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpBpzuDRt0A
I'm not sure of the specific performance differences between the engines mentioned, though I'm sure someone on here could help. As far as maximum altitude goes for a given platform, I would be careful with publicly available numbers as I'm quite sure they're inaccurate. For example, back in the days of the F-22 fever, when it seemed as though no other aircraft would possibly do for any country looking to replace their combat jets, there were some people in the public debate who made a big deal of the F-22's publicly quoted operational ceiling of 50,000 feet. The idea was that a supercruising Raptor at this altitude could "loft" its AMRAAMs further than the F-35, which was not designed to attain supercruise and had a publicly quoted flight ceiling of (I believe) 40,000 feet.
However, a little bit of research would be quickly revealed that flight at 50,000 feet wasn't some magic trick reserved only for the F-22. In fact operational combat jets have been capable of reaching 50,000 feet for decades - the F-4 Phantom is one example, and I believe there were examples of F-8 Crusaders getting up that high. The MiG-25 and MiG-31 interceptors would have had no problem whatsoever attaining 50,000 feet, and I'm sure an appropriately equipped F-15 could do it while barely breaking a sweat.
Of course, the big difference would be the performance of the various aircraft types while at that altitude. I'm sure if you put together a series of exercises to undertake at high altitude, the results for the F-4, the F-15 and the F-22 would all look very different. How effectively would an F-4 operate at 50,000 feet? I don't know. All I know is that the aircraft has attained that altitude repeatedly during its service life.
That was a really long winded way to say:
a) don't take publicly available figures on altitude (or anything else remotely sensitive such as missile range) as gospel.
b) context is important - there's a difference between attaining an altitude and operating effectively at that altitude.
c) I suspect the F-35 will be quite comfortable operating at higher altitudes than prior generation aircraft, regardless of information in the public domain.
d) with such a comprehensive sensor fit and the ability to deploy weapons targeted via offboard datalink, I think the F-35 will do quite a lot of its air-to-ground mission at a higher altitude than previous generations of combat aircraft. One could perhaps draw a parallel to the P-8 Poseidon, which is capable of undertaking the ASW mission at altitudes that are, compared to its predecessors, truly staggeringallel to the P-8 Poseidon, which is capable of actively pursuring the ASW mission at altitudes so far in advance of its predecessors as to be staggering.
LM and JPO positions will track closely with each other.
Here's the official JPO reponse to the DOT&E Report.
2015 DOT&E Report - Public Response Statement
29 Jan 2016 Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, F-35 Program Executive Officer
"The independent program review from the OSD Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) is an annual occurrence, and the process was executed with unfettered access to information and with the full cooperation of the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO). There were no surprises in the report; all of the issues mentioned are well-known to the JPO, the U.S. services, international partners and our industry team.
Once again, the annual DOT&E report points out the progress being made by the program. This includes the U.S. Marine Corps declaring Initial Operational Capability (IOC) in July 2015. The USMC declared IOC with Block 2B software because it provides increased initial warfighting capability. Marine F-35s have the necessary weapons to conduct close air support, air interdiction and limited suppression/destruction of enemy air defense missions. Currently Marine F-35s can carry the following weapons internally in stealth mode – the AIM-120, GBU-32 JDAM, and GBU-12 Paveway II. When the developmental program is complete in the fall of 2017, all F-35 variants will be able to carry more than 18,000 pound of munitions internally and externally.
2015 ended with more than 150 operational (fleet and operational test) and 18 developmental test jets operating at 10 U.S. locations and the Italian Final Assembly and Checkout (FACO) facility in Cameri, Italy. Together, the entire fleet has flown more than 48,000 hours.
The program delivered 45 aircraft in 2015 – the most aircraft delivered in one year in program history. These deliveries included the first international delivery from the Italian FACO, and bring the overall operational delivery total to 154. Along with Italy, Norway took its first delivery in 2015. Five partner nations - Australia, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom - along with the U.S. Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy, now fly the F-35. Israel and Japan will take their first deliveries in 2016.
Pilot and maintainer training increased substantially in 2015. More than 250 pilots including the first two for Australia, Italy and Norway respectively entered training. More than 2,800 maintainers are qualified to service the jet, with a majority graduating from the F-35 Aircraft Training Center at Eglin AFB, Florida.
Although the DOT&E report is factually accurate, it does not fully address program efforts to resolve known technical challenges and schedule risks. It is the F-35 Joint Program Office’s responsibility to find developmental issues, resolve them and execute with the time and budget we have been given. Our government and industry team has a proven track record of overcoming technical challenges discovered during developmental and operational testing and fleet operations, and delivering on program commitments. A few recent examples of issues that are resolved include the F-35C tailhook, the F135 engine rub, and F-35B STOVL Auxiliary Air Inlet door. The F-35C has now “caught the wire” more than 200 times at sea, the engine rub fix is incorporated on the production line and delivered engines are being retrofitted, and the F‑35B has performed more than 1,000 vertical landings safely.
Currently, mission systems software and the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS), are the program’s top technical risks. Disciplined systems engineering processes addressing the complexity of writing, testing and integrating mission systems and ALIS software have improved the delivery of capability, although challenges remain. There is more work to accomplish in both mission systems software and ALIS before the end of the development program.
Continuing on 2015’s results, Block 3i software was released for flight test in May 2015 to support the U.S. Air Force IOC declaration later in 2016. Coding for the final development software block (known as 3F) was completed in June 2015 and the software has been released for flight testing. Additional updates are planned throughout the year with 3F tracking for completion by the end of the System Development and Demonstration Program (SDD) in the fall of 2017 in order to support U.S. Navy IOC in 2018 and the start of IOT&E. Throughout testing, interim software test builds are provided to both the developmental test and operational test teams allowing them to experience the software as early as possible to provide feedback to our teams. As of Dec. 31, the program completed 80 percent of SDD test points and is on track for completion in the fourth quarter of 2017.
At the completion of the F-35 SDD program, the objective is to deliver full Block 3F capabilities (Mission Systems, Weapons & Flight Envelope) for the Services and International customers. The F-35 program will continue to closely coordinate with the JSF Operational Test Team (JOTT) and DOT&E on key test planning and priorities to successfully meet key SDD program milestones and objectives.
The flight test program made significant progress in maturing the capability of the aircraft during 2015. For example, the program:
- Completed the third F-35B sea trial aboard the USS Wasp and the second F-35C sea trial aboard USS Dwight D. Eisenhower for a total of five sea trials since 2013.
- Completed six-months of climatic response testing at the McKinley Climatic Lab at Eglin AFB, Florida. During these tests, the jet operated in ranges from 120 degrees to minus 40 degrees and various ranges of humidity and weather conditions.
- Completed F-35A 3F software high angle of attack and performance testing and continued envelope expansion for all variant 3F software.
- Achieved aerial refueling certification with the Australian tanker (KC-30A) and Italian tanker (KC-767), including night operations.
- Completed GAU-22 25mm ground gun fire testing and began airborne testing on the F-35A.
- To date, completed 90 weapon separations - GBU-12, GBU-31, GBU-32, AIM-120, GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb, U.K. Paveway IV, and first F-35 AIM-9X. This includes 18 for 18 successful live fires of AMRAAM, JDAM, and GBU-12s.
- To date, completed 17 Weapon Delivery Accuracy events (GBU-12, GBU-31, GBU-32, and AIM-120)
- To date, successfully verified F-35 low observable stealth signature 146 times with both flight test and operational jets.
These accomplishments prove the basic design of the F-35 is sound and test results reinforce our confidence in the ultimate performance the U.S. and its partners and allies value greatly.
As a reminder, the F-35 program is still in its developmental phase. This is the time when issues are expected to be discovered and solutions are implemented to maximize the F-35’s capability for the warfighter. While the development program is 80 percent complete, we recognize there are known deficiencies that must be corrected and there remains the potential for future findings. Our commitment to overcoming challenges is unwavering. The Joint Program Office will continue to work with the F-35 enterprise to make corrections and improvements as quickly as possible. At the completion of the F-35 development program, the objective is to deliver full Block 3F capabilities (Mission Systems, Weapons & Flight Envelope) for the Services and International customers. We thank the DOT&E for their assistance as we remain focused on developing, delivering and sustaining the world’s finest multi-role 5th generation aircraft."
2015 DOT&E Report - Public Response Statement
29 Jan 2016 Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, F-35 Program Executive Officer
"The independent program review from the OSD Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) is an annual occurrence, and the process was executed with unfettered access to information and with the full cooperation of the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO). There were no surprises in the report; all of the issues mentioned are well-known to the JPO, the U.S. services, international partners and our industry team.
Once again, the annual DOT&E report points out the progress being made by the program. This includes the U.S. Marine Corps declaring Initial Operational Capability (IOC) in July 2015. The USMC declared IOC with Block 2B software because it provides increased initial warfighting capability. Marine F-35s have the necessary weapons to conduct close air support, air interdiction and limited suppression/destruction of enemy air defense missions. Currently Marine F-35s can carry the following weapons internally in stealth mode – the AIM-120, GBU-32 JDAM, and GBU-12 Paveway II. When the developmental program is complete in the fall of 2017, all F-35 variants will be able to carry more than 18,000 pound of munitions internally and externally.
2015 ended with more than 150 operational (fleet and operational test) and 18 developmental test jets operating at 10 U.S. locations and the Italian Final Assembly and Checkout (FACO) facility in Cameri, Italy. Together, the entire fleet has flown more than 48,000 hours.
The program delivered 45 aircraft in 2015 – the most aircraft delivered in one year in program history. These deliveries included the first international delivery from the Italian FACO, and bring the overall operational delivery total to 154. Along with Italy, Norway took its first delivery in 2015. Five partner nations - Australia, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom - along with the U.S. Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy, now fly the F-35. Israel and Japan will take their first deliveries in 2016.
Pilot and maintainer training increased substantially in 2015. More than 250 pilots including the first two for Australia, Italy and Norway respectively entered training. More than 2,800 maintainers are qualified to service the jet, with a majority graduating from the F-35 Aircraft Training Center at Eglin AFB, Florida.
Although the DOT&E report is factually accurate, it does not fully address program efforts to resolve known technical challenges and schedule risks. It is the F-35 Joint Program Office’s responsibility to find developmental issues, resolve them and execute with the time and budget we have been given. Our government and industry team has a proven track record of overcoming technical challenges discovered during developmental and operational testing and fleet operations, and delivering on program commitments. A few recent examples of issues that are resolved include the F-35C tailhook, the F135 engine rub, and F-35B STOVL Auxiliary Air Inlet door. The F-35C has now “caught the wire” more than 200 times at sea, the engine rub fix is incorporated on the production line and delivered engines are being retrofitted, and the F‑35B has performed more than 1,000 vertical landings safely.
Currently, mission systems software and the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS), are the program’s top technical risks. Disciplined systems engineering processes addressing the complexity of writing, testing and integrating mission systems and ALIS software have improved the delivery of capability, although challenges remain. There is more work to accomplish in both mission systems software and ALIS before the end of the development program.
Continuing on 2015’s results, Block 3i software was released for flight test in May 2015 to support the U.S. Air Force IOC declaration later in 2016. Coding for the final development software block (known as 3F) was completed in June 2015 and the software has been released for flight testing. Additional updates are planned throughout the year with 3F tracking for completion by the end of the System Development and Demonstration Program (SDD) in the fall of 2017 in order to support U.S. Navy IOC in 2018 and the start of IOT&E. Throughout testing, interim software test builds are provided to both the developmental test and operational test teams allowing them to experience the software as early as possible to provide feedback to our teams. As of Dec. 31, the program completed 80 percent of SDD test points and is on track for completion in the fourth quarter of 2017.
At the completion of the F-35 SDD program, the objective is to deliver full Block 3F capabilities (Mission Systems, Weapons & Flight Envelope) for the Services and International customers. The F-35 program will continue to closely coordinate with the JSF Operational Test Team (JOTT) and DOT&E on key test planning and priorities to successfully meet key SDD program milestones and objectives.
The flight test program made significant progress in maturing the capability of the aircraft during 2015. For example, the program:
- Completed the third F-35B sea trial aboard the USS Wasp and the second F-35C sea trial aboard USS Dwight D. Eisenhower for a total of five sea trials since 2013.
- Completed six-months of climatic response testing at the McKinley Climatic Lab at Eglin AFB, Florida. During these tests, the jet operated in ranges from 120 degrees to minus 40 degrees and various ranges of humidity and weather conditions.
- Completed F-35A 3F software high angle of attack and performance testing and continued envelope expansion for all variant 3F software.
- Achieved aerial refueling certification with the Australian tanker (KC-30A) and Italian tanker (KC-767), including night operations.
- Completed GAU-22 25mm ground gun fire testing and began airborne testing on the F-35A.
- To date, completed 90 weapon separations - GBU-12, GBU-31, GBU-32, AIM-120, GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb, U.K. Paveway IV, and first F-35 AIM-9X. This includes 18 for 18 successful live fires of AMRAAM, JDAM, and GBU-12s.
- To date, completed 17 Weapon Delivery Accuracy events (GBU-12, GBU-31, GBU-32, and AIM-120)
- To date, successfully verified F-35 low observable stealth signature 146 times with both flight test and operational jets.
These accomplishments prove the basic design of the F-35 is sound and test results reinforce our confidence in the ultimate performance the U.S. and its partners and allies value greatly.
As a reminder, the F-35 program is still in its developmental phase. This is the time when issues are expected to be discovered and solutions are implemented to maximize the F-35’s capability for the warfighter. While the development program is 80 percent complete, we recognize there are known deficiencies that must be corrected and there remains the potential for future findings. Our commitment to overcoming challenges is unwavering. The Joint Program Office will continue to work with the F-35 enterprise to make corrections and improvements as quickly as possible. At the completion of the F-35 development program, the objective is to deliver full Block 3F capabilities (Mission Systems, Weapons & Flight Envelope) for the Services and International customers. We thank the DOT&E for their assistance as we remain focused on developing, delivering and sustaining the world’s finest multi-role 5th generation aircraft."
shanes_world_05
Member
Not F-35 centric but interesting nonetheless
Found this article to be insightful.
Interview with an experienced USAF pilot who flew F-5's ,F-16, F-15's and Mig-29. However his impressions of the F-35 aren't too flattering. Does not indicate whether he has flown (I take it that he hasn't) or why he has these impressions. But with this mans experience is it worth something in the assessment of the F-35 at all?
Is he missing something or are we?
How To Win In A Dogfight: Stories From A Pilot Who Flew F-16s And MiGs
Found this article to be insightful.
Interview with an experienced USAF pilot who flew F-5's ,F-16, F-15's and Mig-29. However his impressions of the F-35 aren't too flattering. Does not indicate whether he has flown (I take it that he hasn't) or why he has these impressions. But with this mans experience is it worth something in the assessment of the F-35 at all?
Is he missing something or are we?
How To Win In A Dogfight: Stories From A Pilot Who Flew F-16s And MiGs
It's a safe bet he's never flown a 5Gen jet and is basing his views on what he's familiar with ie. 4Gen arcraft and their doctrine and tactics. If he had been direcrly involved with 5Gen aircraft, in particular the F-35, I would expect him to sound more like LTC. Chip Berke.
https://youtu.be/zxK6O5--9Z0
https://youtu.be/zxK6O5--9Z0
Not really. Never flown it, never flown against it. Nor does he have any more insight into it's capability than any other pilot.
What I would find interesting is his opinion on the Hornet series versus his (clearly) beloved USAF fighters.
Mostly because the F-35 seems most likely to be 'dogfighting' in a similar manner to how they do...
His insight into the 'G' level limitations on fighters with external stores I found more than a tad interesting though. A 4G (sustained turn rate) limited F-35 is a terrible thing we are told. Yet earlier fighters with 4G limited external stores are perfectly fine, fighter aircraft...
I wouldn't have thought to on such a rabid anti-JSF site as that...
Yep, never flown it but knows its a pig, even though he previously stated he prefers the more powerful more advanced GE engines F-16Cs to the lighter earlier ones, or to the big heavy Eagle.
the road runner
Active Member
"It's very difficult to look at your baby and say......god your ugly"
That Quote from the above link sums it up all to well
USAF draws down F35 buy over next five years
The USAF is downsizing its F35A purchases over the next five years in a recent announcement.
I don't like to speculate but my thoughts are that the USAF has seemed to be the least excited of the US services about the JSF. With increasing chatter from Boeing and Northrup Grumman about a Sixth Gen aircraft it makes me wonder if the USAF may hedge it's overall procurement numbers of the F35A I understand budget contraints too
US Air Force Defers 45 F-35As Over Next Five Years
The USAF is downsizing its F35A purchases over the next five years in a recent announcement.
I don't like to speculate but my thoughts are that the USAF has seemed to be the least excited of the US services about the JSF. With increasing chatter from Boeing and Northrup Grumman about a Sixth Gen aircraft it makes me wonder if the USAF may hedge it's overall procurement numbers of the F35A I understand budget contraints too
US Air Force Defers 45 F-35As Over Next Five Years
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
IMHO, it is the USN that is the least excited, not the USAF.
But can they do CAS as effectively? Having the A-10 flying low and slow over uncontested airspace with no real air defences/manpads, versus a scattered insurgency threat,seems like an ideal opportunity to deploy it.
There are other platforms that can do CAS and have been doing so effectively for years. That's not even open to question except in the minds of the A-10 fan base. A-10 is a redundant capability, a one-trick pony. The money to keep the A-10s flying could have purchased real muli-mission capabilities for decades to come with the F-35.. Read up on Persistent CAS (PCAS) to appreciate the future of CAS. It's focused on achieving precision strikes far quicker upon receipt of a CAS requesr and it's platform-agnostic.
Blue Jay
Member
To put it simply, as far as CAS is concerned, the common use of PGMs has meant that the A-10 has been used as a "bomb truck", and other aircraft like the F-16 have been as well. So the idea behind the F-35 is to replace all platforms used in CAS with a single platform, since they're all being used in the same way.
It's no longer necessary to fly "low and slow" for accurate delivery of munitions. As a result, an immense level of survivability and ruggedness like that found on the A-10 isn't necessary either. Any other jet that can drop PGMs can do the job just as well. CAS has evolved.
Not to mention the immense capabilities that the F-35 brings to the field. It's a huge step up. And before you mention the A-10's "tank buster" rotary cannon. Every other fixed-wing plane used in CAS has one too. Such a weapon is no longer needed to take out hard targets, but rather for striking in close proximity to friendly forces. You don't need a special gun and ammo for that.
And now to the experts: Did I get everything right? I sure hope so