F-35 Program - General Discussion

[ADMk2]

A few weeks ago there was an article in Sydney Morning Herald.

The Chief of the Air Force, Air Marshal Leo Davies, was being interviewed and was talking about the future of female combat pilots in the RAAF, one particular paragraph in the article stood out:

"Australia expects to start operating the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter from 2020. The latest Pentagon report points to continuing problems with the project but Air Marshal Davies said nothing in the report suggested the RAAF would need to changes its schedule."

If the Chief of the Air Force says that nothing in the report suggested the RAAF would need to change its schedule, well that's good enough for me!

In Australian terms, he is a person right at the very top of the food chain when it comes to information and knowledge about the F-35 program, and lets not forget too, it was only a few days ago that Australia released the new DWP, and it reaffirmed the commitment to 72 F-35A's to replace the Classic Hornets.

The US DOT&E's charter is to point out issues and successes with programs. Not to identify each and every step that has or needs to be taken to achieve success.

It comes out once a year... So any fix nearing completion won't be featured in the report for another 12 months.

By which time the naysayers will well and truly have moved on to other 'critical issues' just like the 'critical' tailhook issue. How many discuss that success now, or mention how vehemently they claimed that would be the end of the F-35C, if not the entire program?

It's great for naysayers to take a short term and easy jab at the program. But as Gen Bogdan himself had to point out (a disgrace given the obviousness of this stuff and truly demonstrating the ludicrous media bias that exists on this program) most of the 'issues' are perfectly well known and are well on the way to being fixed, or already have.

Everybody who follows the program knows ALIS needs more work. Everyone KNOWS the HMS needs work, but has steadily improved and so on. The program is still only at 80% completion of it's development. The fixes are coming but the program, as Congressionally mandated has to deliver new capability whilst still working out the bugs in earlier development. That whole concurrency thing...

The bugs will be worked out and the F-35 will be a perfectly excellent combat aircraft. Undoubtedly the best all-rounder we will see for many years yet.

 

[StobieWan]

Just having scan read the DOT&E report on current problems with development and this up to date article:

Another F-35 setback - Business Insider

I just wondered considering forum members knowledge regarding the long history of the project, including time scale, cost, performance benefits, compromises, maintenance, what would your recommendation would actually be?

Would it be to continue with the project or to abort? There has to come a time when a decision has to be taken with regard to risking further substantial funding and taking the risk of emerging with either a highly superior aircraft or an unreliable one with performance inadequacies.

The stakes are high. Both Russia and China over the next few years are likely to be fielding upgraded aircraft (e.g T50) and there is the possibility that radar development and other stealth counter measures will render the F-35 advantages invalid if the time scale extends much further.

What do people honestly think? Are there any more attractive cost effective alternatives?

If you're curious how a cancellation might play out, look at Comanche - the RAH-66 - it was built, worked and flew, the US Army canned it in favour of a new development and recapitalisation of their existing fleet with current types. Comanche was canned in 2004 and the Army has gone through two successive programs spending about 40% more than the RAH-66 program without producing a working replacement.

F35 is in the air, there's about 100 examples either flying or in build, they getting cheaper to buy and fly, they've got export orders. I see no benefit in cancellation at this late stage, when the potential adversaries may be handed the opportunity to close the technical gap.

 

[Toblerone]

Even the slightest thought about cancellation is a waste of time, there is no turning back, it will go ahead, all problems will be fixed by throwing money and expertise at them and it will be the backbone of the most advanced air fleet for decades to come.

According to the 2015 DOT&E Report:

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.

 

[gf0012-aust]

geebuz....

perhaps they should do some basic research....

Australia needs to 'show spine' over Joint Strike Fighter says expert - Background Briefing - ABC Radio National (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

 

[Boagrius]

geebuz....

perhaps they should do some basic research....

Australia needs to 'show spine' over Joint Strike Fighter says expert - Background Briefing - ABC Radio National (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

The age of clickbait journalism is well and truly upon us. The extent to which developmental defence projects can have even their most routine obstacles paraded about like some sort of grand scandal with little or no journalistic rigour/integrity is surely unprecedented nowadays. I do wonder if companies like LM could be doing a better job of dealing with this though. Their response to David Axe's misrepresentation of the "leaked" test report on control law testing left a lot to be desired from my point of view. Perhaps there is more to this than I am aware of...?

 

[SpazSinbad]

At the above Dingle URL Sarah won me over with this:

"...If the pilot weighs less than 75 kilograms, and needs to eject, there's a 23 per cent chance the software-heavy helmet will snap their neck and kill them...."

 

[Boagrius]

At the above Dingle URL Sarah won me over with this:

Hahahahaha missed that one. Death by Windows 10!

 

[gf0012-aust]

RNoAF pilots feedback

http://theaviationist.com/2016/03/0...g-in-the-f-35-a-jsf-pilot-first-hand-account/

 

[Boagrius]

RNoAF pilots feedback

http://theaviationist.com/2016/03/0...g-in-the-f-35-a-jsf-pilot-first-hand-account/

^Yes but you see he's just paid off by Lockheed/toeing the Govt line/working for the illuminati :roll

In all seriousness though it's refreshing to hear some more sober commentary on the jet. That said I still don't know why LM never recently pointed out that the F35, in all likelihood won't need to resort to the high alpha/instantaneous turn domain even within the WVR arena. Why bother when you can use EODAS and/or datalinks to shoot from 360 degrees around the jet while remaining in a high energy state? Getting bogged down in a knife fight is surely going to be a death wish for anyone given the way modern AAMs are progressing...

Even in WVR the same basic principal surely holds true - get the first look, take the first shot, leave the area (?).

Just my 2c...

 

[old faithful]

Great read, thanks for posting.
Only thing that sounded worrying to me was the helmet mounted display being difficult to read during high G moves, due to shuddering. However this only happend to pilots with Gen2 helmets, not Gen3.

Previous interview with Sarah.....was the weapons bay issue a real issue? If so, has it been addressed?

 

[ADMk2]

^Yes but you see he's just paid off by Lockheed/toeing the Govt line/working for the illuminati :roll

In all seriousness though it's refreshing to hear some more sober commentary on the jet. That said I still don't know why LM never recently pointed out that the F35, in all likelihood won't need to resort to the high alpha/instantaneous turn domain even within the WVR arena. Why bother when you can use EODAS and/or datalinks to shoot from 360 degrees around the jet while remaining in a high energy state? Getting bogged down in a knife fight is surely going to be a death wish for anyone given the way modern AAMs are progressing...

Even in WVR the same basic principal surely holds true - get the first look, take the first shot, leave the area (?).

Just my 2c...

L-M has done that very thing literally dozens of times. The whole point of LO is that it will allow you the opportunity to obtain the most advantageous position available to employ your weapon systems, that isn't obviously going to be the 'knife fight in a phone booth'.

Pilots will continue to train in ACM, because it is excellent training, not because there is a genuine likelyhood of ending up in WVR furballs in any future combat scenario.

As we've seen from GW1 onwards, the overwhelmingly dominant form of air to air combat (in the plus 90% range) has been BVR weapons shots. With increasingly capable long range weapons and sensors plus the increasing numbers of LO aircraft in the battlespace I think it fairly safe to say that trend will continue...

Any WVR will be a surprise scenario more than a planned tactic and as has been pointed out, the F-35 is more than capable enough to deal with the low likelyhood of such combat against the range of threats that exist.

 

[ADMk2]

At the above Dingle URL Sarah won me over with this:

Damn that heavy software! Lol

 

[Boagrius]

L-M has done that very thing literally dozens of times. The whole point of LO is that it will allow you the opportunity to obtain the most advantageous position available to employ your weapon systems, that isn't obviously going to be the 'knife fight in a phone booth'.

Pilots will continue to train in ACM, because it is excellent training, not because there is a genuine likelyhood of ending up in WVR furballs in any future combat scenario.

As we've seen from GW1 onwards, the overwhelmingly dominant form of air to air combat (in the plus 90% range) has been BVR weapons shots. With increasingly capable long range weapons and sensors plus the increasing numbers of LO aircraft in the battlespace I think it fairly safe to say that trend will continue...

Any WVR will be a surprise scenario more than a planned tactic and as has been pointed out, the F-35 is more than capable enough to deal with the low likelyhood of such combat against the range of threats that exist.

Indeed. Even then, one would expect that EODAS would make a "surprise furball" a nigh on impossibility for adversaries of the F35. It will be very interesting to see what SACM produces - I imagine a small, extremely nimble HOBS missile with an NEZ covering the entire WVR arena could make the "furball" essentially obsolete. Perhaps a possibility with new propulsion technologies...

EDIT- Re: LM. My mistake, I was thinking, for instance, of the JPO response to the viral article by David Axe on the F35 control laws test report. From memory it basically said that the F35 was designed to win at BVR range anyway, leading some muppets to view it as a concession that the jet was indeed a BFM/kinematic dud.

I guess it is immaterial anyway so long as the powers that be get the right information and in turn make the right decisions. It just strikes me that the internet has made the arena of public opinion an unprecedentedly vicious and illiterate place. Any goober with a PC (*cough* Axe *cough*) can spread whatever drivel they like and still sound credible to the average punter.

 

[ADMk2]

Indeed. Even then, one would expect that EODAS would make a "surprise furball" a nigh on impossibility for adversaries of the F35. It will be very interesting to see what SACM produces - I imagine a small, extremely nimble HOBS missile with an NEZ covering the entire WVR arena could make the "furball" essentially obsolete. Perhaps a possibility with new propulsion technologies...

EDIT- Re: LM. My mistake, I was thinking, for instance, of the JPO response to the viral article by David Axe on the F35 control laws test report. From memory it basically said that the F35 was designed to win at BVR range anyway, leading some muppets to view it as a concession that the jet was indeed a BFM/kinematic dud.

I guess it is immaterial anyway so long as the powers that be get the right information and in turn make the right decisions. It just strikes me that the internet has made the arena of public opinion an unprecedentedly vicious and illiterate place. Any goober with a PC (*cough* Axe *cough*) can spread whatever drivel they like and still sound credible to the average punter.

Fortunately it isn't average punters who make procurement decisions then...

 

[Boagrius]

Fortunately it isn't average punters who make procurement decisions then...

Haha, very true!

Still, quotes (from the test pilot) like:

"The F-35 was at a distinct energy disadvantage in a turning fight and operators would quickly learn that "

"Overall, the most noticeable characteristic of the F-35A in a visual engagement was its lack of energy maneuverability"

and

"The EM of the F-35A is substantially inferior to the F-15E with PW-229s due to a smaller wing, similar weight, and "'15,000 Ibs less in afterburner thrust"

... probably warranted a more direct response? Ah well, it's all done and dusted now. Hopefully smoother sailing ahead for the program.

 

[Clueless]

Fortunately it isn't average punters who make procurement decisions then...

Yeah, but unfortunately it seems some of those average punters have gone on to become Greens senators in Oz. One in particular seems to thrive on the drivel Axe etc spruik.

 

[Vertias]

F35 stealth fighter program resorting to systemic cheating

To try and get around software-associated delays, the F35 test program is being revised: some test points are being eliminated, reducing the total number of test points remaining for Block 2B from 529 down to 243; and some fixes are being deferred to the Block 3 program.

aviationweek.com/defense/jsf-program-ditches-tests-protect-schedule

Skipping and deferring tests that were previously deemed to be necessary translates to a more sloppy and rushed effort to still meet deadlines.

A major operational test series planned for the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has been abandoned in an attempt to protect the schedule for delivering a fully operational aircraft.

Previously reported improvement in reliability was due to changes in how failures were reported. ie. They started lying in how they reported failures

The Pentagon’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation also notes that an apparent improvement in a major reliability metric — "mean flight hours between failure – design controllable" — up to late summer 2014 may be due to changes in reporting. More failures were reported as "induced," or due to maintenance actions, and fewer to "inherent" design problems. Also, once a redesigned version of a failure-prone part is introduced into the fleet but before 100% of the fleet has been retrofitted, the program stops counting failures of the previous version, improving the system’s on-paper reliability even though failures are occurring.

One of the F-35’s distinctive features, the Distributed Aperture System, is still problematical, the report says, continuing "to exhibit high false-alarm rates and false target tracks, and poor stability performance, even in later versions of software.

 

[ADMk2]

Yeah, but unfortunately it seems some of those average punters have gone on to become Greens senators in Oz. One in particular seems to thrive on the drivel Axe etc spruik.

They don't make procurement decisions either...

NSC of Cabinet does and the NSC doesn't have many independent or Green Senators on it, last I heard?

 

[John Fedup]

Fortunately it isn't average punters who make procurement decisions then...

Depends on the country. Saying some of our procurement people our average is being over generous.

 

[gf0012-aust]

To try and get around software-associated delays, the F35 test program is being revised: some test points are being eliminated, reducing the total number of test points remaining for Block 2B from 529 down to 243; and some fixes are being deferred to the Block 3 program.

aviationweek.com/defense/jsf-program-ditches-tests-protect-schedule

Skipping and deferring tests that were previously deemed to be necessary translates to a more sloppy and rushed effort to still meet deadlines.

A major operational test series planned for the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has been abandoned in an attempt to protect the schedule for delivering a fully operational aircraft.

Previously reported improvement in reliability was due to changes in how failures were reported. ie. They started lying in how they reported failures

The Pentagon’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation also notes that an apparent improvement in a major reliability metric — "mean flight hours between failure – design controllable" — up to late summer 2014 may be due to changes in reporting. More failures were reported as "induced," or due to maintenance actions, and fewer to "inherent" design problems. Also, once a redesigned version of a failure-prone part is introduced into the fleet but before 100% of the fleet has been retrofitted, the program stops counting failures of the previous version, improving the system’s on-paper reliability even though failures are occurring.

One of the F-35’s distinctive features, the Distributed Aperture System, is still problematical, the report says, continuing "to exhibit high false-alarm rates and false target tracks, and poor stability performance, even in later versions of software.

all of those things have been addressed on here

and if you're going to quote aviation week where Bill Sweetman is a known and irrational anti-JSF objector - then you might as well start quoting David Axe under the title of the worlds best aeronautical engineer....

you also seem to have missed the pilots reports on how effective EODAS is.

all the wailing in the world by those who are anti-JSF ignores the fact that the systems enhancements its bringing to the fight underline and underpin all major none BRIC and their satellite players militaries.

In fact the majority of those BRICs are rebuilding their militaries weapons sharing and overall force integration systems along the same lines despite ventilating at the inadequacy of LO developments.

selective criticism contradicts their own engineering philosophy.

there seems to be a complete lack of awareness that whats being delivered in JSF is more complex than what was driving the development of the B2 - and that the speed of weapons capability change, the speed of new warfighting constructs as a result of those developments has no historical precedence. There is no baseline

Criticism of the project management is justified, but considering the fact that what has been attempted and what has been achieved has no historical equivalent, well I think the armchair snipers as residing in AW and WIB (who have a tendency to load their own arguments and responses with "weighted" references can be taken with a pinch of salt.

I'm much more prepared to listen to those who have to do the real world evaluations, and who are actually involved in the selection process who have actual current and relevant skills than some of the nonsense that gets trotted out as insightful