Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
More Problems For The F-35?  
User currently offline747classic From Netherlands, joined Aug 2009, 2199 posts, RR: 14
Posted (5 years 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 11615 times:

Ashton Carter, deputy undersecretary of defense for acquisition, will reconsider all aspects of the F-35's current programme, including design, manufacture and flight test, to prevent further delays and cost overruns.
See following article :
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...sought-to-avert-more-problems.html

[Edited 2009-11-12 07:07:30]


Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (5 years 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 11464 times:

I found these comments from the article interesting ...

"The F-35, meanwhile, continues to face new flight-test delays. Aircraft BF-1, the first short take-off and vertical landing prototype, remains at Lockheed's facility in Fort Worth, Texas. It is already several weeks late in ferrying the aircraft to Patuxent River, Maryland, where it must complete its first transition from forward flight to vertical landing.

Lockheed's first weight-optimised conventional take-off and landing flight test aircraft, AF-1, also has still has not achieved its first flight."

Does anyone know what the cause for the delays is?



Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (5 years 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 11398 times:



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 1):
Does anyone know what the cause for the delays is?

Haha!


User currently offlineTommytoyz From Tonga, joined Jan 2007, 1353 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (5 years 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 11392 times:

O Geez. Another cluster of a program. The military industrial complex at its best at milking money for itself. Eisenhower warned us. At what point would it be cheaper to just cancel and go with the Rafael or Typhoon? Of course manufacture the units in the US to keep jobs and industry here employed. But this magnitude in over runs and delays is just incompetent at its worst. What then, if the performance is subpar as well? Ok, so I'm down on this waste of money, who wouldn't?

User currently offlineMayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10601 posts, RR: 14
Reply 4, posted (5 years 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 11060 times:



Quoting Tommytoyz (Reply 3):
At what point would it be cheaper to just cancel and go with the Rafael or Typhoon?

I didn't realize the Rafael or Typhoon had the STOL and VTOL capabilities that the F-35 will.  Yeah sure



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineEvomutant From United Kingdom, joined May 2006, 510 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (5 years 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 11024 times:



Quoting Mayor (Reply 4):

Quoting Tommytoyz (Reply 3):
At what point would it be cheaper to just cancel and go with the Rafael or Typhoon?

I didn't realize the Rafael or Typhoon had the STOL and VTOL capabilities that the F-35 will. Yeah sure

Neither will most of the US F35's. I don't know how many of each variant the States will order, but i'm guessing the B will not be the most numerous.


User currently offlineTommytoyz From Tonga, joined Jan 2007, 1353 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (5 years 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 10930 times:



Quoting Mayor (Reply 4):
I didn't realize the Rafael or Typhoon had the STOL and VTOL capabilities that the F-35 will. Yeah sure

Well at least the Rafael is carrier capable and makes landing in Us carriers from time to time. So that would be off the shelf ready. To me, the F-35 is like a Swiss Knife - an expensive one. Jack of all trades but master of none. It can also only remain in stealth if it does not carry external loads.

The Rafael on the other hand seems capable on many levels. It's just a great compromise design, not made for 100% stealth, let's call it 50% stealth - especially with the outer surface coating material. The 100% stealth approach of the F-35 design is what is hampering it, in my opinion. New radars will be able to detect 100% stealth designs anyway, like the F3 Rafael radar already can to some degree.

It works like this (I've read): Where there is a stealth aircraft, there is no or very little return signal to the originating radar, unlike the background and other aircraft. So the radar computer can point out this "hole" and track it. This is of course an infinitely simplified explanation.

Anyway, F-35 is already way expensive and if more cancellations come it'll get more expensive still. This is, in my opinion, an out of control program and military contractor consortium.


User currently offlineOroka From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 913 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (5 years 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 10814 times:



Quoting Tommytoyz (Reply 6):
To me, the F-35 is like a Swiss Knife - an expensive one. Jack of all trades but master of none. It can also only remain in stealth if it does not carry external loads.

First, look at how many aircraft it is replacing. The USAF doesn't need another thoroughbred beast, that is what the F-22 is for. Second, no one expect the F-35 or even F-22 to always be stealthy. When stealth is important, they will fly clean profiles. When it is time to chase tanks and bomb low risk targets, the fly dirty. The ability to be stealthy when needed is what is important.

Quoting Tommytoyz (Reply 6):
The 100% stealth approach of the F-35 design is what is hampering it, in my opinion.

Its shape is not what is hampering it, squeezing a F/A-18, F-16, AV-8B, and A-10 into one airframe is the problem. When was the last time a advanced high technology military program was on time or on budget? This is not the 40s where they can design and fly a aircraft in 117 days. Modern fighters are a bit more complicated these days.

The US already has gen 4/4.5 fighters, the F-16C/D, F/A-18E/F, and soon the F-15SE (and they dont even fly the F-16C/D). An advanced F-16 could handle a Typhoon pretty well, but the US doesn't like fair fights.


User currently offlineMayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10601 posts, RR: 14
Reply 8, posted (5 years 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 10771 times:

Quoting Oroka (Reply 7):
Its shape is not what is hampering it, squeezing a F/A-18, F-16, AV-8B, and A-10 into one airframe is the problem. When was the last time a advanced high technology military program was on time or on budget? This is not the 40s where they can design and fly a aircraft in 117 days. Modern fighters are a bit more complicated these days.

It was the same more than 40 years ago. Read "Skunk Works" by Ben Rich and you'll see exactly why those kinds of problems are encountered and why each new problem or requirement by the gov't. costs so much, especially during the Blackbird program. This was in the early 60s.

Somewhat the same problems when the U-2 was being developed in the 50s.

[Edited 2009-11-15 20:32:13 by mayor]


"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2969 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (5 years 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 10753 times:

And for some good news on the F-35 project: The first production-standard A model, AF-1, finally flew for the first time on Saturday.


The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (5 years 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 10619 times:



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 1):
"The F-35, meanwhile, continues to face new flight-test delays. Aircraft BF-1, the first short take-off and vertical landing prototype, remains at Lockheed's facility in Fort Worth, Texas.

BF-1 arrived Pax River Sunday 15 Nov 2009.


User currently offlineFaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1586 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10284 times:

The F-35 program won't be cancelled, it has too much economic and political momentum to it. What will happen is what has already happened to the B-2 and F-22: planned procurement figures will be viciously and heinously slashed...

Faro

[Edited 2009-11-20 05:14:24]


The chalice not my son
User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4938 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (5 years 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 10011 times:

And eager/willing customers would take up the slack from undecided partners.....

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...xt-main-fighter-jet%3A-report.html

Japan mulls F-35 purchase as next main fighter jet: report



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8709 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (5 years 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 10001 times:

It's pretty clear Japan and others would like to buy it. The question is, when is the best time for them to gather around the campfire without paying too much of their own money. So far, they have been smart to wait it out. Who wants to pay all these development costs? Let the Americans do it.

User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (5 years 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 9899 times:



Quoting Flighty (Reply 13):
It's pretty clear Japan and others would like to buy it. The question is, when is the best time for them to gather around the campfire without paying too much of their own money. So far, they have been smart to wait it out. Who wants to pay all these development costs? Let the Americans do it.

It doesn't matter when you purchase an aircraft (or any other item) the development costs are included in the price.

Seems Japan has made a decision:

http://www.domain-b.com/defence/general/20091123_f-35_fighter.html


User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4938 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (5 years 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 9617 times:

So has Australia.....

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...ns-initial-order-for-14-ctols.html

Quote:
"The Minister for Defence, Senator John Faulkner, today announced that the Australian Government had approved acquisition of the first batch of F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft as foreshadowed in the 2009 Defence White Paper.

[.....]

The Government has approved acquisition of the first 14 Conventional Take-Off and Landing (CTOL) Joint Strike Fighters and infrastructure and support required for initial training and testing, at an estimated cost of $3.2 billion.

'Approval of this first batch of JSF aircraft is evidence of the Rudd Government’s strong commitment to defence and our commitment to implementing the Defence White Paper,' Senator Faulkner said.

Approval of the next batch of aircraft and all necessary support and enabling capabilities, sufficient to establish three operational squadrons and a training squadron of CTOL JSF, will be considered in 2012. This will fulfil our White Paper commitment to acquire three operational squadrons comprising not fewer than 72 aircraft."



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineAutothrust From Switzerland, joined Jun 2006, 1604 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (5 years 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 9522 times:



Quoting Oroka (Reply 7):
An advanced F-16 could handle a Typhoon pretty well, but the US doesn't like fair fights.

Nonsense, it would have little chance against it, aswell against the Rafale.  banghead 



“Faliure is not an option.”
User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (5 years 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 9484 times:



Quoting Autothrust (Reply 16):
Quoting Oroka (Reply 7):
An advanced F-16 could handle a Typhoon pretty well, but the US doesn't like fair fights.

Nonsense, it would have little chance against it, aswell against the Rafale.

My understanding is that there's only one air-to-air bird that can relatively easily overcome the Typhoon, and that's the F-22A. Typhoon is one tough bird to beat in air-to-air.



Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16892 posts, RR: 51
Reply 18, posted (5 years 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 9396 times:



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 17):
My understanding is that there's only one air-to-air bird that can relatively easily overcome the Typhoon, and that's the F-22A. Typhoon is one tough bird to beat in air-to-air.

What about an AESA equipped F-18F?



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineSpudh From Ireland, joined Jul 2009, 301 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (5 years 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 9367 times:

F-18F had a hard time WVR with an F-14D or even F-18C. It loses all the number games to the EF.

Basing air supremacy on the superiority of the radar is back to putting the fight into the missile instead of the fighter. I thought the Missileer and the gun-less phantom killed that argument 30 years ago.

The only game changer will be an advance in passive detection so unless AESA can produce a firing solution using the opposing fighters emmisions then the F-18F has nothing but the pilot to give it an advantage over the EF.


User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (4 years 12 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 9109 times:

As always the case, the scenario can often dictate the outcome.

With updated AMRAAMs and powerful AESA radars, AIM-9X and JHMCS, they can make even an F-4 a potent adversary let alone an AESA powered F-18F that can sling 11 AAM's. Sure, in a 1v1 it sweats against a legacy Hornet let alone being dictated to by a GE powered F-14, but it's got a powerful radar and potent missiles who don't care what brought them to the fight.


User currently offlineSpudh From Ireland, joined Jul 2009, 301 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (4 years 12 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 8952 times:



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 20):
As always the case, the scenario can often dictate the outcome.

With updated AMRAAMs and powerful AESA radars, AIM-9X and JHMCS, they can make even an F-4 a potent adversary let alone an AESA powered F-18F that can sling 11 AAM's. Sure, in a 1v1 it sweats against a legacy Hornet let alone being dictated to by a GE powered F-14, but it's got a powerful radar and potent missiles who don't care what brought them to the fight.

Agreed.

I was thinking some more about it, can a section of F-18F's act as hunter-killer combo's with one producing a firing solution from outside the missile envelope of the opposing fighter while the other closes without using its own radar to get off a shot using data link info from the first?

Otherwise you're back to the old F-15/sparrow scenario (and right into the F-14/phoeniix advantage) where the range of the radar far exceeds the range of the missile and the F15 is vulnerable as it closes to gain a firing solution. Even though you've detected the opposition at longer range than he can detect you, your radar has alerted him to your presence and the element of surprise is gone. Granted AMRAAM is far superior to sparrow but I wonder what its real range in full active mode is. I bet no more than 10 miles, probably less.

No matter how superior the F-18F radar is (and I doubt that the gap between last generation conventional and 1st gen AESA is as wide as people think), the EF radar is going to be operating right in the heart of its sweet spot by the time the F-18 is close enough to fire its own missilies.

Hmmm, obviously ROE's play a huge part but tactics would be king.


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 22, posted (4 years 12 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 8730 times:

For the F-35 haters out there.
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...-whistling-past-the-graveyard.html



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineTGIF From Sweden, joined Apr 2008, 277 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (4 years 12 months 23 hours ago) and read 8665 times:



Quoting Lumberton (Reply 22):
For the F-35 haters out there.
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art....html

I think it will turn out fine as a fighter. But some of the reasons given here makes little sense to me, since they don't address the 'naysayers' concerns i.e. waste of taxpayers money (not only US taxpayers).

Quote:

Here are four reasons the F-35 program is going to turn out fine.
1. There is no alternative.
2. Other programs are faring worse.
3. The design concept is sound.
4. The development strategy is refined.

1. Since when is monopoly a good thing when it comes to lowering costs? If this is the case, then why not ditch the F-136 and the KC-X competition already?
2. How does B787, A380 and A400M delays help taxpayers around the world? And saying the development has progress "smoothly" just doesn't seem right. Almost 3 years delay since its original schedule doesn't sound smoothly to me...
3&4. On these points, I agree though, i.e. learning from the F-22. These are key factors in keeping costs low.

My conclusion from this statement is: The F-35 will turn out fine since we put all of our eggs in one basked and the government will continue to open it's wallet until the F-35 turns out fine. So this wont stop the "F-35 haters".


User currently offlineSpudh From Ireland, joined Jul 2009, 301 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (4 years 12 months 14 hours ago) and read 8568 times:



Quoting Spudh (Reply 19):
The only game changer will be an advance in passive detection so unless AESA can produce a firing solution using the opposing fighters emmisions then the F-18F has nothing but the pilot to give it an advantage over the EF

I've been doing a bit more homework since I wrote that, seems I underestimated the ability of AESA to operate undetected - in fact it seems to be one of the primary advantages of AESA over last gen conventional radar.

Still doesn't totally turn the tables though. You're still in the situation that the F18F has to get within firing range before the EF picks up the F18 Radar signature, he just doen't have his RWR jumping up and down telling him to 'ooh, look over here, look over here'.

IMHO the biggest advantage the F-18F has is the guy sitting behind the pilot!


25 Post contains links Lumberton : Another target for the F-35 haters. Don't spare the vitriol on this one. http://www.reuters.com/article/marke...sNews/idCNN0310240720091203?rpc=44
26 Art : Interesting conclusion in the Lexington Institute analysis cited. The Lexington Institute analysis concludes: "F-35 is progressing at a healthy pace,
27 747classic : " target=_blank>http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art....html " target=_blank>http://www.reuters.com/article/marke...pc=44 I think you are reading a l
28 Post contains links Art : Mmmmm.... Progressing at a healthy pace, eh? How ill would you have to be before the doctors at the Lexington Institute told conceded that you were n
29 Post contains links Rob2507 : The alternate engine program has been spared: Mass. push saves costly engine plan Lawmakers protect jobs at GE in Lynn despite Obama call to ax progra
30 Post contains links TGIF : Good news for the F-35B. After 33 days on the ground at Pax River, BF-1 finally got its feet off the ground again and the countdown to the first verti
31 Allegro : Actually, it is the opposite ... the AESA radar is MUCH better than most people think ... we have not ever used its full potential against foreign ai
32 Tommytoyz : The main flaw I have read about the F-35 is it's lack of missile carrying capacity. No matter how stealthy and effective it is, once it's fired off i
33 ThePointblank : I think the issue with lack of missiles is that the current weapons racks inside the weapons bay does not use the space very efficiently; the weapons
34 Sphealey : I don't claim to be any sort of radar expert (although no one with deep knowledge of the technology is going to be posting here, either), but the Nat
35 Post contains links 747classic : Defence chiefs are preparing drastic cuts to the number of American stealth aircraft planned for the RAF and the Royal Navy's proposed new carriers. s
36 UH60FtRucker : No, that's not how it works. The abilities you speak of, are of a completely different nature than that of tracking an aircraft. Tracking clouds of d
37 Tommytoyz : I'm not a radar expert in any way. However, if other experts are saying it is becoming possible to track stealth aircraft, I don't think it's all hot
38 Spudh : Maybe I've got this all wrong but I thought stealth does not eliminate the radar return but reduced the return by an order of magnitude so say a B1 re
39 Ctr : You are visualizing that a radar signal return is equivalent to looking at a black fly on a white wall. But air, water vapor, pollen, etc, are not so
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic More Problems For The F-35?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
The Netherlands Has Decided To Go For JSF F35 posted Thu Dec 18 2008 12:37:28 by Mortyman
Last Chance For The VH-71? posted Mon Sep 28 2009 11:16:01 by AirRyan
More Woe For Ares I posted Tue Jul 21 2009 21:56:35 by Rwessel
New Life For The Buffalo? posted Tue Jun 9 2009 03:31:48 by Connies4ever
Australian White Paper: F-35s For The R A A F posted Sat May 2 2009 15:59:24 by Lumberton
The T-50 For The USN posted Thu Mar 26 2009 15:48:36 by 747400sp
Would A Nimitz Class CV Work For The Indian Navy? posted Mon Feb 23 2009 14:32:26 by Lumberton
When Is The Hearing For The Usaf Tanker Deal posted Wed May 28 2008 15:59:18 by Dougbr2006
Finding A Name For The KC-45 posted Thu Mar 13 2008 11:44:32 by CFMitch56
Report: A400M - More Problems posted Sat Jan 5 2008 08:53:14 by Mham001
More Grief For The F-35... posted Thu Sep 1 2011 05:01:23 by JoeCanuck
More Cash Problems For The Restored Vulcan posted Tue Feb 19 2008 12:22:28 by GDB
How Much Is Too Much For The F-35...? posted Wed Nov 17 2010 15:56:14 by JoeCanuck
Any Replacements For The C-5 Galaxy On The Horizon posted Thu Apr 21 2011 20:52:23 by 444Pilot
Lockheed & Boeing Designs For The C-17 Contract? posted Sun Mar 27 2011 11:48:18 by 747400sp
Wrist Watches For The US Air Force Pilots? posted Mon Dec 20 2010 21:37:02 by wardialer
Will There Ever Be A Replacement For The E-2? posted Fri Apr 2 2010 03:34:11 by 747400sp
The Beginning Of The End For The VC10 posted Tue Jan 19 2010 08:17:58 by Tonystan
Last Chance For The VH-71? posted Mon Sep 28 2009 11:16:01 by AirRyan
Why No Stovl For Navalized F-35? posted Sat Jul 25 2009 07:35:38 by LHCVG

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format