F-35 Joint Strike Fighter News, Videos and pics Thread

[TerraN_EmpirE]

Ineffective as a Close Air Support Platform

The F-35 has plenty of shortfalls performing air-to-ground interdiction missions well away from the immediate battlefield, but it is even worse in its other intended air-to-ground role directly in support of engaged troops, close air support (CAS)

Where we going now?

An effective cannon is essential for many CAS missions where any size bomb, guided or unguided,

Gun system on all versions of the F35 is the Gau22 a 25mm cannon the F35 actually moved up in caliber from the Vulcan's 20mm

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

said they preferred the A-10’s cannon fire even to guided munitions because 80 percent of the cannon rounds fired hit within a 20-ft radius of the aiming point, providing exactly the kind of precision that danger close situations absolutely require. Cannons are also most useful for hitting moving targets because a cannon burst can lead the target in anticipation of movement.

The Gau 8 is a damn good gun! and the F35 has the second best gun in the USAF, a derivative of the Gau 12/U 25mm.

None of the three F-35 models in the current fleet

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. In fact, none of them are even close to completing their developmental flight tests—much less their operational suitability tests—for airframe safety, accuracy, and target lethality. Even worse, based on preliminary test experience, it appears that the severe inaccuracy of the helmet-mounted gunsight on all three F-35 versions that makes the cannon ineffective in air-to-air combat will also make it ineffective in CAS—and that the helmet’s accuracy problem may be technically inherent and incurable.

Again at this point and now you are claiming the future.

Note that the cannon accuracy requirements for CAS are considerably more stringent than for air combat: when shooting in close proximity to friendly troops, even minor accuracy problems can have tragic consequences. As mentioned before, the gun pods for the Marines’ F-35B and the Navy’s F-35C will likely add another source of inaccuracy—also possibly incurable

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

Gun pods have been used for decades. And Plenty of successful fighters and ground attackers have used gun pods.

Further limiting the cannon’s effectiveness in each version of the F-35 is the number of 25 mm rounds it carries—182 for the F-35A and 220 for the B and C. This is grossly deficient for CAS, especially when compared to the over 1,100 30 mm shells carried by the A-10.

and here he fails again. because the USAF, USN and USMC have doen CAS missions with less ammo then the A10 carriers the AV8B uses a Gau 12/U with 300 rounds, The both the F18 and F16 has done it with 500 rounds the Gripen, Typhoon and Tornado use 27mm guns with 150-180 rounds. Hell the Russian SU25 packs a twin barreled 30mm with 250 rounds. okay the fact is A10 is a gun on wings! fine but it pack way more rounds than actually needed. the author even says.

While the A-10 has enough cannon rounds for between 10 and 20 attack passes, any variant of the F-35 will only have enough for two, maybe four, passes.

the reason A10 needed so much ammo was that the weapons on the day had a far higher chance of missing a target. So you would need to Ripple fire fire 2 or three missiles a target. Today that is not as big an issue.

Even more limiting in the effective use of any CAS weapon, cannon or other, is the F-35’s inability to fly low and slow enough to find typical hard-to-see CAS targets and safely identify them as enemy or friendly, even when cued by ground or air observers. Due to its small, overloaded wings, the F-35 cannot maneuver adequately at the slow speeds that searching for concealed and camouflaged targets requires

BOGUS! first what is the mission of the EOTS and electrooptic pods he pointed to as superior? oh yeah there job is to allow pilots to standoff and identify friend and foe. to target stand off munitions. to see in other spectrums of light and look through camouflage.
farther more F16 and F/A18 have done far more CAS missions then A10 and have survived far more CAS missions because they can stand off and employ precision munitions. look at Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan the main weapons being used are hellfire missiles from fighters and Drones not A10's sucking in weeds and sand to gun down a target.

and being completely unarmored and highly flammable,

Same for F15E, F16, F/A 18 [/quote] it would suffer catastrophic losses from just the small rifle and light machinegun hits inevitable at the low altitudes and slow speeds required. In sharp contrast, the A-10 was specifically designed for excellent low and slow maneuverability and, by design, has unprecedented survivability against those guns, and even against shoulder-fired missiles.[/QUOTE] yeah A10 is tough but it's taken a lot of losses and as I pointed out many of those missions could have been flown by other aircraft.

Air Force officials

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

that the lack of an effective gun or inability to maneuver low and slow won’t matter in future wars because the Air Force intends to conduct CAS differently—that is, at high altitudes using smaller precision munitions. But the F-35 will not be cleared to carry those weapons for at least five years.

Oh Burn... Shots fired... but wait a second here F22 is just getting Aim 9X and compact versions of the AMRAAM. in fact no fighter enters LRP with all it's systems, and oh wait the USAF USN and USMC do not need to deploy F35 at this very moment because they have fighters that do those jobs... And will not need them for oh 5 years...

In the meantime, the F-35 can carry only two guided bombs right now, and those are 500 pounds or larger. None of those models are usable in proximity to friendly troops. According to the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, at 250 meters (820 feet), a 500-pound bomb

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

of incapacitating friendly troops. This means that within that bubble, the enemy can maneuver free from close air support fires. A 250-pound Small Diameter Bomb II is now in low rate production and cleared for use on the F-15E; even that, though, is much too large to be used near friendly troops in “danger close” firefights, and the software and bomb racks necessary to employ it on the F-35 will not be available and cleared for combat until 2021 at the earliest.

wow... Shocker...

Close air support is more than aircraft simply dropping bombs on targets. To be truly effective, CAS missions require detailed tactical coordination between the pilots and the troops fighting on the ground. For decades, this has been done effectively through radio communication, and in recent years, operational aircraft have been upgraded with digital communication links for voice and data over networked systems called Variable Message Format and Link-16. In flight tests, the F-35’s digital data links have experienced significant difficulties,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

or information being transmitted in the wrong format. This has forced pilots and ground controllers to work around the system by repeating the information by voice over the radio. In a close firefight, when seconds count, this is a dangerous delay the troops can ill-afford.

Standard issue for all new communications systems again software issues and in CAS they would be using Link 16. by the way if you are wondering why this wouldn't be a issue, once you start dropping bombs on someone they know you are there.
most of the rest is just trying say "See See See"

Navy’s F-35 Unsuitable for Carrier Operations
One of the most important characteristics the Navy’s variant of the F-35 must have is that it has to be able to operate from aircraft carriers. Otherwise, what is the point of designing a specialized naval version of the plane? But the Navy’s own pilots say the F-35C doesn’t work with the ships.

Developmental testing revealed that a severe amount of jerking during catapult launches—termed “excessive vertical oscillation”—“make the F-35C operationally unsuitable for carrier operations, according to fleet pilots who conducted training onboard USS George Washington during the latest set of ship trials.”

And that is the Whole reason they run these trials. F14,F18 and F/A18 have all had issues on carrier Trials. it's like trying to zip line by jumping off a skyscraper with a hook and the line suspended 20 feet below between two skyscrapers.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

Aircraft taking off from the confined decks of carriers require a major boost to reach the necessary speed to achieve lift and takeoff, which is accomplished with a catapult set into the flight deck. Before the jets are launched, the pilots increase the engine thrust. To keep the jets from rolling off the front of the ship before launch, they are held down with hold-back bars. The force of the thrust compresses the gear’s strut as it is being held down. When the hold-back bar is released and the jet is launched, the F-35C’s strut is unloaded, causing the nose to bounce up and down, jarring the pilot

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

that was leaked to Inside Defense in January 2017.

again standard issues and under work.

The problem is dangerous to the pilot. The Helmet-Mounted Display is unusually heavy, currently

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, and when that’s combined with the forces generated during a catapult launch, the extra weight slams the pilot’s head back and forth. In 70 percent of F-35 catapult launches, pilots report moderate to severe pain in their heads and necks.

The helmet is getting lighter.

The launch also impacts the alignment of the helmet. Pilots reported difficulty reading critical information inside the helmet, and they have to readjust it after getting into the air. The pilots say this is unsafe as it happens during one of the most critical phases of any flight. Pilots try to counter the oscillations by cinching down their body harnesses tighter, but this creates a new problem by making it hard to reach emergency switches

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

in the event of an emergency.

again helmet is under evolution.

The F-35’s Program Manager, Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, has said he will attempt a short-term tweak to the F-35C’s nose gear strut to fix the problem, but a longer-term fix may actually be required, such as a redesign of the entire front landing gear assembly. This is unlikely to begin until 2019—the same year the Navy has said it intends to declare the F-35C ready for combat. By that time, the Navy will likely have 36 F-35Cs in the fleet, each of which would then need to have the front landing gear replaced, at a yet-to-be determined cost.

again common event of a fighter LRP.

The test teams have found that the hook point on the F-35C’s arresting gear is wearing out three times faster than it is supposed to. Though it is supposed to last a minimum of 15 landings, the longest a hook point has lasted in testing is 5. The program is reportedly considering redesigning the arresting gear to be more robust.

again more common issue.

Another structural issue yet to be resolved on the F-35C involves the wings. During test flights, engineers discovered the ends of the wings were not strong enough to support the weight of the AIM-9X short-range air-to-air missile. The F-35C’s wings fold at the ends to save space in the crowded confines of the deck and hangars on aircraft carriers.

So did F/A18.

It took the crew 55 hours to complete the engine swap, far longer than it takes to perform the same action on a legacy aircraft. The engine on an F/A-18, for instance, can be replaced in 6 to 8 hours. DOT&E noted the crew took its time performing all the necessary steps for safety purposes, and pointed out that future iterations would likely be a little faster as the crews gain more experience.

again LRP.

Another problem uncovered during the trials on the George Washington involved the transmission of the massive data files the F-35C’s computers produce. The F-35 program relies on the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS), the enormous and complex computer system all F-35s use for mission planning, maintenance diagnosis, maintenance scheduling, parts ordering, and more. To work properly, the system has to move large volumes of data across the network on and off the ship.

During the Washington trials, the crew had to transmit a moderately sized 200 MB ALIS file over the ship’s satellite network. It took two days. Bandwidth limitations and spotty connectivity had drastically impeded the transmission of the data. Many such transmissions—and even larger ones—will be required to support an entire air wing. Additionally, the fleet often operates in periods of “emissions control,” or radio silence, to avoid giving away its position to the enemy, further bottlenecking the transfer of the data necessary to keep the F-35s flying.

Upgrades in communications are likely for the carrier fleet in the Future, another possible option might be to store such data on the Carrier's servers until she get to port. mostly this is an issue of operations and will not be unique to F35 as more and more hardware moves into the digital age. I almost guarantee the Super Advanced Hornet, FVL and FA-xx will do the same. once in Combat deployment they will not be operating in the same mode.

Price Tag Is the Only Thing Stealthy about the F-35

Oh boy this will be good... Any more Farms needing cover?

Much has been said since the election about further F-35 purchases and affordability. President Trump questioned the program’s value in a series of tweets before the inauguration, but hopes that the program would be dramatically altered were dashed when he declared he had convinced Lockheed Martin to shave $600 million from the price of the latest batch of F-35s. Lockheed Martin and their partners within the JPO had already stated the price would be lower, largely due to improved efficiencies in manufacturing. On the surface, this seems like a great development for the American taxpayers, but any money “saved” now will end up costing far more in the future because we are buying a bunch of untested prototypes that will require extensive and expensive retrofits later

Called it, guess what that is the norm for all procurements. from tanks to fighter to rifles. and not just in the US the Chinese, Russians, French and More the first units will need upgrades to meet mission wants.

And this problem will only be compounded if Lockheed Martin and the Joint Program Office get their way and Congress approves a three year “block buy” of 400 F-35s before the program completes the testing and evaluation process.

It's called life cycle.

The prices quoted in the press are usually based on the cost of an Air Force conventional take-off variant, the F-35A—the least expensive of the three variants. In addition, that cost figure is only an estimate of future costs, one that assumes everything will proceed perfectly for the F-35 from here on out—which is unlikely as the program enters its most technologically challenging test phase. As this latest DOT&E report shows, the program has a long way to go before the F-35 will be ready for combat.

This is as the F35 has such a high degree of commonality that the F35A is the most bought and the system baseline. The Marines will have the second most common now and the Navy F35's are not even a major cost point yet.

Even this amount doesn’t tell the whole story: it only covers the procurement cost, not what it will cost to bring F-35As up to the latest approved configuration, nor the additional Military Construction costs to house and operate F-35As. And of course, the $119.6 million price tag does not include any of the research and development costs to develop and test the F-35A. The 2016 production-only cost for the Marine Corps’ F-35B and the Navy’s F-35C is $166.4 million and $185.2 million per plane, respectively.

again life cycle look at the Eurofighter Typhoon tranches. the same thing.

Skipping a bit because it's mostly just the same old arguments.

Combat Effectiveness at Risk
In every first-rate air force, turning out superior fighter pilots requires them to fly at least 30 hours a month to hone and improve their combat skills. Here lies the single largest cause of the F-35’s lack of combat effectiveness: because of the plane’s unprecedented complexity and the corresponding reliability and maintenance burdens, pilots simply cannot fly them often enough to get enough real flying hours to develop the combat skills they need.

Again look back in other programs to the same point F35 is at and the same things happen the new machine needs more time in the shop to learn how it works and what it needs.

Skipping again because this is really a heaping rant.

This is one of the most enduring problems of the F-35 program. The fleet has had a notoriously poor reliability track record: it failed to achieve many of its interim reliability goals, and continued to do so through 2016. As the program creeps towards the all-important operational test phase, there are real concerns the aircraft will not be able to fly often enough to meet the testing schedule. There are also concerns about how often the jets will be able to fly when called up for combat service.

Again early program as it progresses more units available more spares more mission ready.

Officials Hiding Truth about F-35’s Problems and Delays from Taxpayers

If anything I would say that the Officials have been blatantly open about the F35 Program. Otherwise we would not have all the knowledge we do about the program.
I mean using google and memory I have debunked a good chunk of this long essay.

 

[Jura The idiot]

how you doing TE?
#4581 ...

...

@Jura here we go #4581Jura, Mar 23, 2017
...

first I'll give you
#4559 Jura, Mar 16, 2017

yeah that's what you'll keep saying, with the next software patch, with the block xyz upgrade ... ultimately eventually will be addressed whatever, lasers on board undoubtedly ... but I'll tell you this:
just look at the Raptor, FOC declared almost ten years ago and how many upgrades has it gotten since then, and how many upgrades have been promised (and are turning into vaporware) ... yeah you may tell me F-35 isn't F-22 but I'm predicting it'll get even WORSE with F-35s than with F-22s due to the shear numbers ... for example I won't hold my breath until 472 of these (I mean just from LRIP copies):

will be swapped for something corresponding to 2010s level

and
#4561 Jura, Mar 16, 2017

yeah once supporters realize actually there has been an issue, it's just birthing problems, of course aggravated (LOL I didn't know how to spell it) by journalists with agenda ... in the meantime I wonder about this:
When will the US Military realize one size doesn't fit all? (and it'll be spending like twenty bil a year for like 15 years in a row to replace a host of aircraft each SUPERIOR (in its specialized role) to an F-35 (in that particular role))

though

now "your"
#4581 Jura, Mar 23, 2017

I now read
Lockheed Martin: F-35/NIFC-CA Live Fire Test In 2018; LRASM Flight Tests This Year

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and have a question:

"... NIFC-CA generally relies on the Link-16 data link to connect the ships, planes and weapons involved in the detect-to-kill process. F-35, however, uses a Multifunction Advanced Data Link (MADL) instead, which would require a new antenna on the destroyers that will launch a missile based on what the F-35B senses. Sheridan said Lockheed Martin has conceptual designs for where to put the MADL antenna on the ship but needs to refine and test those ideas."

why not to use Link16 of an F-35 (instead of putting MADL on a ship)??

when later TE made a compelling argument basically saying (you may of course read it directly from him! from a series of posts starting after the one I quoted right above) an F-35 will stay undetected and feed the network (NIF-CA), so the other component of the network (a ship) needs the MADL (as an F-35 wouldn't use its Link16)
TE, did I get it right?

(personally I think it's just a dream anyway, because, as they say, Chain Is No Stronger Than Its Weakest Link, and NIF-CA as a whole relies on the Link16)

 

[Jura The idiot]

now I read
OPINION: Can Pentagon's new F-35 chief keep on target?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A military acquisition manager has a tough job. There are schedules to meet and budgets to keep, fickle politicians to placate, penny-pinching from bureaucrats and relentless finagling by contractors.

By those standards, the hardest job of all must belong to Lt Gen Christopher Bogdan, the US programme executive officer (PEO) charged with managing the contracts for the Lockheed Martin F-35 airframe and Pratt & Whitney F135 engine. He does not have just one legislature to navigate, but more than a dozen, supervises a unique global supply chain, and has two primes that do not work off the same contract.

Bogdan will leave the F-35 Joint Programme Office this summer after an extended, five-year run as first the deputy PEO and, after December 2012, the top military official on the world’s most expensive weapon system.

It has been a remarkable tenure, however. A former US Air Force B-2A test pilot, Bogdan swept into office at full blast, rhetorically carpet-bombing his two main contractors, accusing them of “trying to squeeze every nickel out of the F-35”.

“I want them both to start behaving like they want to be around for 40 years,” he told journalists in February 2013. “I want them to take on some of the risk of this programme. I want them to invest in cost reductions. I want them to do the things that will build a better relationship. I’m not getting all that love yet.”

It is possible he was never fully satisfied by the “love” from Lockheed and P&W, but there was progress. Both committed to a 2014 initiative to cut F-35 production expenses, followed up by a second effort last summer targeting sustainment costs. The programme has stayed on budget too. Schedules for key operational and sustainment capabilities have slipped, but not by years.

The programme is still not out of the woods. The long-promised Block 3F software standard could be further delayed and the Autonomic Logistics Information System is still playing catch-up.

Bogdan’s successor, Rear Adm Mathias Winter, faces key structural decisions, including the ongoing review ordered by defence secretary James Mattis. Moreover, Sen John McCain, chairman of the Senate armed services committee, may still pressure Mattis to break up the F-35 programme office, which employs over 2,000 personnel.

If he navigates all that successfully, Winter has Bogdan to thank. Unlike several of his predecessors, he leaves the F-35 in much better shape than he found it.

their poll right now:

(one has to vote to then see this)

 

[Jura The idiot]

LOL check

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

today (all I can say)

 

[mankyle]

LOL check

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

today (all I can say)

Happy April's Fool's day!!!!

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

A fleet of F4 Phantom II with go Faster stripes painted on them... LEL

 

[Obi Wan Russell]

A fleet of F4 Phantom II with go Faster stripes painted on them... LEL

That's no joke, we really tried it: The paint job makes ALL the difference! Can't beat a 'Go Faster' Stripe!

 

[Jura The idiot]

... Fallon said. “And the U.K. is proud to be the future hub for all the European jets. ..."
is it true? I mean I've heard of a facility in Italy ...

F-35’s U.K. Arrival Moves Closer with Award of New Support Contract

Readiness for the arrival of the U.K.’s first F-35 Lightning II jets took another step forward with the award of a contract by the U.S. Department of Defense F-35 Joint Program Office worth more than 80 million pounds ($102.2 million) to Lockheed Martin to deliver the initial training, engineering, maintenance and logistics support for the United Kingdom’s F-35 fleet over a three-year period.

Lockheed Martin has subcontracted work worth 40 million pounds to BAE Systems and together the two companies will form a team of more than 100 skilled technicians at Royal Air Force (RAF) Marham, who will provide engineering and technical expertise, deliver air-crew and ground-crew training, facilitate routine maintenance and help to manage the jets’ global supply chain. BAE Systems will take the lead sustainment role for F-35 in the United Kingdom with Lockheed Martin continuing as prime contractor for global operations.

The award was announced by U.K. Defence Secretary Sir Michael Fallon during a press conference with U.S. Defense Secretary Gen. James Mattis. The visit was Mattis’ first to the United Kingdom in his role as U.S. defense secretary.

“Nothing demonstrates the strength of our relationship better than our joint work on the most advanced combat aircraft in the world — the F-35,” Fallon said. “And the U.K. is proud to be the future hub for all the European jets. The additional investment at RAF Marham will ensure that we have a formidable fighting force that, at a time of growing danger, in the most momentous of weeks, will help us work with our U.S. partners to promote international peace and security.”

Work already is under way to prepare RAF Marham for the arrival of 617 Squadron, who will fly the U.K.’s initial operational F-35 jets from 2018 onward. The contract announcement follows a 142-million-pound package that was awarded to Lockheed Martin and BAE Systems in April 2016 to deliver an Operations Center, Integrated Training Center and Maintenance and Finish building. Significant progress has been made in the past year and work is on target to be completed in early 2018.

“The F-35 will play a crucial role in defending the U.K, for decades to come,” said Peter Ruddock, chief executive of Lockheed Martin UK. “We at Lockheed Martin are honored and excited to bring our knowledge and expertise to bear and to our ongoing role in supporting the world’s most advanced fighter when the F-35 arrives at RAF Marham next year.”

“We are extremely proud of our continued relationship with the U.K. and the dedication of our people at RAF Marham,” said Andrea Thompson, F-35 Lightning II senior vice-president at BAE Systems. “We are working hard to prepare for the arrival of F-35 and this contract is the next step towards that reality. This contract builds upon our pedigree in delivering maintenance and support to the U.K.’s fast jet fleets at bases across the country, including at RAF Marham where we have been supporting the operation of the Tornado GR4 fleet for the last decade.”

source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!