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

now General: Older Fighters Can’t Match F-35
Older fighter jets such as the F-16 and F/A-18 will never match the F-35, an Air Force general said.

Brig. Gen. Scott Pleus, a former
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
pilot who directs the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program’s integration office, said even upgraded versions of the fourth-generation fighters simply can’t compete against the newer aircraft’s stealth superiority.

“You cannot take an airplane like an F-16 and really make it stealthy,” Pleus said in an interview with Military.com on Wednesday at the Pentagon. “The airplane is the shape of the airplane, the size is the size of the airplane,” he said.

“The radar cross-section of an F-18 is the radar cross-section of an F-18 — you can’t change that,” he added. “Low observable technology, the ability to evade radar if you will, is something that has to be designed into the airplane from the very beginning.”

Pleus’ comments came just weeks after President-elect Donald Trump took to Twitter to criticize the F-35 program — the Pentagon’s biggest acquisition program estimated at nearly $400 billion for almost 2,500 aircraft.

“Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!”
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

As previously noted on this blog, the Boeing-made
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
doesn’t offer the same level of stealth or sensor technology as the F-35 Lightning II, though the Chicago-based aerospace giant has argued that the capabilities of the twin-engine electronic attack variant
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
eclipse the Joint Strike Fighter’s stealth advantage. And, of course, the Super Hornet is significantly cheaper.

For military pilots, the statements by Pleus, the brigadier general, won’t come as a revelation. But Trump’s comments have spurred a debate on whether defense contractors can upgrade fourth-gen fighters to somehow operate like a fifth-gen fighter.

Pleus, who has 153 flight hours in the F-35 and more than 2,000 in the F-16 — explained the closest they could get to making a fourth-gen fighter into a “4.5-gen” fighter is by adding some newer technologies, limited by the original mechanics of the aircraft, cooling and generator systems, among other issues.

“What you can do is take a fourth-generation aircraft and put a very good radar in it — so it’s a piece of technology that the F-35 has, and so you’ve upgraded it.”

Enhancing it, “more in the sensor itself,” can get a fighter like the F-16 — flying since the early 1980s — or F/A-18 a step closer to fifth-gen, “but you cannot add on stealth technology to an airplane.”

Pleus detailed the advantages the F-35 brings to the table: rapid computer technology, radar-evading stealth and what he called survivability.

“The idea is, the F-35 was developed to go into a highly contested area, both air-to-air threats and surface-to-air threats, drop its bombs, hit the targets it’s supposed to, and then come home — and that is the entire fifth-generation package,” he said.

Flying a fourth-gen or fifth-gen, from a pilot’s perspective, is “not a big change,” he said. The cockpit of the F-35, however, has bumped up situational awareness capabilities of how pilots can see or detect friend or foe in the airspace or down below.

In an F-16 for example, “If my radar doesn’t see it, then I don’t see it,” Pleus said.

“In the F-35, if my radar sees it, or if my electronic warning system sees it … or my wingman’s radar sees it, or their wingman’s radar sees it, I see all of it.”
source is DoDBuzz
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
There are certain reporters, certain so-called defense analysts, certain politicians, and certain publications who look for any little negative piece of news to report on the F-35 and then do so...despite it gaining traction and momentum in virtually all areas.

They hope it to fail because they have vested their politics, and their professional "expertise" in saying it is a loser, when it is showing definitiely that it is not...and more and more countries are recognizing it and buying into it.

Look, remember my words for after I am gone.

The F-35...alll three variants, are going to be successful and they are going to be the most successful and wdely proliferated 5th generated stealth aircraft on the planet, bringing new sensor fusion capabilities to the war fighter that will revolutionize air to air fghting as well as air to surface capabilities.

Those other folks can moan and complain all they want...but it will not change that success story which I expect my grand kids and great grand kids to talk about and recognize as time goes on.
 
Dec 14, 2016
before everybody (me including :) forgets:

Nov 8, 2016


Sep 24, 2016


haven't heard anything yet (but soon Donald may LOL!


as for what's linked through 'Nov 8, 2016' above:
Dec 21, 2016
... F-35 Chief: Loose Bracket Sparked Fire on Marine Corps Plane
source is DefenseNews
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and now about what's linked through 'Sep 24, 2016' above:
Recent F-35 Fire Unrelated to Previous Problems: General
Pooled fuel in the tailpipe of an
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
likely caused it to
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
at
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, an Air Force general involved with the program said.

“The initial feedback from this is it was not an engine fire; [investigators] are calling it a tailpipe fire,” said Brig. Gen. Scott Pleus, a former
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
pilot who directs the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program’s integration office for the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

“A tailpipe fire is a result of some form of fuel getting ignited in the back-end of the airplane that is not necessarily in the engine, so this was not an engine problem. There was some excess fuel that pooled in the back of the airplane and then ignited” before takeoff, he said in an interview with Military.com on Wednesday.

The F-35A, assigned to the 56th Fighter Wing, was preparing for a training mission at Mountain Home when it caught fire just before takeoff Sept. 23, according to the service. But official details into the investigation have yet to be released.

“An engine fire is obviously a fire that starts in the engine,” Pleus said. This “is still obviously a problem but, at the same time, it had nothing to do with the engine problem [the F-35] had before, nor the [polyalphaolefin cooling] lines.”

Pleus was referring to the Lightning II’s engine difficulties in 2014, and recent insulation issues.

“In the F-35 program, I think the largest ‘setback’ we had was the fire at
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, [Florida], where we had the engine fire on takeoff, and the reason why I would call that a setback is because we found an
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. ”

The rear of an F-35A caught fire while preparing to take off from the base that summer. As a result, the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of the Lockheed Martin Corp.-manufactured fighter jet.

“In my world, that’s a pretty big setback,” Pleus said, but “all of the training kept that pilot alive. We found the root cause to the problem in the engine … we got a solution, we fixed it, implemented it fleetwide, and [we have] not had any issues [like that] since then.”

The recent tubing insulation flaw basically came down to human error, Pleus said.

The service on Sept. 16
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of 13 out of 104 F-35s in the fleet “due to the discovery of peeling and crumbling insulation in avionics cooling lines inside the fuel tanks,” according to a statement at the time. Two additional aircraft, belonging to Norway and stationed at
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, were also affected.

The issue, discovered during depot servicing, affected a total of 57 aircraft.

The subcontractor — still
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
— had nothing to do with the aircraft’s design. Simply put: “They put the wrong insulation in,” Pleus said.

“I almost look at this as more of a success,” he added, “because we proved something that they never thought that they would have to deal with and they were able to fix it right.”

The F-35s involved returned to the skies
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
There ya go kids, right out of the horses mouth!
similar story:
Greeting me upon arrival in the doorway to his office, US Air Force Brig. Gen. Scott Pleus, dressed in an olive green flight suit, offered his hand.

From his direct eye contact, exact manner of speaking, and overall subject-matter discipline, it's clear he's a command pilot.

I'm here to ask him about milestones, setbacks, misconceptions, and his work as a wing commander, pilot, and now director of the integration office for America's priciest weapons system: the F-35 Lightning II.

Before coming to the Pentagon to head the integration office, Pleus spent 24 years flying the F-16 with just north of 2,200 flight hours, followed by two years as the commander of the 56th Fighter Wing at Luke Air Force Base.

While at Luke, Pleus welcomed a unique challenge: Develop the next-generation of lethal F-35 fighter pilots.

Within a few months, the first student for the 56th Fighter Wing began F-35 training — it was Pleus.

Now headquartered at the Pentagon for a little over five months, Pleus is the single voice for the US Air Force to the F-35's Joint Program Office.

I glance at the commemorative plaques lining his office walls before he offers me a seat at a polished conference table.

"So what's the biggest misconception about this program that you want to leave behind in 2016?" I ask.

'It's not a real airplane'
"I'll use an analogy that I heard a few years ago," Pleus began.

"The F-35 was an airplane on paper only," he added. "The F-35 was a capability that was only on paper — it has not been proven. Yeah, maybe there are some test pilots that are flying it, but it's too far away and it's not a real airplane."

"That is my overall biggest misconception about the airplane," said Pleus.

"We have pilots that are flying it and executing missions today that simulate a combat environment, and we know that this airplane has capabilities that are far better than we could have ever hoped for in a fourth-generation aircraft."

"I can tell you that it is by far the best platform I've ever flown in my entire life, and at that you would have to take me on my word."

In August 2016, Gen. Herbert "Hawk" Carlisle, commander of Air Combat Command,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(IOC) for a squadron of F-35A's — a significant breakthrough for the weapons program, which has been beset by design flaws, cost overruns, and technical challenges.

"Initial operating capability is a huge milestone because what you're saying is this is not necessarily just a developmental airplane anymore. This is a real thing. We could on that day have sent those airplanes into combat the next day," Pleus said.

Since IOC, the US Air Force has trained more than 120 pilots in 100 F-35As, accruing a combined total of 75,000 hours of flight time.

'One our adversaries should fear'

In preparing to sit down with Pleus, I recalled comments he made at the Air Force Association's annual conference in September. "In terms of lethality and survivability, the aircraft is absolutely head and shoulders above our legacy fleet of fighters currently fielded," he said at the time. "This is an absolutely formidable airplane, and one our adversaries should fear."

So I followed up, asking him, as one of the few people who have flown both an F-16 and an F-35, what's it like to engage an F-35?

"You never knew I was there," he said with a smile. "You literally would never know I'm there. I flew the F-35 against other fourth-generation platforms and we killed them and they never even saw us."

"If you were to engage an F-35 in say, a visual dogfight capability," he added, "the capabilities of the F-35 are absolutely eye-watering compared to a fourth-generation fighter."

"The airplane has unbelievable maneuvering characteristics that make it completely undefeatable in an air-to-air environment. So if it's a long-range contact, you'll never see me and you'll die, and if it's within visual-range contact you'll see me and you're gonna die and you're gonna die very quickly," said Pleus, who has 153 flight hours in the F-35.

To date, the US is slated to buy 2,443 F-35s at an acquisition cost of $379 billion. In December, the Joint Program Office released the finalized price for the most recent production contract for the fifth-generation jet.

After a little more than 14 months of negotiations between the Department of Defense and Lockheed Martin, the ninth Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP-9) contract for 57 F-35 jets was valued at $6.1 billion. The LRIP-9, which is essentially the ninth batch of jets, includes 34 jets for the US and 23 for five other countries.

The US Air Force, getting the lion's share of F-35s, bought 42 planes in LRIP-9 and paid $102.1 million a jet, which includes aircraft, engine, and fee.

By comparison, that $102.1 million is down from the previous contract by 5.5%, which equates to $5.9 million.

The first step on the F-35's journey to becoming the centerpiece of fusion warfare began on October 26, 2001, when the Pentagon awarded Lockheed Martin a contract worth more than $200 billion to build the next-generation stealth strike-fighter.

The Pentagon's request was colossal: Develop a supersonic fifth-generation aircraft with the capability to replace four existing kinds of US military aircraft but also to be used by multiple international partners.

What's more, design three variants of the fighter in order to accommodate the unique needs of each sister-service branch: the F-35A for the Air Force, F-35B for the amphibious Marine Corps, and F-35C for the Navy.

Having already engineered stealth aircraft — F-117A Nighthawk and F-22 Raptor — Lockheed Martin was playing on their home court.

The cradle of the F-35, with its slick floors, high ceilings, brightly painted assembly areas, and machinery hum, is where I saw the Joint Strike Fighter for the first time.

Riding in a golf cart through Lockheed Martin's mile-long production facility in Fort Worth, Texas, I watched the neatly organized bins of nuts and bolts, jet wings, and sophisticated electronics evolve into a seafoam green airframe.

Once assembled, the planes roll into a windowless complex devoted to draping the F-35 in its invisibility cloak. "This room is the most advanced painting facility in the world," retired US Air Force pilot and F-35 simulation instructor Rick Royer told me as we entered the Aircraft Final Finishes bay.

It's here where the jet receives its highly classified stealth technology that makes it almost invisible to enemy radar. It's here where the US military leaps ahead of emerging threats. It's here where the most expensive weapons system in American history is crafted.

And whatever its shortcomings, developing a platform of this magnitude is undoubtedly impressive.

'The only experts in the F-35 business, are those that fix, maintain, and fly the F-35'

At the aforementioned Air Force Association's annual conference, Pleus sat on a panel alongside commander of Air Combat Command, Gen. Herbert "Hawk" Carlisle, F-35A Joint Strike Fighter Program executive officer Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, and commander of the 388th Fighter Wing Col. David Lyons.

Pleus began his remarks, his delivery blunt and confident, "I'm hopeful that as we continue to grow this fleet, we all take the opportunity to form opinions on this airplane from experts. And the only experts in the F-35 business, are those that fix, maintain, and fly the F-35 on a day-to-day basis."

"Whether they be at Eglin, Luke, Edwards, Nellis, or Hill, if you go and talk to them they will give you the ground truth. If you are forming your opinions by somebody that has not fixed or flown the airplane I would tell you you're wrong."

The room couldn't have been more quiet.

Sitting at the head of a conference table in his office, Pleus had the same intensity I remember from the panel discussion at AFA.

"This airplane is out there."

"We got real pilots flying it, real maintenance guys working on it, and if you ask the experts — and my definition of an expert is you either flew it, fought against it, or you fixed it — if one of those three things you are now considered an expert on the F-35," Pleus said.

"If you haven't done any of those things, go find one of those people and ask them what they think about the airplane, and they'll tell you the truth."

At first blush, the F-35 is easy to criticize, with its much chronicled cost overruns, faulty ejection seats, and helmet-display issues, among other problems.

While I won't rehash, Pleus noted that the F-35A's 75,000 flying hours didn't go off without a hitch and addressed some of the program's more substantial setbacks in 2016.


...
size-limit reached; source is Business Insider (again :) right after Yesterday at 8:22 AM):
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
continuation of the post right above:
Successes and setbacks

"The biggest setback was an instability issue on 3i software," Pleus said thoughtfully.

"The instability was not found out until we released the software to our test community, and they found that the fusion system onboard the airplane with the sensors was having trouble talking to each other."

"So one computer is trying to talk and the other computer is trying to talk at the same time and they basically shut themselves down," Pleus explained.

The 3i software hang-up, which took about four months to solve, caused a delay that will impact the installment of the 3F software, which delivers the plane's full warfare capability.

Another setback, which Pleus labeled a "success," was the polyalphaolefin insulation issue discovered during an inspection at Nellis Air Force Base.

"Polyalphaolefin is kind of a coolant that runs through a system of pipes throughout the entire airplane to cool off the computers and some of the hardware onboard the plane. There was a vendor that produced the wrong insulation on one of the pipes and that insulation swole up and cracked and came apart from the pipes," Pleus said.

The problem came less than two months after the Air Force declared IOC and resulted in the temporary grounding of 15 jets.

"I think personally that that is a pretty big success story for two reasons, the first one was that we caught it very early in the process. So through very rigorous inspections that we have on the airplanes from a mechanical standpoint, it was noted very early."

"The second thing — because the way the program is built we knew exactly what airplanes by tail number by exact location, cause it was actually two manufacturers — so we knew which manufacturer had the good pipe and which manufacturer had the bad pipe and we knew exactly where it was."

"You say that is a success but what would you say to people who call that a significant setback?" I asked.

"My counter to that would be that there was absolutely no setback. The airplanes that we had that were operational and flying. We had a total of 13 of them that were United States Air Force airplanes and two of them were Norwegian airplanes and they were scattered at Hill Air Force Base, Nellis Air Force Base, and Luke Air Force Base. Those airplanes, once the insulation fault was discovered, while they didn't fly for a period of time there was no operational impact from a training perspective or a combat-capability perspective."

"There was also additional airplanes that Lockheed Martin had in the assembly line process that had these insulation issues associated with it and t he assembly line never stopped. That would be in my mind a huge setback to the program, what they did was continued those airplanes and fixed them as they came out."

"So those airplanes will all be delivered a few months late but still on schedule for the release of the airplanes. So from my standpoint, t hat bore no cost to the program. The United States Air Force, Department of the Navy and the Joint Programming Office did not pay a single penny for that."

Since speaking with Pleus, the F-35's saga continues.

On December 22, President-elect Donald Trump
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that he asked Boeing to "price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet." Trump's request came a day after
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
with the CEOs from Lockheed Martin and Boeing to discuss bringing the "costs down" on the F-35 and the next fleet of presidential aircraft.

Boeing's response — also announced
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
— said it accepted the invitation to work with the Trump administration to " affordably meet US military requirements."

Pleus noted a few upcoming events for the F-35A in 2017. The Air Force plans to debut the F-35A at Red Flag, the pinnacle of combat training, later this month and lasting until February. Following the training at Red Flag, the F-35A will participate in a theater security package, which is a small deployment to what Pleus called an "austere-type location."

"One of the good examples you can think of is we send F-22s to Kadena Air Force Base, and they'll be there a couple of months," he said. "They go to a base that's not necessarily use to having F-22s on it, and they train, they practice, they do all the things that they would normally do and then they'll redeploy back to their home. We do that with almost all of our fighter aircraft in the United States ... and we send them to both the Pacific theater as well as the European theater."

A third highlight this year will be when the 34th Fighter Squadron at Hill Air Force Base reaches its full capacity of airplanes in the fall.

"That means that not only will they have their 24 primary assigned aircraft but they will also have the right contingent of properly trained pilots and properly trained maintenance as well as their intelligence folks. At that point, you have a full squadron that a combatant commander would be looking for for a true combat role."
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


the F-35 show has been very interesting so far ... and soon will get even better, I guess
 
isn't she leaving? :) anyway Super Hornet 'Not Interchangable' With F-35, Says US Air Force Secretary
If US President-elect Donald Trump moves forward with trying to supplant Lockheed Martin’s F-35 with Boeing’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, he can expect to find opposition from the Air Force, the service’s top civilian said.

Trump made waves in December when — just a day after meeting the Defense Department’s F-35 program chief and CEOs from Lockheed and Boeing — he tweeted out that he had asked Boeing to price out a Super Hornet that would be “comparable” to an F-35.

While the president can determine whether to cancel a weapons program or direct the military to start a new one, the Air Force remains a strong supporter of the F-35 program, Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James told Defense News in a Jan. 5 interview.

“The Air Force does not view the F/A-18 and the F-35 to be substitutable at all,” she said. “They fulfill different requirements. They’re both fine aircraft, don’t get me wrong. But it’s fourth generation, and F-35 is fifth generation.”

“The leaders of the Air Force will have the opportunity when the time comes to advise the president-elect on this,” she added. “But based on everything I know, the two are not interchangeable and the Air Force has not expressed interest in the F/A-18s.”

Trump has already met with one such official, the Defense Department’s F-35 program chief Gen. Christopher Bogdan, to discuss the program. While the president-elect has not softened on the F-35 since then, James pointed out that his meetings with Boeing head Dennis Muilenburg and Lockheed CEO Marillyn Hewson may have had an impact on Trump’s tone.

“It’s impossible for me to say” what Trump’s intentions are, she said. “But clearly on that particular day, he did have both the CEOs of Lockheed and Boeing come talk to him about these programs. He did talk about costs. … It certainly would be consistent, I believe, that he is trying to negotiate and trying to see whatever he can do to bring down costs further.”

Although the joint strike fighter still is working through challenges, the program has shown progress, said James, who pointed to decreased costs and the service’s declaration of initial operational capability last August.
source is DefenseNews
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
I'll repeat myself first:
Wednesday at 10:50 AM
OK I just hope the Marines won't outsmart themselves (or jam themselves)
now
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"As an example, Bailey said he was at Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms, Calif., to observe an infantry officers course last year, where officers riding in the back of MV-22 Ospreys in a raid scenario had tablets that were tied in to an F-35. Bailey and others observed from a simulated F-35 – a room with multiple computer screens that showed all the information an F-35 pilot would have at his disposal while flying. A Marine in one Osprey could change the plan for the raid based on new information, and that change was sent to both the tablets in the other Ospreys and to the F-35 pilot":
Interview: Lt. Gen. Bailey Says F-35, Closer Partnerships Will Enhance Operations in 2017
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
it's mostly F-35 inside
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
is mostly good news for the Marine Corps — but there are a couple of important caveats. Both his
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
s by 50 percent and his public lambasting of the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
could cause problems for Marine Corps leaders as they struggle to explain their strategy to the enthusiastic but inexperienced Trump.

Most politicians love Marines, and Trump is no exception, nominating
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to his cabinet. But the Marines are not only the most politically popular service, they’re also the smallest, and an overly enthusiastic embrace can cause almost as many problems as outright criticism.

Consider Trump’s pledge to grow the Marine Corps from 24 active-duty rifle battalions to 36, and from two tank battalions to three. The figures come straight from Heritage Foundation analyst Dakota Wood — a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
— who proposed
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
in all the services, based on the forces required to wage past wars.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, Wood & co. looked at average force levels across Korea, Vietnam, the 1991 Gulf War, and the 2003 invasion of Iraq; doubled that average to allow for
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
; and then added another 20 percent to account for units in training, refit, or otherwise unavailable.

But when you ask
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
about how best to grow the Corps, he’s not looking back at the requirements of past wars. He’s focused on
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, particularly cyber and electronic warfare. If Trump wants to build 13 new ground combat battalions, the Marines will of course obey. But if Gen. Neller instead could choose what to do with a few thousand more Marines, he’d rather add them to
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
than to rifle squads and tank crews.

The Marine Corps’ aviation wing has even more to worry about, because Trump is publicly slamming the fighter on which they’ve bet their future, the F-35. While the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
is buying the most Joint Strike Fighters, the Marine Corps is buying the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
variant, the F-35B, and it’s
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
before either the Air Force or Navy variants go.

What makes the F-35B complex? It sacrifices fuel capacity for, effectively, an extra engine that lets it land and take off vertically, without a runway. That “jump jet” capacity is crucial for the Marine Corps, which operates off
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for a conventional take-off or landing. The Marines also want to operate future fighters out of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. But the history of the notoriously crash-prone
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, which the F-35B will replace, suggests this form of flight is particularly tricky. One high-profile
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, let alone a death, would bring intense scrutiny to the F-35B — and Trump is already skeptical of the entire F-35 program.

Overall, the odds are the Marines will do well under a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. Just don’t be too surprised if the love affair turns sour.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
... The most expensive F-35 variant has hit another major snag that could take years to fix

source (now it says the article appeared eleven hours ago):
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Hold-back problem right now did not prevent the tests but can be dangerous possible a complete re design !

The Navy’s F-35C Has A Major Nose Gear Problem
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Medium-term actions include small modifications to the nose gear and HMD symbology, such as simplifying what is displayed in the helmet during catapult launches. These alterations are not set to begin for about another year, after which they will take at least six months to accomplish, and the HMD software may take much longer to change due to the restrictions of the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Long-term actions are not slated to begin until 2019—the same year the jet will supposedly be declared operational—and would take between one and three years to complete. These include changes to the hold-back bar design, and could include alterations to the carrier’s catapult systems themselves to change the amount of compression the nose strut experiences prior to launch. Finally, if these measures don’t fix the problem, a full redesign of the nose gear assembly would be needed. Currently a redesign isn’t being pursued due to development time restraints, and would likely take years to achieve once the process begins. Dramatically retrofitting existing F-35Cs—there will be squadrons in service by that time—would also be a costly affair to say the least.
 
Top