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

regarding the most recent posts here:

the Pentagon asserted tremendous cost savings by commonality of the three variants, of course, while May 19, 2018
... even The National Interest dropped this already May 4, 2016
Is the F-35 Stealth Fighter Set to Triumph Over Its Greatest Foe (Not China)?
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"The three variants were originally intended to have
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, and the USN budgets even costed the F-35B and C as a single line item until FY2010. Engineering and design changes through the life of the program have instead resulted in three essentially distinct aircraft, with only about
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. "
how many aircraft is in Lot 11? asking because now noticed
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Press Operations

Release No: CR-098-18
May 24, 2018


Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is being awarded a $558,276,346 cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee, fixed-price-incentive-firm, firm-fixed-price contract. This contract provides for sustainment support, including equipment, training devices, training facilities, non-aircraft spares, Autonomic Logistics Information System hardware and software, and facilities standup in support of low-rate initial production Lot 11 F-35 Lightning II aircraft in support of the Air Force, Marine Corps, Navy; non-Department of Defense (DoD) participants, and foreign military sales (FMS) customers. Work will be performed in Orlando, Florida (71 percent); Redondo Beach, California (13 percent); Fort Worth, Texas (11 percent); Owego, New York (4 percent); and Samlesbury, United Kingdom (1 percent), and is expected to be completed in February 2023. Fiscal 2016, 2017, and 2018 aircraft procurement (Air Force, Marine Corps, and Navy); non-DoD participant; and FMS funds in the amount of $558,276,346 will be obligated at time of award, $19,550,597 of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract combines purchases for the Air Force ($173,171,727; 31 percent); Marine Corps ($62,285,043; 11 percent); Navy ($50,968,348; 9 percent); non-DoD participants ($232,144,112; 42 percent); and FMS customers ($39,707,116; 7 percent). This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to 10 U.S. Code 2304(C)(1). The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00019-18-C-1048).
also curious how that half of a bil until 2023 is related to one bil and a half until next May May 1, 2018
LOL! right after the above comment noticed Lockheed gets $1.4B contract for F-35 sustainment
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
it sure looks like several mil per aircraft per year for 'support' LOL
EDIT to be included into the flying cost per hour, yes? no?
Last edited:


Tyrant King
Stealth was not a concern, Boeing clearly had a solution in place (or they wouldn't get to prototype stage).
A reduced radar Cross section was a Demand on the JSF from Day one.

F-32 promised to be longer-legged(significantly) , more maneuverable in combat, cheaper and slightly smaller.
The Delta Wing of the Prototype did offer increased fuel load but at the Cost of maneuvering. When The Navy said they wanted a more nimble bird Boeing who had been betting on Theoretical cost savings was pushed back to the drawing board.
But yes, STOVL was just a mess all around, and prototypes weren't just troublesome,
Boeing was Banking on the Harrier's Direct lift system LockMart went with the more complex set up. it turned out though that the X35B system proved more reliable.
they weren't even representative of what they wanted to build.
because of the changes in requirements, but Lockheed seems to have foreseen the demand of a more nimble fighter where Boeing placed all it's hopes in risk reduction and Perceived reduced production cost. Even when Boeing was reassessing there design the form of Tail selected the Four poster was for perceived cost reduction. They had also looked at the Pelican tail configuration like on the YF23 but the Boeing Execs overruled that choice.
Since the plan was to build one aircraft, it was this shafted fan who essentially won the deal to the Lockheed.
The JSF was always intended to be 3 variants but with a degree of Commonality. The X32 didn't just suffer when it came to the VTOL but it also had issues in simulated carrier ops and The Central mounted engine with the Associated radar cross section likely caused all 4 involved in the selection ( USAF, USMC, USN, RAF) to have reservations.
However in the end you are on the right track. The Combined Lift fan 3 barring swivel system of The X35B allowed that the X35A and X35C to have a serpentine intake and reduce radar cross section. it also allowed a more conventional layout of machine better suited for all around operations.
Boeing struggled just to meet basic requirement here, and Lighting not just worked, it just exceed it in everything.
Totally agree.


Junior Member
Registered Member
A reduced radar Cross section was a Demand on the JSF from Day one.
I mean, "would be" F-32 clearly was stealthy enough frontally.
Probably through usage of complex radar blocker.
It's interesting to know,actually, how these relate with those on F/A-18E, especially on block III aircraft.
kinda success story
Posted: May 24, 2018 5:20 PM

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A small repair to an F-35B Lightning II strike fighter was made possible by a 3D printer on board a Navy amphibious assault ship, an act that saved tens of thousands of dollars and shortened the repair time, a Marine expeditionary unit (MEU) commander said.

Col. Tye R. Wallace, commander of the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit, speaking May 24 to the Potomac Institute in Arlington, Virginia, on the two patrols in the Pacific made by the MEU within the past year, said that one of the six embarked F-35Bs on their first operational shipboard deployment board USS Wasp this spring suffered breakage of a bump stock, a small plastic piece on a landing gear door that prevents metal-on-metal contact when the landing gear door is closed.

“You couldn’t order the little plastic piece by itself,” Wallace said. “You had to order the whole panel: $64,000 and two-weeks of time to ship it out to us. The squadron [Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121], being ingenious, went to our logistics battalion [that had a 3D printer] and said, ‘Can you see if you can build this little plastic part?’”

The part was built, and “we had a tech rep with us who, by luck, knew some people at NAVAIR [Naval Air Systems Command],” Wallace said. “He floated it up to NAVAIR, got it approved, and a couple days later the part was on the plane, and we were flying the airplane. For about 25 to 50 cents worth of plastic, we had the jet up operational and flying, versus 64 grand and two weeks of waiting, [thanks to a young sergeant and this printer].”

Wallace said the 3D printer also was used to make covers for EOD [explosive ordnance disposal] robots, temporary pintels for machine guns, throttles for small boats, and broken handles on personal wall lockers.

“If it’s made out of plastic, you can probably make it,” he said. “3D printing is a wave of the future that we need to start making happen.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Junior Member
Mar 7, 2018
updating with just yet another link:
Future of F-35 in Italy remains a mystery under new government
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Doesn't really sound good if they come to power the 35 could lose again which al8ng with Canada could be a real dent but who would replace the Italian maintenance and assembly not to mention if 35 loses the Turk sales
the part of the most recent DefenseNews article
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
related to F-35:

"Due to rising
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, the U.S. Senate’s annual defense policy bill proposes shaving two aircraft off the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to buy 77 in 2019.

And that means there’s some closed-door wrangling ahead as staff and lawmakers reconcile competing
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of the National Defense Authorization Act.

The Senate Armed Services Committee-approved bill approached not only the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, but the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System, or
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, differently than the House-approved bill.

The SASC bill would authorize one fewer of the Lockheed Martin-made F-35s for the Air Force and Navy to redirect the savings into funding for spares, modifications and depot repair capability. The bill also mandates quarterly updates to Congress on the status and direction of the F-35 program, codifying already regular communication with Congress.

“There was concern the program wasn’t sufficiently balanced for sustainment costs of the aircraft, so within the monies for F-35, the adjustment was made to put the money into sustainment that would be sufficient,” an SASC aide said Friday. “That entailed a minor reduction in aircraft procurement.”

The idea, according to an SASC summary of its bill, was to “establish a solid sustainment base before the steep ramp of production overwhelms the enterprise’s ability to sustain the aircraft.”

The move comes as Air Force officials have sought to drive down sustainment costs to that of fourth-generation fighters like the F-16 and in the wake of reports the service would cut its purchases if costs don’t sufficiently fall.

The Government Accountability Office projected in 2017 that total sustainment costs over the life of the F-35 program could amount to more than $1 trillion during a 60-year life cycle.

The SASC approved its version of the massive NDAA after meeting behind closed doors last week, but the text of the bill itself is not expected for at least several days.

The NDAA is several steps from becoming law. The House passed its version May 24, and the Senate must pass its version before the two are reconciled over the summer into a final bill for both chambers to pass."
I've read only the ALIS part of
Marine Corps F-35s dogged by parts shortages
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

which is:
ALIS improving…but slowly

ALIS, the F-35’s logistics system, has been slammed by F-35 critics for being
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and requiring its users to often work around the system’s limitations. As the software improves, maintainers are noting better performance, but say it still needs improvement.

“It’s slow,” Pedro said, and that may be a problem specific to Beaufort, as Marines at MCAS Yuma in Arizona are reportedly experiencing faster ALIS response times.

“We have a bunch of aircraft out there. And we have only so many servers,” he said. “They have less aircraft, and their servers aren’t booting up as much information.”

Another maintainer told Defense News that ALIS’ 2.0.2 software update, a version of which is used at Beaufort, is helping speed up engine maintenance. ALIS 2.0.2 marked the first time the F-35’s Pratt & Whitney F135 engine was fully integrated with the system, allowing it to pull data from the F135 and run diagnostics.

However, a number of workarounds are still needed, for instance, when that data does not import correctly, the maintainer said.

Friedman, a spokesman for Lockheed, said the company is “making improvements to ALIS to enhance the user experience, improve work flow and lower maintenance labor and material cost.”


Tyrant King
I've read only the ALIS part of
Marine Corps F-35s dogged by parts shortages
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

which is:
Nothing new. The USMC's whole Fixed wing fleets are all plagued by this. F18C/D have this issue because of age and fighting the remaining navy units for spares, Which is Nothing compared to the Harrier Fleets that often have abysmal readiness rates.