The plane: what did you just say to me?
The pilot: oh, please, forgive me.
The plane: too late, I will show you what is "kick ass".
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter News, Videos and pics Thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
The pilot: oh, please, forgive me.
The plane: too late, I will show you what is "kick ass".
Rate of availability is between 50%-60% for the majority of the US aircraft fleet beside some small beech and gulfstream based airframe. THe B1b is one of the worst with less than half the fleet not mission capable (40% in 2021).
The biggest problem about F-35 is these airframe are mostly fresh and new... Number in FY20 and 21 seems to be better but I have only the A model, the less troublesome of the lot on that list.
The B model have auto-ejection when onboard computer feel that the plane is irrecuperable. The auto-ejection was to diminish the reaction time from the pilot on vertical landing conditions, just find it strange if it was triggered in another flight scenario.
If bad weather could cause it to trigger autoejection, maybe from turbulence or messing up sensors, it's quite bad. A pilot unprepared for ejection could mean quite a lot of injuries...
Be kind to the machine spirit.So F-35B can expell the pilot out of its own mind?!Better to be nice to the jet, otherwise you will be kicked out before you know it. Luckily the jet is kind enough to send the parachute together with the seat.
Is the F-35 becoming too big to fail? Seems like we've been hearing problems about it for years, all the while it was being marketed and sold to allies. Can those countries maintain/repair those jets themselves, or would the planes have to be sent back to LM whenever there is something wrong with it, or even be forced to swap for new jets?
i think it's a long con by LM to keep minting money.
F-35 have problems but it is the best they can have before NGAD. If anything it shows how unsustainable going heavy on stealth is. Something akin to J-16 like F-15EX was needed.
I heard J-20 had some special technique on coat maintnence before procured in large number. Maybe that is what F-35 was missing.
I heard J-20 had some special technique on coat maintnence before procured in large number. Maybe that is what F-35 was missing.
The thing that F-35 is missing is common sense in is design phase. It's 3 planes in one, build to replace a ton of different fighter jets (F18abcd, F-16, A6, A-10, AV8B, Tornado, Jaguar, etc), using untested sytems and materials while promising all bells and whistles.
Ended with way less commonality between the 3 variants, a project too big with all eggs in one basket, majority of bell and whistle nonfunctioning and everything is managed with maximum level of corporate greed.
Sounds like it's working perfectly as intended.
The big takeaway from the GAO report is that the US government and the primary contractor (Lockheed Martin) are at a constant crossroads of who is responsible for what part of the F-35 enterprise. LM points the finger at the government, and the government points the finger at LM. Since GAO is a government organization it is siding with government, which is trying to wrench more control from LM. This report will be used for more of that. a lot of these agreements stem from decades back when the government and contractor drew up the plans of who would take care of what parts and programs of the worlds largest defense program. Remember that at the time the notion that free enterprise just did everything better than government was alive and well. it still is today too, but the government wants more control over the F-35 for the moment.
that is the least of the problems, but its constantly assumed that is what the problem is. The pentagon managed to botch KC-X which should be pretty straightforward. If all pentagon programs went like clockwork then it would be easy to complain about the F-35, but since we have things like the zumwalt, LCS, KC-X, CSAR-X, F-22, V-22 and a whole host of problems with every program under the sun, its not a matter of the F-35 having problems alone. This is a systematic problem, the program is immaterial.
F-35 would have been better off with a more realistic timetable to start with, and as I pointed out before the government constantly changed the standards and expectations of the F-35 throughout the process. When anyone changes what they want in a previously agreed on deal, its going to lead to delays and cost overages. This has little to do with the aircraft itself. The commonality is not necessarily supposed to be among the parts of the aircraft, the most important and expensive parts are the avionics and the engine. No one cares if the F-35B uses a different canopy than the F-35A/C that is small and irrelevant compared to the big ticket items. They all share a center fuselage, common engine, common electronics, common training, etc.
most people don't even really bother to look into any of the details of what the F-35 is, or why things are. they just regurgitate what they read online and then repeat "good ol' boy" slogans. always remember that "corporate greed" was one of the things that lead to the JSF in the first place. Never again would the taxpayer be nefariously "tricked" into buying a separate aircraft for each mission or service! the F-16 and F-18 would be combined this time! services no longer got to have their own "toys" now. That was going to be stopped and the US congress was here to stop it. And anyone in industry or uniform who protested was nothing more than a greedy shill, tools of the dying MIC!
Initially the F-35 was going to use heavier, less refined parts, this would save money while adding weight. Then the goals shifted and new standards created the need for a redesign. This meant lighter, more refined, but more expensive parts- and less commonality. It was a tradeoff and it is up to the reader to decide if such a thing should have been shifted at all, or if it was an intelligent change that meant a better aircraft at more cost. it is a simple fact that programs "evolve" as the demands shift. Such growth is pretty common, but its going to be felt more on a program where every change must be incorporated across the fleet. Government greed exists too, its just not about money but about performance. Instead of creating a realistic timeline they got greedy. instead of creating a realistic set of standards and sticking with it, they got greedy, instead of freezing the design, they got greedy and changed it. and then in the end went "wow! this sure does cost a lot of money! and its completely blown that silly schedule we gave it!" How did that happen?!
I wish I could say the lessons had been learned, but we are instead launching straight into NGAD. "using untested sytems and materials while promising all bells and whistles." it is also worth noting that every Us aircraft fielded after Vietnam has had its share of complaints and detractors. the F-16 was once considered a boongdoogle, and the F-15 a prideful gold plated waste.
actually, they will have to expand production to keep up with demand. Supply currently can't match it.
its the worlds most awful, most in demand fighter.