Almost every single fighter program has that problem. For example the F-22's mean time before maintenance was less than 0.67 hours at IOC, and wasn't much higher than 1.5 two years after. The KPP for it was 3.0 hours (which it now has reached)
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08467sp.pdf
The F/A-18E/F's range never reached KPP... its significantly shorter than what it should have been because of pylon design, and is barely better than the F/A-18C.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-99-127/pdf/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-99-127.pdf
Same goes for the Super Hornet's An/Apg-79 radar, which still has not met some of its key performance parameters. I also think it did not meet some of its aerodynamic parameters.
All programs see this sort of decrease... In truth we don't know exactly what it means in regards to the F-35 because there is no context behind the numbers. Altitude, load, engine life, AB... all of those are not clear.
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08467sp.pdf
The F/A-18E/F's range never reached KPP... its significantly shorter than what it should have been because of pylon design, and is barely better than the F/A-18C.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-99-127/pdf/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-99-127.pdf
Same goes for the Super Hornet's An/Apg-79 radar, which still has not met some of its key performance parameters. I also think it did not meet some of its aerodynamic parameters.
All programs see this sort of decrease... In truth we don't know exactly what it means in regards to the F-35 because there is no context behind the numbers. Altitude, load, engine life, AB... all of those are not clear.
HB_Pencil said:
It was the retirement of the F-111 fleet combined with delays to the F-35 program that was the initial trigger for the F-18F purchase. http://www.anao.gov.au/Publications/Audit-Reports/2012-2013/F18/Audit-brochure The prewiring was a follow-on decision, and late last year the conversion of 12 F-18Fs to EA-18G was approved, with an all up price tag of $1.5b http://www.defence.gov.au/defencenews/stories/2012/aug/0823.htm
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
Article in USAF news:
First F-35A four-ship flies over Eglin
by Maj. Karen Roganov
Eglin Air Force Base Public Affairs
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123335351
First F-35A four-ship flies over Eglin
by Maj. Karen Roganov
Eglin Air Force Base Public Affairs
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123335351
- Reaction score
- 4,270
- Points
- 1,260
LM setting up Ottawa office....
Anyone care to triangulate that yellow bit with this?
LockMart Info-machine, 7 Feb 13
Anyone care to triangulate that yellow bit with this?
What a real Johnny Canuck fighter pilot says about the F-35 . . .
"“What does that do?” he said, pointing to an F-35 model on the table.
“It does 50 per cent further in range than the CF-18s that I flew, that my squadron flew going to the Arctic. It allows you to go the Arctic by yourself, not refuel, it allows you to go patrol over the Arctic and stay over station longer. You go further, you stay on station longer than any airplane, by a dramatic amount, 50 per cent further than I ever could go in a CF-18, that’s dramatic, that’s measurable, everyone gets it, because the expanse of the Arctic is on a scale that only a Canadian can understand,” said Mr. Flynn.
“What do you see? In the CF-18 what you have is a little radar that looks ahead, and you have the equivalent of a fuzz buster, a radar warning receiver,” Mr. Flynn said, answering questions about criticism over F-35 capabilities.
“What you see with the sensors in this airplane, I see, in my F-35 in Texas, to the horizon, everything as far as the eye can see is what I see and sense, and by the way, no one can see me doing that,” he said in reference to F-35 stealth capability.
“I get to patrol the Arctic, I go further, I stay longer, I see dramatically further at all sorts of spectrums, more than other airplane could, and no one knows I’m there. To me this is entirely a story about Arctic sovereignty,” Mr. Flynn said."
http://www.hilltimes.com/news/politics/2013/02/07/lockheed-martin’s-top-sales-guys-pitch-f-35s-in-ottawa-flynn-says-jet-fighters/33625
Guess the usual supsects won't believe him despite his track record of having been there and really done that.
"“What does that do?” he said, pointing to an F-35 model on the table.
“It does 50 per cent further in range than the CF-18s that I flew, that my squadron flew going to the Arctic. It allows you to go the Arctic by yourself, not refuel, it allows you to go patrol over the Arctic and stay over station longer. You go further, you stay on station longer than any airplane, by a dramatic amount, 50 per cent further than I ever could go in a CF-18, that’s dramatic, that’s measurable, everyone gets it, because the expanse of the Arctic is on a scale that only a Canadian can understand,” said Mr. Flynn.
“What do you see? In the CF-18 what you have is a little radar that looks ahead, and you have the equivalent of a fuzz buster, a radar warning receiver,” Mr. Flynn said, answering questions about criticism over F-35 capabilities.
“What you see with the sensors in this airplane, I see, in my F-35 in Texas, to the horizon, everything as far as the eye can see is what I see and sense, and by the way, no one can see me doing that,” he said in reference to F-35 stealth capability.
“I get to patrol the Arctic, I go further, I stay longer, I see dramatically further at all sorts of spectrums, more than other airplane could, and no one knows I’m there. To me this is entirely a story about Arctic sovereignty,” Mr. Flynn said."
http://www.hilltimes.com/news/politics/2013/02/07/lockheed-martin’s-top-sales-guys-pitch-f-35s-in-ottawa-flynn-says-jet-fighters/33625
Guess the usual supsects won't believe him despite his track record of having been there and really done that.
- Reaction score
- 6,488
- Points
- 1,360
HEY, I'M IMPRESSED!!!
I mean if the freakin' table top model can do all that just imagine what the plane will do.............. :facepalm:
I mean if the freakin' table top model can do all that just imagine what the plane will do.............. :facepalm:
- Reaction score
- 4,270
- Points
- 1,260
And I'm SURE we'd hear about any problems about the model from a guy whose paycheque is signed by the same folks that 1) made the model ....Bruce Monkhouse said:
.... or 2) posted videos to YouTube saying how well things are going, right?HB_Pencil said:
Do I believe all the critics of the F-35? No - too much potential to cherry-pick only the bits supporting the case being made.
Do I believe all the company says? See above.
- Reaction score
- 8,299
- Points
- 1,160
I can't help but wonder what one of my grandfathers would have made of all of this.
He was a craftsman on the team that built the prototype Prestwick Pioneer for Scottish Aviation just after the war (WW2 for the pedantically inclined).
They designed and built a good solid aircraft that was taken into service and earned its reputation during the Malayan Emergency.
One saying of his I remember all too well as an inquisitive 5 year old asking unanswerable questions about work he was doing.
"Fools and Bairns shouldn't see half done work!"
The poor buggers at Lockheed are having to work in full view of 6 billion television viewers.......including their competitors.
Previously it would have been enough to build a plane that flew. Lockheed now has to deliver a plane that mechanics can service without breaking a sweat and armourers can bomb up in record times. A very different game.
He was a craftsman on the team that built the prototype Prestwick Pioneer for Scottish Aviation just after the war (WW2 for the pedantically inclined).
They designed and built a good solid aircraft that was taken into service and earned its reputation during the Malayan Emergency.
One saying of his I remember all too well as an inquisitive 5 year old asking unanswerable questions about work he was doing.
"Fools and Bairns shouldn't see half done work!"
The poor buggers at Lockheed are having to work in full view of 6 billion television viewers.......including their competitors.
Previously it would have been enough to build a plane that flew. Lockheed now has to deliver a plane that mechanics can service without breaking a sweat and armourers can bomb up in record times. A very different game.
Kirkhill said:
Basically that's the rub. I've never seen a program under so much scrutiny... probably the closest parallel might have been the American space program in the early 1960s. Every detail gets nitpicked, discussed, criticized, and then rewashed in the news. Yet other programs get a complete pass on far worse problems.
I'm certainly not saying this program has been a paragon of acquisitions excellence... hardly. However alot of what has been emerging in the press lately has been completely detached from the reality. The aircraft, like every other one before it, will likely not meet some of its parameters, but basically deliver on the capabilities as promised. Realizing that should be the basis on how we guide our decisions... not listening to the hyperbole of the Opposition and other actors.
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,359
- Points
- 1,010
There was opposition to the Bradley when it was being developed and yet it has done quite well (its not perfect but in a time when the Marder was the only other western IFV, it earned its stripes).
I am sure their were critics for every other major product undertaken.
Look at the Stryker family of vehicles that came into US Army service slightly more than a decade ago. Some people screamed bloody outrage at using 8 X 8 vehicles on a modern battlefield. However it has done well and earned its stripes too.
An imperfect plan on time is better than a perfect one too late. Can not satisfy all critics.
Time will tell if F35 is a success or a complete flop.
I am sure their were critics for every other major product undertaken.
Look at the Stryker family of vehicles that came into US Army service slightly more than a decade ago. Some people screamed bloody outrage at using 8 X 8 vehicles on a modern battlefield. However it has done well and earned its stripes too.
An imperfect plan on time is better than a perfect one too late. Can not satisfy all critics.
Time will tell if F35 is a success or a complete flop.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,936
- Points
- 1,160
Kirkhill said:I can't help but wonder what one of my grandfathers would have made of all of this.
He was a craftsman on the team that built the prototype Prestwick Pioneer for Scottish Aviation just after the war (WW2 for the pedantically inclined).
They designed and built a good solid aircraft that was taken into service and earned its reputation during the Malayan Emergency.
One saying of his I remember all too well as an inquisitive 5 year old asking unanswerable questions about work he was doing.
"Fools and Bairns shouldn't see half done work!"
The poor buggers at Lockheed are having to work in full view of 6 billion television viewers.......including their competitors.
Previously it would have been enough to build a plane that flew. Lockheed now has to deliver a plane that mechanics can service without breaking a sweat and armourers can bomb up in record times. A very different game.
You need to take a holiday in Malaysia, good food and some interesting museums
- Reaction score
- 8,299
- Points
- 1,160
Thanks for that photo Colin, and the advice.
Pretty cool to see one of Grampa's aircraft in such good condition.
If I can be permitted to extend this tangent a little further - Here's a demonstration video of the Pioneer at Prestwick. About half way through they show the Pioneer landing requirements in comparison to the runways at Prestwick.
http://ssa.nls.uk/film.cfm?fid=5024
On a more direct reference to the F-35 programme, if you take a read of the Wikipedia entry you will see that it references a minor hiccup in the development of the aircraft.
The original design brief signed off by the Scottish Aviation and the RAF called for a 240 HP engine.
The Prototype failed to make one of its KPPs.
The RAF cancelled the contract.
Scottish Aviation then went on to rework the design and prototypes on its own shilling.
They swapped out the 240 HP engine for a 520 HP engine and demonstrated it to the RAF.
The RAF proceeded to buy the aircraft - something like a total of 59 were built.
Now, can you imagine the furor if the F35 were suddenly discovered to require a thrust increase of 116%? How would that be managed in the glare of the cameras? First of all it would require the design of an engine that doesn't exist or redesigning the fuselage and everything attached to it to accomodate a second engine and still end up at 92% of the power requirement.
The F35 is worlds away from the Prestwick Pioneer in all respects, just as a Prius is worlds away from a Model T. But many folks are evaluating its progress in comparison to aircraft like the Pioneer. I suppose they would be just as happy driving a Model T as a Prius.
Wheels? Wheels. Engine? Engine. Steering Wheel? Steering Wheel. Good to Go.
Wings? Wings. Engine? Engine. Joystick? Joystick. Good to Go.
Pretty cool to see one of Grampa's aircraft in such good condition.
If I can be permitted to extend this tangent a little further - Here's a demonstration video of the Pioneer at Prestwick. About half way through they show the Pioneer landing requirements in comparison to the runways at Prestwick.
http://ssa.nls.uk/film.cfm?fid=5024
On a more direct reference to the F-35 programme, if you take a read of the Wikipedia entry you will see that it references a minor hiccup in the development of the aircraft.
The original design brief signed off by the Scottish Aviation and the RAF called for a 240 HP engine.
The Prototype failed to make one of its KPPs.
The RAF cancelled the contract.
Scottish Aviation then went on to rework the design and prototypes on its own shilling.
They swapped out the 240 HP engine for a 520 HP engine and demonstrated it to the RAF.
The RAF proceeded to buy the aircraft - something like a total of 59 were built.
Now, can you imagine the furor if the F35 were suddenly discovered to require a thrust increase of 116%? How would that be managed in the glare of the cameras? First of all it would require the design of an engine that doesn't exist or redesigning the fuselage and everything attached to it to accomodate a second engine and still end up at 92% of the power requirement.
The F35 is worlds away from the Prestwick Pioneer in all respects, just as a Prius is worlds away from a Model T. But many folks are evaluating its progress in comparison to aircraft like the Pioneer. I suppose they would be just as happy driving a Model T as a Prius.
Wheels? Wheels. Engine? Engine. Steering Wheel? Steering Wheel. Good to Go.
Wings? Wings. Engine? Engine. Joystick? Joystick. Good to Go.
- Reaction score
- 64
- Points
- 530
I cant think of another combat aircraft that has or will have this capability.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fHZO0T5mDYU
http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2013/02/11/522451/10021210/en/Northrop-Grumman-AAQ-37-Sensor-System-Demonstrates-Hostile-Fire-Detection-Capability.html
BALTIMORE, Feb. 11, 2013 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Northrop Grumman Corporation's (NYSE:NOC) AN/AAQ-37 Electro-Optical Distributed Aperture System (DAS), developed for the F-35 Lightning II, has added hostile ground fire detection to its capabilities by successfully detecting and locating tanks that were firing live rounds during preparations for a military exercise.
A video accompanying this release is available on YouTube at http://youtu.be/fHZO0T5mDYU.
While being flown on Northrop Grumman's BAC 1-11 test aircraft, the DAS detected and located tank fire from an operationally significant distance. In addition to artillery, the system is able to simultaneously detect and pinpoint the location of rockets and anti-aircraft artillery fired in a wide area.
The AN/AAQ-37 DAS provides passive spherical awareness for the F-35, detecting and tracking aircraft and missiles in every direction simultaneously, providing visual imagery for day or night navigation and targeting purposes.
"The DAS continues to show its ability to gather and analyze data for a wide range of missions not initially contemplated for this sensor system. These flight test results are just the latest example of the situational awareness capability of this revolutionary technology in action," said Mark Rossi, Northrop Grumman's DAS business area director.
Although hostile fire detection is not an F-35 requirement for the DAS, the system design makes it ideal for this mission. This inherent capability enables DAS to harvest, process and deliver key battlespace information to ground forces and other aircraft autonomously, without the need for cueing or increasing pilot workload. The ability to gather this live fire data expands the mission possibilities of the sensor to include close air support and ground fire targeting.
Northrop Grumman is a leading global security company providing innovative systems, products and solutions in unmanned systems, cybersecurity, C4ISR, and logistics and modernization to government and commercial customers worldwide. Please visit www.northropgrumman.com for more information.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fHZO0T5mDYU
http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2013/02/11/522451/10021210/en/Northrop-Grumman-AAQ-37-Sensor-System-Demonstrates-Hostile-Fire-Detection-Capability.html
BALTIMORE, Feb. 11, 2013 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Northrop Grumman Corporation's (NYSE:NOC) AN/AAQ-37 Electro-Optical Distributed Aperture System (DAS), developed for the F-35 Lightning II, has added hostile ground fire detection to its capabilities by successfully detecting and locating tanks that were firing live rounds during preparations for a military exercise.
A video accompanying this release is available on YouTube at http://youtu.be/fHZO0T5mDYU.
While being flown on Northrop Grumman's BAC 1-11 test aircraft, the DAS detected and located tank fire from an operationally significant distance. In addition to artillery, the system is able to simultaneously detect and pinpoint the location of rockets and anti-aircraft artillery fired in a wide area.
The AN/AAQ-37 DAS provides passive spherical awareness for the F-35, detecting and tracking aircraft and missiles in every direction simultaneously, providing visual imagery for day or night navigation and targeting purposes.
"The DAS continues to show its ability to gather and analyze data for a wide range of missions not initially contemplated for this sensor system. These flight test results are just the latest example of the situational awareness capability of this revolutionary technology in action," said Mark Rossi, Northrop Grumman's DAS business area director.
Although hostile fire detection is not an F-35 requirement for the DAS, the system design makes it ideal for this mission. This inherent capability enables DAS to harvest, process and deliver key battlespace information to ground forces and other aircraft autonomously, without the need for cueing or increasing pilot workload. The ability to gather this live fire data expands the mission possibilities of the sensor to include close air support and ground fire targeting.
Northrop Grumman is a leading global security company providing innovative systems, products and solutions in unmanned systems, cybersecurity, C4ISR, and logistics and modernization to government and commercial customers worldwide. Please visit www.northropgrumman.com for more information.
Well this is going to cause some indigestion in the usual crowd. Wonder if they used the uber advanced PBO cost forecasting methods based on the weight of previous aircraft or if they actually did all the tedious ILS work and crunched real numbers.
"F-35 costs coming down
Lockheed Martin announced it has managed to reduce the cost of an F-35 in “combat configuration” by 50 per cent, through supply chain and production line streamlining."
http://skiesmag.com/news/articles/18108-f-35-costs-coming-down.html
"F-35 costs coming down
Lockheed Martin announced it has managed to reduce the cost of an F-35 in “combat configuration” by 50 per cent, through supply chain and production line streamlining."
http://skiesmag.com/news/articles/18108-f-35-costs-coming-down.html
- Reaction score
- 2,849
- Points
- 940
Haletown said:
Much like "the usual crowd" of cheerleaders won't scratch their heads and say, "what an amazing coincidence" upon reading
If LM can miraculously drop the cost by 50 percent without flinching when the programme may be in jeopardy, does that not beg the question -- even to the "F-35 can do no wrong-crowd" -- of how extortionary the price tag was in the first place?
Disclaimer: I am a fan of the F-35.
I'm not a fan of the mindless posts from either extreme. It's like reading the old political posts between Thucydides and Redeye -- the posts are so polemic they're not worth reading, and so get ignored regardless of whether they may have contributed anything of value.
- Reaction score
- 8,299
- Points
- 1,160
Haletown said:
Amazing what happens when the well dries up. >
Let's see:
The War is Over... the taps have been turned off and all the suppliers are over stocked and over capacity.
Sequestration.... the taps have been.... (oh wait! I said that already)
This is the Last Manned Fighter (see previous propaganda) .... Lockheed Martin likely to be the only customer in town for many of these vendors for quite a long while
Meanwhile...
Lockheed Martin is under pressure to pass along the savings to the market, in particular Canada, by constantly reminding them that there are other options (poor as they may be) and no deal is ever final.
The press thinks the uncertainty reflects poorly on the Government. In fact the uncertainty assists the Government in the ongoing negotiation with Lockheed Martin - and the outcome will have zero impact on the next election.
Similar threads
