Lockheed Martin F-35 Thread

Northrop Grumman Begins Full-Rate Production of F-35 Lightning II Center Fuselage

PALMDALE, Calif. – June 29, 2018 – Northrop Grumman Corporation’s (NYSE: NOC) center fuselage of the F-35 Lightning II recently entered full-rate production. This milestone marks the beginning of a 1.5-day production interval (PI) meaning a center fuselage will be produced every day and a half.

https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/releases/northrop-grumman-begins-full-rate-production-of-f-35-lightning-ii-center-fuselage
 
31Test Evaluation Sq Lightning brings the fire
 

Attachments

  • 047AIM120.jpg
    047AIM120.jpg
    54 KB · Views: 587
  • 048AIM120.jpg
    048AIM120.jpg
    59.4 KB · Views: 584
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-airshow-f35-exclusive/exclusive-lockheed-f-35-jet-price-falls-6-percent-to-below-90-million-sources-idUKKBN1K50DD

The deal for 141 F-35s lowers the price of the F-35A, the most common version of the stealthy fighter jet, to about $89 million, down around 6 percent from $94.3 million in the last deal struck in February 2017, the sources familiar with the talks said.

Bringing down the cost of the world’s most expensive defence programme is crucial to securing more orders, both in the United States and abroad.

President Donald Trump and other U.S. officials have criticised the F-35 programme for delays and cost overruns, but the price per jet has steadily declined in recent years as production increased.
 
Program updates from Lockheed program manager Greg Ullmer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5Or2CvrlcU
 
bobbymike said:
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-airshow-f35-exclusive/exclusive-lockheed-f-35-jet-price-falls-6-percent-to-below-90-million-sources-idUKKBN1K50DD

The deal for 141 F-35s lowers the price of the F-35A, the most common version of the stealthy fighter jet, to about $89 million, down around 6 percent from $94.3 million in the last deal struck in February 2017, the sources familiar with the talks said.

.

Are those 89 million for 141 planes without engine, as previous lot contracts had?
 
With engines; since around LRIP 8 they've generally been publicising the all-up flyaway cost rather than just the airframe cost.

You likely won't find a source explicitly stating that the deal includes the engines (not yet at least; they haven't reached a formal contractual agreement just yet for LRIP 11), but LRIP 10 had F-35As at $94.6 million "including jet, engine and fee". The chances of $89 million not including the engine (which is about $13 million), and all these reports about LRIP 11 having a 6% drop from LRIP 10 being wrong, particularly when the Pentagon was willing to issue a unilateral agreement on LRIP 9 to achieve cost reductions, is basically nil.
 
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/business/lockheed-adds-1-800-workers-to-ramp-up-f-35-fighter-production

Lockheed Martin will add 400 workers to boost production of the F-35 fighter jet, the most expensive in U.S. history, after making a good on an earlier promise to President Trump to increase the aircraft's workforce by 1,800.

"The F-35 is an iconic product," Lockheed Chief Executive Officer Marillyn Hewson said in a statement. "The program supports 194,000 direct and indirect jobs nationwide, and as we ramp up production we are creating even more opportunities for American workers."

Lockheed, based in Bethesda, Md., trumped rival defense contractor Boeing for the right to develop the aircraft in 2001, the first year of George W. Bush's presidency. The stealthy, supersonic plane was designed to replace aging fighter jets such as the Air Force's F-16s and the Navy's F/A-18s while deftly handling both precision air-to-ground strikes and mid-air combat with other jets. It's expected to cost more than $406 billion.
 
When will they stop calling it the "most expensive fighter in history"?
 
Congress moves to put 90-day hold on F-35 transfers to Turkey

Two weeks after Defense Secretary James Mattis discouraged US lawmakers from blocking the transfer of Lockheed Martin F-35A fighters to Turkey, the House Armed Services Committee and Senate Armed Services Committee jointly released details of a compromise National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) bill that would do just that.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/congress-moves-to-put-90-day-hold-on-f-35-transfers-450616/
 
Just ran across this and didn't find it in a search of the thread.


http://www.airframer.com/news_story.html?release=41955

GKN Aerospace receives order to increase production of F-35 bulkheads
 
Is it correct another five F-35Bs are arriving in the UK next week?
 
http://airforcemag.com/Features/Pages/2018/July%202018/USAF-to-Deploy-Fifth-Gen-Fighters-to-Europe-Again-This-Summer.aspx?utm_source=&utm_medium=&utm_campaign=

USAF fifth generation aircraft will come back to the European theater later this summer, US Air Forces in Europe boss Gen. Tod Wolters said Wednesday.

Though Wolters would not say whether the flying training deployment would include F-22s or F-35s, he said “they will work with US and allied forces already in Europe to build on … previous deployments,” and called the integration of fifth generation assets into theater a “game changer.”

“The purpose is to introduce a US fifth-gen capability one more time to the European continent, so we can improve our interoperability with other fifth-gen assets already on the continent and also improve our interoperability with other fourth gen” aircraft in theater, Wolters told reporters during a media roundtable via telephone on Wednesday.

The Royal Air Force last month accepted its first four F-35Bs at RAF Marham, England, which is located about 20 nautical miles from RAF Lakenheath, where USAF will beddown its own F-35As beginning in 2021.

USAF is about halfway through that planning cycle, Lt. Col. Clinton Warner, the F-35 program integration office director at Lakenheath, told Air Force Magazine during a recent visit to the base. He said the Royal Air Force has been pretty busy since they got the jets with the RAF’s centennial celebrations, but his team still meets with them every Friday to discuss lessons learned, some of which have already been incorporated into USAF planning.

“RAF Marham found they were short in electricity, which made us question how we were doing. We found we will be short as well, but we identified that years out,” said Warner.

Marham officials also told USAF they wished they had had a communications plan in place much sooner. “We took that lesson learned from them and we should have, in the next couple of months, a dedicated communications planner coming here to help us out,” added Warner.

Overall, there are more than $360 million worth of F-35-related construction projects either in the works or in the planning stages at Lakenheath, including everything from a new dining facility to accommodate the 1,244 new uniformed personnel coming to the base (primarily operations and maintenance) to the construction of new hangars, a flight simulator building, and ramp extension for displaced F-15E Strike Eagle parking, said Warner.
 
Various shots of F-35 flying at Edwards during June. Big bulge seen at 1:45 is Norwegian drag chute fairing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AWTCPnaKR4
 

Attachments

  • F-35 Drag Chute.png
    F-35 Drag Chute.png
    916.9 KB · Views: 704
Nobody nose the trouble I've seen......

http://www.nwfdailynews.com/news/20180822/update--spotted-nose-down-on-runway

EGLIN AFB — An spotted nose-down on the runway by a motorist passing by on a nearby highway experienced an inflight emergency, according to a press release from the 33rd Fighter Wing.

The pilot returned to base and landed safely. The front nose gear collapsed after the plane was parked, the release said.

Fire crews responded immediately and could also be seen by passing motorists.

The pilot was uninjured.

The extent of damage to the Lightning II was not immediately available.

The mishap occurred at about 12:50 p.m. on the flightline of Eglin, which shares runways with the Destin-Fort Walton Beach Airport. No commercial traffic was affected by the incident, county officials said.

An investigation into the circumstances surrounding the mishap is underway.
 

Attachments

  • 2018-08-22 13_57_34-UPDATE_ F-35 spotted nose-down on runway.png
    2018-08-22 13_57_34-UPDATE_ F-35 spotted nose-down on runway.png
    1.3 MB · Views: 621
SpudmanWP said:
Nobody nose the trouble I've seen......

http://www.nwfdailynews.com/news/20180822/update--spotted-nose-down-on-runway

EGLIN AFB — An spotted nose-down on the runway by a motorist passing by on a nearby highway experienced an inflight emergency, according to a press release from the 33rd Fighter Wing.

The pilot returned to base and landed safely. The front nose gear collapsed after the plane was parked, the release said.

Fire crews responded immediately and could also be seen by passing motorists.

The pilot was uninjured.

The extent of damage to the Lightning II was not immediately available.

The mishap occurred at about 12:50 p.m. on the flightline of Eglin, which shares runways with the Destin-Fort Walton Beach Airport. No commercial traffic was affected by the incident, county officials said.

An investigation into the circumstances surrounding the mishap is underway.

Fueldraulics failure? They're still doing that right?
 
It's my understanding that the fueldraulic systems are contained to just certain propulsion system actuators; the landing gear and a number of other systems use conventional hydraulics:

bXj2CnR.png


It's my understanding that landing gear locking mechanisms are typically spring-operated to enable landing gear actuation & locking via wind drag when hydraulics fail; if that's the case on the F-35 as well, then it likely would mean that some part of the locking mechanism seized, broke or came loose.
 
https://www.pogo.org/investigation/2018/08/f-35-program-cutting-corners-to-complete-development
 
F-35C, Super Hornet Damaged During At-Sea Aerial Refueling


An F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter flying from USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) was damaged during an aerial refueling exercise, in the first major flight mishap for the carrier version of the JSF.


The engine of an F-35C from Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 125 was damaged while receiving fuel from an F/A-18F Super Hornet from VFA-103 on Aug. 22, Navy officials confirmed to USNI News. Debris from an aerial refueling basket was ingested into the F-35C’s engine intake, resulting in the damage, Naval Air Forces Atlantic spokesman Cmdr. Dave Hecht said on Tuesday.

Both fighters were able to land safely – the Super Hornet flew to Naval Air Station Oceana, Va., while the F-35C returned to Lincoln. No injuries were reported and the incident is currently under investigation, Hecht said.
More at the jump
https://news.usni.org/2018/09/04/f-35c-damaged-36249
 
F-35B operations deployed on USS Essex as part of 5th fleet (Persian Gulf/Indian Ocean area).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzxnR-gsWzc
 
Airplane said:
What is with the external ami9's? Are they trying to obscure the rcs?

My understanding is that's the only way they can carry them. IIRC, the internal bays, currently, can only hold one AMRAAM each (With or without an internal LGB as well).
 
2 AMRAAMs per bay; these are the loadouts certified for Block 3F (and 2B in the blue):

JZZJovF.png


Here's also a pic of what 2 per bay looks like:

aRvbeZV.jpg


No AIM-9s internally due to the Sidewinder being a rail-launched only (vs ejected) weapon. Internal AIM-132 integration was planned previously and would use a sort of trapeze launcher / rail that extended the missile out from the door hardpoint, but that was cancelled back around the turn of the decade.

Lx0ZacK.png


As for why they're carrying Sidewinders on the Essex-launched jets, I expect that it's partly to obscure the RCS (that's what the Luneburg lenses are for though) and partly because any air-to-air work those F-35s encounter would be short range policing-style encounters a bit like with the Super Hornet and Su-22 engagement last year. If nearby nations know where the Essex is they might also be interested in taking a look, so having an F-35B detectable, visibly armed and extra-capable at WVR combat could be useful for escorting anyone getting a bit close.
 
Here are some slides from the recent Tailhook 2018 briefings. I'll watch all 12 hours of them this week and try and grab some more.
 

Attachments

  • 2018-09-10 20_58_22-.png
    2018-09-10 20_58_22-.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 726
  • 2018-09-10 21_01_29-.png
    2018-09-10 21_01_29-.png
    2.1 MB · Views: 677
Colonial-Marine said:
When the GBU-12 is listed does it also include the GBU-49 Enhanced Paveway II?
As far as I'm aware yes - I could've sworn that I saw somewhere that GBU-49 certification (earlier this year, but not prior to March) wasn't completed, but I can't find anything saying that, and the GBU-49 was chosen specifically because it's meant to be compatible today with Block 3F, so I'd assume that either I was imagining things, or that it's just a matter of bureaucratic paperwork - they've been using GBU-49s in pre-IOT&E.

https://twitter.com/IanKnight35/status/1017940849810800640/photo/1

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/us-plans-to-order-up-to-1600-gbu-49-bombs-for-forei-448238/
 
And here we go again...

https://www.pogo.org/investigation/2018/09/exclusive-f-35-program-facing-another-setback/

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4872647/DOT-amp-E-Readiness-for-Formal-Entry-Into-F-35.pdf

Somehow I doubt that "DOT&E is an unqualified pen-pusher" isn't gonna work this time.

http://www.dote.osd.mil/about/director-bio.html
 
In short; they're going to wait until Block 3F release '30R02' because it resolves deficiencies in Air-to-Air Range Infrastructure software and they don't want to risk using the current AARI software in case it creates inconsistencies in their data.
 
The last sentence sums it up nicely:

Changing AARI software versions in the midst of IOT &E could potentially result in inconsistencies in data collection and affect the validity and adequacy of the test and evaluation.
 
LowObservable said:
Somehow I doubt that "DOT&E is an unqualified pen-pusher" isn't gonna work this time.

http://www.dote.osd.mil/about/director-bio.html

Behler's been pretty reasonable with the pre-IOT&E stuff; unlike his predecessor.
 

Attachments

  • gilmore-dbb.png
    gilmore-dbb.png
    866.8 KB · Views: 67
Dragon029 said:
Colonial-Marine said:
When the GBU-12 is listed does it also include the GBU-49 Enhanced Paveway II?
As far as I'm aware yes - I could've sworn that I saw somewhere that GBU-49 certification (earlier this year, but not prior to March) wasn't completed, but I can't find anything saying that, and the GBU-49 was chosen specifically because it's meant to be compatible today with Block 3F, so I'd assume that either I was imagining things, or that it's just a matter of bureaucratic paperwork - they've been using GBU-49s in pre-IOT&E.

https://twitter.com/IanKnight35/status/1017940849810800640/photo/1

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/us-plans-to-order-up-to-1600-gbu-49-bombs-for-forei-448238/
Thanks. I had thought the Paveway IV used the same control method to guide itself to the target as the Paveway III but I guess it's the same as the original Paveway II? So is there much of a difference between the Paveway IV and GBU-49?
 
F-35 Ground Testing Shows Potential for F-35A Lifetime Extension

"...
Ground testing includes a full-scale durability airframe of all three variants, which were loaded in unique test rigs and laboratories to simulate ground and flight load conditions during fleet operations. The F-35 aircraft’s service lifetime is 8,000 hours, and each test airframe is required to complete two life-times of testing, or 16,000 hours. The F-35A vastly exceeded the requirement by completing three full life times of testing, or a simulated 24,000 hours, which gives the program confidence in a potential service-life increase. "
 
Maybe 30 F-35 more for the Netherlands :

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2018/09/20/dutch-defense-chief-opens-door-for-more-f-35s/
 
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/raytheon-pitches-usaf-on-f-35a-auto-landing-system-452040/
 
Lockheed Martin Proposes IRST Upgrade For F-35

The company has developed a prototype of a next-generation Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS), a belly-mounted camera tasked with identifying targets in the ground and in the air, says Frank St. John, executive vice president of Lockheed’s Missiles and Fire Control business area...

Adding a long-wave infrared sensor to the existing mid-wave sensor would give the F-35 a package optimized for detecting targets on the ground and in the air, St. John says.

“Certainly long wave provides more capability [in air-to-air mode],” St. John says. “So you might look out a long-wave system or even a dual-band system to get the benefits of both.”

Interest among the F-35’s customers is growing for a new sensor with improved IRST capability.

The company has completed a prototype of a next-generation EOTS using internal research and development funds, he adds. It is being offered to the F-35 Joint Program Office for insertion in the Block 4 modernization program.To usher the next-generation EOTS into production, Lockheed estimates a 30-36 month development process would be required, followed by a test program.
 
Define "any". The variety of products out there comes with a great many diversity of resolutions.

More seriously, I wonder if that new IRST has something in commune with the solution pushed frwd for the SH and F-15 V2 (V1 originated from the F-14-IRST).
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom