Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

https://insidedefense.com/daily-news/f-35-start-graduated-plan-operational-testing-spring

Lt. Col. Nick Ihde, commander of the 31st Test and Evaluation Squadron, told Inside Defense in a Nov. 30 interview the plan was approved last month and the program will begin conducting test exercises that count toward IOT&E in March or April of next year.

The program is required to have 23 production-representative jets as test assets to conduct the full slate of IOT&E test events, but currently estimates modifications to its test jets will not be complete until January 2019. Retired Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, the former F-35 program executive officer, pitched the graduated IOT&E start in February, arguing that if testers start conducting a subset of events that don't depend on the full slate of capabilities before all 23 jets are modified, it could significantly speed the testing schedule.
Click to expand...

According to Bogdan in February, they expect to have 18 / 23 jets ready for the start of IOT&E, but the remaining 5 will take the rest of the year to get modified (possibly due to depots getting clogged up with other early-block jets getting upgrades).
 
Here's the relevant portion of General Bogdan's testimony to HASC from then -

Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) Entrance: There are a number of criteria required by the DOT&E that must be met before IOT&E can begin. These include the release of the final Block 3F aircraft capability, the release of ALIS 3.0, the release of a verified and validated Mission Data File (MDF), the readiness of 23 instrumented aircraft in a Block 3F production representative configuration (6 USAF A-models, 6 USMC B-models, 6 USN C models, 3 UK B-models, and 2 Netherlands A-models), and functioning Air-to-Air Range Infrastructure 2 (AARI 2) capability on the test aircraft and ranges. Additionally, a verified, validated, and accredited F-35 simulator must be delivered approximately 4 months prior tocompletion of the 13 month long IOT&E program. This simulator requirement will be met by the Joint Simulation Environment located at Naval Air Station Patuxent River in Maryland. It is likely that by February 2018, the release of ALIS 3.0, the release of a verified and validated MDF, the modifications necessary to place all 23 aircraft into a production representative configuration will not be completed. However, a large subset of those entrance criteria to start IOT&E will be met by February 2018. It is possible, with DOT&E approval, to incrementally start IOT&E by March 2018. Starting IOT&E incrementally, earlier than waiting for all entrance criteria to be fully met is desirable for many reasons: First, obtaining earlier feedback from the OT community will enable the JPO and Industry to make corrections and fixes sooner, providing better capabilities to the warfighter. Second, delaying IOT&E will result in higher costs because IOT&E support will have to continue longer than planned. The JPO estimates that a 6 month delay in the start of IOT&E will cost an additional $30 million. Finally, since F-35s will be produced at over 100+ airplanes per year during IOT&E, the sooner deficiencies are discovered the quicker they can be cut into production, saving the time and resources that would otherwise be needed to retrofit these jets if they were to be produced without the corrections.
Click to expand...

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AS/AS25/20170216/105552/HHRG-115-AS25-Wstate-BogdanC-20170216.pdf
 
UK bemoans lack of F-35 transparency, requests regular programme updates

The UK has to date received 10 of a planned 138 F-35 aircraft. A parliamentary committee looking into the programme has highlighted a lack of transparency on technical issues and costs that could undermine public support for the multibillion dollar project. Source: IHS Markit/Patrick Allen
The UK parliament has requested that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) provide it with six-monthly updates on the progress and cost of the international Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme.

The request was made in a Defence Committee report titled ‘Unclear for take-off? F-35 Procurement’ that was published on 19 December. In the report, the committee noted that a lack of transparency in the F-35 programme in general and inadequate responses to a critical article published in The Times earlier in the year in particular, risk undermining public confidence in the project that is critical to the future of UK defence.

“We, therefore, recommend that the MoD provide the Committee with six-monthly updates on the programme, detailing the progress made in addressing the issues that have been previously identified, as well as any future problems. We also believe that these updates should include information on the ongoing cost of the programme,” the Committee said in its report titled ‘Unclear for take-off? F-35 Procurement’.
Click to expand...

http://www.janes.com/article/76503/uk-bemoans-lack-of-f-35-transparency-requests-regular-programme-updates
 
Full details of what was actually said.

UK Report Summary (ie the "Conclusions and Recommendations" section of the full report):

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmdfence/326/32610.htm

Full report here:

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmdfence/326/326.pdf
 
F-35 Reaches F-35 Weapons Delivery Milestone

Testers with the 461st Flight Test Squadron and the F-35 Integrated Test Force recently completed Weapons Delivery Accuracy flight tests on the Joint Strike Fighter, which first began in July 2013. During the tests all three F-35 variants delivered AIM-120, AIM-9X, and the UK’s Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missile. Testers also confirmed air-to-ground deliver of the Paveway IV, GBU-39 small diameter bomb, the GBU-12, the Joint Direct Attack Munition, and the Joint Standoff Weapon. “Weapons delivery accuracy tests are important, because without proof that the F-35 can actually drop these weapons where we need them to go, then the F-35 is just an information-gathering system,” said Lt. Col. Tucker Hamilton, 461st FLTS commander and F-35 ITF director. “The F-35 proved it was extremely capable in delivering these weapons where we wanted it and how we wanted it delivered. These are the most complicated and intricate missions that we had and the jet did extremely well.” The final tests on the F-35's GAU-22 25mm gun wrapped up in early December, following completion of air-to-air tests in August and air-to-ground tests in October, according to a USAF release.
 
bobbymike said:
F-35 Reaches F-35 Weapons Delivery Milestone

Testers with the 461st Flight Test Squadron and the F-35 Integrated Test Force recently completed Weapons Delivery Accuracy flight tests on the Joint Strike Fighter, which first began in July 2013. During the tests all three F-35 variants delivered AIM-120, AIM-9X, and the UK’s Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missile. Testers also confirmed air-to-ground deliver of the Paveway IV, GBU-39 small diameter bomb, the GBU-12, the Joint Direct Attack Munition, and the Joint Standoff Weapon. “Weapons delivery accuracy tests are important, because without proof that the F-35 can actually drop these weapons where we need them to go, then the F-35 is just an information-gathering system,” said Lt. Col. Tucker Hamilton, 461st FLTS commander and F-35 ITF director. “The F-35 proved it was extremely capable in delivering these weapons where we wanted it and how we wanted it delivered. These are the most complicated and intricate missions that we had and the jet did extremely well.” The final tests on the F-35's GAU-22 25mm gun wrapped up in early December, following completion of air-to-air tests in August and air-to-ground tests in October, according to a USAF release.
Click to expand...

Is there a link for this? Thx!
 
Korea Moves Toward Buying More U.S. Stealth Fighters
(Source: JoongAng Ilbo; issued Dec 22,2017)
By Ser Myo-Ja
Korea has taken the first step toward purchasing additional stealth fighter jets from the United States, multiple government sources told the JoongAng Ilbo on Wednesday.

The move followed an agreement between leaders of the two countries that Korea will make massive advanced arms purchases from the United States to beef up its defense against growing North Korean threats. The agreement was reached between President Moon Jae-in and U.S. President Donald Trump during their summit in Seoul on Nov. 7.

According to the Defense Acquisition Program Administration, its Defense Agency for Technology and Quality made an announcement on Dec. 13 to commission research for the second round of the next generation fighter jet project.

Although the state-run procurement agency labeled it the second round of the next-generation fighter jet project, it is actually a program to buy 20 additional F-35As, multiple government sources said.

Even if the government holds a bid to buy new jets, no builder other than Lockheed Martin, the producer of F-35As, qualifies to participate in the competition, they said.

“The Air Force wants fighter jets capable of striking major installations located deep inside North Korea’s inland areas,” said a government official. “The Defense Acquisition Program Administration will make the stealth capability the top priority, and F-35s are the only planes that can satisfy requirements.”

Seoul and Washington agreed on Korea’s purchase of 40 F-35A fighter jets in 2014 with a price tag of $7 billion. Codenamed F-X III, the program was the costliest procurement program in the history of the Korean military.

Korea had initially planned to retire 250 aged aircraft by 2020 and replace them with 60 next-generation fighter jets by 2021. But because of budget restrictions, the Air Force decided to make an initial purchase of 40 F-35As for the time being.

At the time, Seoul and Washington agreed that the additional 20 new aircraft will be purchased later after reassessment of the required operational capabilities, changes in the security climate and technological advancements. The military plans to introduce them starting in 2023.

Korea expects to begin deploying the first F-35As in 2018 and all 40 planes are slated for delivery by 2021.

The selection process of the F-35As was already controversial. After it was first initiated in 2007, Korea held a tender, and the F-15 Silent Eagle by Boeing, the Eurofighter Typhoon of the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company, and the F-35As competed.

After thorny price negotiations, Boeing’s F-15SE advanced to the final stage of the selection, but in 2013, the government postponed its decision on the winner of the project. At the time, the military said its decision to drop the only remaining contender in the running was due to the aircraft’s unsatisfactory stealth features.

Later that year, the military announced changed specifications to include strong stealth capabilities, a de facto endorsement of the F-35As from American defense contractor Lockheed Martin.

-ends-
Click to expand...
 
BEAST MODE F-35 with 16 AMRAAMs :eek:

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/17250/lockheed-touts-non-existent-beast-mode-f-35-configuration-with-16-air-to-air-missiles
 
It's 14 AMRAAMs and 2 9Xs which is the max after the Block 4.x "6-internal" AMRAMM notional plan.
 
So what's the actual schedule for all this?

I recall people with tuberous names saying ten years ago that the six internal AMRAAMs were right around the corner. Update please!

So when do we see "Beast Mode" outside video games? When is there due to be a flight test series at MTOW? (70 klb for the A-model as I recall. Can someone find that number on the official sites today?) What customer has asked for and is funding that? What's the expected performance (mission radius at cruise alt X) with 22 klb of weapons?

As the topic title says, News Only. Maybe it should be Fact Based News Only. Speak up, Spud. I'm all ears.
 
Well, the A2G "beast mode" can be done now and 14 out of the 16 AAMs can be carried now.

We'll know more if & when details of the FoM session are published or they appear in the budget docs.
 
How can they "be carried now", when no testing - not even flight-sciences testing at the required weights - has been done?

All you can actually assert is that "the configuration could be qualified if the customer wanted to pay for it", and you appear to be acknowledging that you don't have a clue when this will happen.

So when do we see "Beast Mode" outside video games? When is there due to be a flight test series at MTOW? (70 klb for the A-model as I recall. Can someone find that number on the official sites today?) What customer has asked for and is funding that? What's the expected performance (mission radius at cruise alt X) with 22 klb of weapons?

Please respond with specifics, not evasions.
 
Here is a shot of the A2G "beast mode"

71RndS2.jpg


Quite frankly I think you're reading too much into it.
 
So, how does that approach 22 klb of weapons?

When is there due to be a flight test series at MTOW? (70 klb for the A-model as I recall. Can someone find that number on the official sites today?) What customer has asked for and is funding that? What's the expected performance (mission radius at cruise alt X) with 22 klb of weapons?

Answers, please.
 
Yeah, the 22k is a bit suspect. The only thing that I can think of is that the 18k is the KPP but 22k is what it has demonstrated. Much in the way that the range was at the 590nmi mark until the end of SDD where it grew to 669nmi. Time will tell.

Better question, why is "the Drive" bringing it up now (and making it sound like it's a new announcement), almost 6 months after it was 1st shown at the Paris Air Show.
 
The 22,000lb (22,300lb) is just the individual hardpoint capacities added up; 18,000lb might be the actual total structure limit, or it might just be a design goal that was exceeded.
 
Better question, why is "the Drive" bringing it up now (and making it sound like it's a new announcement), almost 6 months after it was 1st shown at the Paris Air Show.

If nobody else has challenged it, why not? Is there a time limit after which advertising must be accepted as reality?

By the way, is 18,000 lbs of ordnance a KPP? Does it have an associated combat radius (it wouldn't mean much if it doesn't)? I think it's more likely that the spec was something like "4x pylons capable of carrying a 2K JDAM, two of them being wet + 2x SRAAM pylons + a place to put the gun pod".

Dragon029 is probably right - but in reality it's very rare to see an aircraft that can actually load all its hardpoints to full capacity, partly because of load combinations and partly because there's usually a margin in hardpoint rating over the stores expected in the design stage.
 
Since it's been 6 months, did the author even bother to ask LM, the DoD, or the JPO for details?

Since he did not put that in the article I would say that he did not.

Sad excuse for journalism.
 
So, does journalistic sloppiness relieve government contractors and their paid agents from any responsibility to avoid making hyperbolic or unsubstantiated claims?
 
How would you know if it's "unsubstantiated" if you never bother to ask them?

Like I said, a sloppy hit piece.

btw, All you have to do is reduce the fuel load by 4k and you could carry your full max weapon load and still stay within MTOW. Not saying it's likely or advised, just possible.

The graphic was just a list of the "maximums" and since no buyer bases their decision on simple graphics, nobody was being fooled.
 
Like saying the Gripen NG is a 6th Generation fighter?

Er, no. Not in the least. English Comp 1.

How would you know if it's "unsubstantiated" if you never bother to ask them?

So far, nobody appears to have produced any kind of credible backup for that figure.
 
LowObservable said:
So far, nobody appears to have produced any kind of credible backup for that figure.
Click to expand...

Nobody has to if a reporter would do their job, do some research, and use common sense instead of predisposed bias and the desire to generate click-bait headlines.
 
So, you would rather have an argument about journalism than about whether a government contractor is using taxpayer money to disseminate dubious claims.

Have at it.
 
LowObservable said:
So, you would rather have an argument about journalism than about whether a government contractor is using taxpayer money to disseminate dubious claims.

Have at it.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't you agree that journalists have a responsibility to "avoid making hyperbolic or unsubstantiated claims"? Or is that standard only for non-journalists?
 
"Beast mode" is Marketing catchword ploy to make up for having such small internal capacity. A 4th Gen can carry 10 or so in non-stealthy platform, right?. f-35 instantly becomes non-stealthy (Uber-expensive) mud pounder. How humbling.

Sounds like they are selling GM trucks.

An F-35 will not remain stealthy in "Beast Mode." All the Mig-29s, Su's and other 4th gen fighters could do same thing if they had EOTS type system (or Lantirn/Sniper pod) and networking.

And then if an F-35 could possibly carry smaller diameter missile internally (Cuda?) in larger numbers are those missiles at a range disadvantage compared to larger missile of opponent.

Maybe the solution is a downsized railgun to fit the F-35. Maybe then it could stay stealthy.
 
kcran - "Beast mode" sounds much better than "non-stealth", and far better than "F-15 (with less power and wing area) mode".

Sferrin - First Amendment, toots. You're all-systems-go to spout off your opinions and so is everyone else. Don't like 'em, don't listen. Don't read it. If someone is full of **** eventually nobody will read their stuff.

BUT

There's always a BUT

Once you're working on my money...
 
What makes the F-35 (and other VLO platforms) special is that they have the "option" to go "beast mode" or stay VLO.
 
I know, but in that stealth mode its very limited as far as how many targets it can go after. And what if the weapons are less than 100% on target with what is in you're bay...> F-35 is not a big airplane. We all know this, not to re-hash it.

Is going low an option, below radar level? Or is that tactic too outdated. Would F-35 ever do it, or is there a minimum operating altitude for its weapon system (or at least preferred altitude).

I would think the F-35s in stealth mode would be high altitude 40-50k++?
 
I've had the flu for a few days and just realized that this is a "News Only" topic and I won't be commenting on this aspect anymore.

My bad.
 
In "Computational Optimization of the F-35 External Fuel Tank for Store Separation", the CFD + Wind Tunnel investigation is
for the F-35 carrying 2 x 438 gallon tanks + 4 x 2k JDAM (or JSOW) + 2 x AIM-9X + 2 x AIM-120 all in the transonic.

And the Norwegians are definitely in on the conspiracy from a drag index perspective.
 

Attachments

  • jsm-f35.jpg
    jsm-f35.jpg
    40.1 KB · Views: 220
B-2 With F-35 Escort 2018 Rose Bowl Parade
 

Attachments

  • 043B2AF35A.jpg
    043B2AF35A.jpg
    67.1 KB · Views: 190
  • 044B2AF35A.jpg
    044B2AF35A.jpg
    67.1 KB · Views: 184
  • 045B2AF35A.jpg
    045B2AF35A.jpg
    27.8 KB · Views: 174
  • 046B2AF35A.jpg
    046B2AF35A.jpg
    29.5 KB · Views: 173
PASADENA, Calif. — A pair of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters and a B-2 Spirit stealth bomber will honor the men and women of organ donors and their recipients during a fly over as the Tournament of Roses Parade kicks off on New Year’s Day.

The B-2 from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri will join up with the two F-35A’s from Edwards, AFB for the 8:00 a.m. PST start of the 129th Rose Parade (ABC-TV, NBC-TV).

More at the jump

https://www.avgeekery.com/air-force-flyover-rose-parade-will-honor-organ-donors-recipients/
Click to expand...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6MEqex_2T8
 
"Dude, can you put your foot on it a bit? We're, like, cranking some serious alpha out here."
 
kcran567 said:
I know, but in that stealth mode its very limited as far as how many targets it can go after. And what if the weapons are less than 100% on target with what is in you're bay...> F-35 is not a big airplane. We all know this, not to re-hash it.

Is going low an option, below radar level? Or is that tactic too outdated. Would F-35 ever do it, or is there a minimum operating altitude for its weapon system (or at least preferred altitude).

I would think the F-35s in stealth mode would be high altitude 40-50k++?
Click to expand...

There is no way the F-35 is a 50k aircraft, given it's limited Mach number and small wing. It's more like 20k to 40k operationally, and it would depend on the threat envelope; IIRC the F-117 tended to operate around 25k, and partly it's due to sensor resolution as well.
 
Flight of 4 F-35s fly UNDER a helicopter along the 2017 Fiesta Bowl parade route.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL43g6CIQFA

By David Cenciotti

Here’s another interesting flyover once again filmed from the above.

The footage below, filmed from a unique viewpoint by Chopperguy, shows four F-35As belonging to the 62nd Fighter Squadron, 56th Fighter Wing, from Luke Air Force Base, Arizona, conducting the Fiesta Bowl Parade flyover at the University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale, Arizona. on Dec. 30, 2017.

By the way, the 62nd FS is one of the three dedicated F-35 training squadrons at Luke. The 62nd and 61st fighter squadrons train an international cadre of F-35 pilots from partner nations like Norway, Italy and Australia. The 63rd, activated in August 2016 with the first jet taken on charge in March 2017, trains F-35 Lightning II fighter pilots as a joint international effort between Turkey and the United States.
Click to expand...
https://theaviationist.com/2018/01/03/take-a-look-at-this-video-filmed-from-a-helicopter-of-four-f-35s-doing-the-fiesta-bowl-parade-2017-flyover/
 
Nice flyby. Can anyone advise whether that kind of alpha + flap deflection is normal on other fighters at ceremonial flyby speed?

According to one source, the max is 300 knots and i doubt that you'd go much under 250. (But if anyone's got a source that says otherwise, have at it.)

Note that at 0:31, 10 s before they pass directly under the helo, lead's nose appears to be pointed right at it.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom