• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

The F-35 Discussion Topic (No Holds Barred II)

lastdingo

Blogger http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de/
Joined
Oct 18, 2008
Messages
580
Reaction score
5
Website
defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de
sferrin said:
lastdingo said:
The F-4 was inferior to a Mirage for continental A2A because it required almost exactly twice as many resources. F-4 fleet efficiency was way inferior because the correct comparison is two Mirage IIIE vs. one F-4E. The F-4 was a definitive loser in such a matchup.
"My plane is better because I need twice as many of them to win."
Well, some people don't get that resources are hugely important even (actually, especially) in military affairs.

Fanbois compare one fighter to another,
while competents compare a fighter fleet affordable with a given budget to another fighter fleet affordable with a given budget.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,210
Reaction score
397
lastdingo said:
sferrin said:
lastdingo said:
The F-4 was inferior to a Mirage for continental A2A because it required almost exactly twice as many resources. F-4 fleet efficiency was way inferior because the correct comparison is two Mirage IIIE vs. one F-4E. The F-4 was a definitive loser in such a matchup.
"My plane is better because I need twice as many of them to win."
Well, some people don't get that resources are hugely important even (actually, especially) in military affairs.

Fanbois compare one fighter to another,
while competents compare a fighter fleet affordable with a given budget to another fighter fleet affordable with a given budget.
I think it's absolutely hilarious that you think you're in that category. Your costs will go far beyond simply the planes themselves. Also, it's about achieving a particular capability, not about how many planes you can get for your Euro.
 

kaiserd

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
748
Reaction score
82
lastdingo said:
The F-4 was inferior to a Mirage for continental A2A because it required almost exactly twice as many resources. F-4 fleet efficiency was way inferior because the correct comparison is two Mirage IIIE vs. one F-4E. The F-4 was a definitive loser in such a matchup.

The Mirage III was very good compared to what the USAF used at the time because the USAF had but two fighters that even deserve being compared; Super Sabre (outmatched at high altitudes at least) and Phantom II (see above). The USN had the Crusader as well, but overall the picture was clearly that both the Soviet Union and the United States had no clearly superior and dominating fighter designs in their inventory compared to countries like Pakistan, Switzerland, Brazil or Lebanon.
Even the introduction of the F-15 didn't change much, since its extremely high cost delivered an ordinary fleet efficiency only. 1980's-era U.S. air power was overwhelming due to gigantic budget (numbers or expensive planes) and the integration of support planes (tankers, AEW&C, ECM).

This paradigm changed only with the introduction of and export ban for the F-22.

And yes, I assert the Russians will use PAK-FA as their premier front-line fighter because they will use their worn Su-30 et al for secondary theatres and strategic air defence where AK-FA's fuselage advantages don't matter.
There's no need for a MiG-21-kind of cheap fighter in the mix because BVR combat has become more relevant and SAMs can easily substitute for light or medium interceptors. The old MiG-21 niche is gone. All you need nowadays is a high end fighter, not a hi/lo mix.

Again; the paradigm changed, and small Western air forces will have no such high end fighter in the 2020's unless the Russians are incompetent and cannot produce a much, much better dedicated A2A machine than the clearly multi-role and VTOL-impaired F-35.
? I literally don't understand.
I agree that the F4 cost more than a Mirage III but it's was also the generally better fighter, I don't follow the rest (you appear to be introducing your own arbitrary "efficiency" coefficient to get the result you want.)
The Israeli's appeared happy to use the F4 to supplant the Mirage III as their "best of the best" fighter.
I also don't know why your trying to drag the poor old MIG21 into the discussion.

Going bank to what original point of the comparison your comments on the F35 also don't really make sense. Concentrating on the PAK-FA comparison;
- Going back to my original points the Rusiians will probably only end up with a small "silver-bullet" elite force of PAK-FAs. There will be opposed by hundreds of F35s complemented by more US F35s and F22s (and its eventual replacement) in times of high tension.
- The small airforces you appear so worried about generally never had a fighter that could go head to head with the last few generations of Russia's elite "best of the best" fighters (classic Flanker, then advanced Flanker) with anywhere near clear level of superiority. We (members of the public) literally don't yet know how the PAK-FA and the F35 will stack up against reach other but there doesn't seem a lot of basis to think the F35 will be relatively any worse (indeed likely to be much better) than the Flanker versus F16 comparison we have been discussing.

Going back to your weird arbitrary "efficiency" measure - how do your yet have any idea where the PAK-FA will "score" given we don't yet know how capable it will be or how much it will cost (but still far supperior to the F35? :) )
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,330
Reaction score
77
LowObservable said:
By the way, for all the historical revisionists: Don't forget that both the Falklands and Bekaa Valley showed the effectiveness of the AIM-9L, while most SARH weapons were considered to have low Pk. I guess that being basically a one-trick pony, and relying entirely on one characteristic while carrying only two weapons with low Pk against your targets, doesn't amount to a winning strategy.
The Falklands and Bekaa showed the effectiveness of ground and air controlled intercepts (stern or rear-quarter) on opponents with limited SA, limited countermeasures or who were operating at the ragged edge of their endurance.

25mm cannon would have been just as effective given the advantage the CGI'ed fighters enjoyed particularly over Bekaa.
 

Colonial-Marine

Fighting the UAV mafia.
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
634
Reaction score
6
lastdingo said:
Small air forces having a top quality fighter was normal pre-F-22. In fact, it was not uncommon for generations to see better fighters in medium-sized air forces than in some great power/superpower air forces.
What? I must have missed all of the F-15s small European air forces were operating.

sferrin said:
And of course they were flying the earlier models, not the MLD.
What would have changed with the MLD? It was somewhat more maneuverable but probably not enough to overcome an F-15 or F-16. Lost a bit of (much needed) fuel versus the earlier variants too.
 

lastdingo

Blogger http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de/
Joined
Oct 18, 2008
Messages
580
Reaction score
5
Website
defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de
kaiserd said:
Going back to your weird arbitrary "efficiency" measure
It's not mine, not "weird", not "arbitrary", and not "efficiency"; but "fleet efficiency".
Obviously, you don't know the term and don't understand it despite it being well described by the combination of the words "fleet" and "efficiency". This means you don't have the intellectual tools to think properly about air force procurement topics. Look up what "fleet efficiency" means, then maybe you will be able to think properly about procurement decisions in a resources-constrained (real) world.

I won't reply to the rest of your stuff because frankly, you're not going to get anything no matter what I write because you switched long ago into a primitive hostility mode and others could ask me by PM if they are really interested in clarification.


Colonial-Marine said:
What? I must have missed all of the F-15s small European air forces were operating.
No, you just ignored what's been written, or else you'd understand that F-15s in small air forces or not was irrelevant to the issue.
 

Colonial-Marine

Fighting the UAV mafia.
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
634
Reaction score
6
lastdingo said:
No, you just ignored what's been written, or else you'd understand that F-15s in small air forces or not was irrelevant to the issue.
Well generally it wasn't true for 4th generation fighters and going back further I wouldn't define the Mirage III as top-quality either. It was adequate and affordable for their needs at the time but it wasn't the most capable aircraft available.
 

kaiserd

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
748
Reaction score
82
lastdingo said:
kaiserd said:
Going back to your weird arbitrary "efficiency" measure
It's not mine, not "weird", not "arbitrary", and not "efficiency"; but "fleet efficiency".
Obviously, you don't know the term and don't understand it despite it being well described by the combination of the words "fleet" and "efficiency". This means you don't have the intellectual tools to think properly about air force procurement topics. Look up what "fleet efficiency" means, then maybe you will be able to think properly about procurement decisions in a resources-constrained (real) world.

I won't reply to the rest of your stuff because frankly, you're not going to get anything no matter what I write because you switched long ago into a primitive hostility mode and others could ask me by PM if they are really interested in clarification.


Colonial-Marine said:
What? I must have missed all of the F-15s small European air forces were operating.
No, you just ignored what's been written, or else you'd understand that F-15s in small air forces or not was irrelevant to the issue.
Well last dingo it appears that one of the few aspects we agree on is that there isn't much point continuing this discussion.
I would suggest you don't so readily resort to accusations of stupidity and hostility at people just because they don't agree with you.
 

lastdingo

Blogger http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de/
Joined
Oct 18, 2008
Messages
580
Reaction score
5
Website
defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de
I did a search back to 14 days and nobody wrote "stupid" in here before you just did it.


Hostility is more than disagreement, true. Hostility is about the style of disagreement, it's about visibly not wanting to understand a text when reading, but instead wanting to find points to attack. Sadly, such behaviour is commonplace in many discussions, especially when people are emotionally invested.
People are emotionally invested in the F-35, in the air force as institution, in their nation etc., and it leads to intolerance instead of grasping content when someone dares to oppose or criticise any of these in any way.

This affects the seemingly never-ending NGFS, LCS and A-10/CAS debates and previously the F-22 debate as well.

A most thorough assessment would begin with the basics of looking at threats, then ambitions (defence or also great power games), then at modern air war, look at national and alliance resources, look at alternatives (including realistic cost expectations excluding sunk costs) including missile artillery as a partial substitute to the F-35 etc etc.
Instead, people are all-too often comparing a single plane with a single different plane, and even basic terms such as "fleet efficiency" appear alien in such a debate.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,210
Reaction score
397
kaiserd said:
I would suggest you don't so readily resort to accusations of stupidity and hostility at people just because they don't agree with you.
I would suggest that is actually an indicator of something the opposite of stupidity. ;)
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
213
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"Congresswoman, former pilot, concerned F-35 won't fill A-10's role"
By Phillip Swarts, Staff writer 1:49 p.m. EDT October 22, 2015

Source:
http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2015/10/22/congresswoman-former-pilot-concerned-f-35-wont-fill--10s-role/74393602/

A former A-10 pilot-turned-Congresswoman said she still has doubts about the F-35’s abilities in close-air support.

During a Wednesday hearing on Capitol Hill to discuss the Lightning II, Rep. Martha McSally, R-Ariz., said she’s concerned the plane might not live up to the capabilities of dedicated CAS platforms like the Warthog.

“I am concerned that this airplane is replacing all of our legacy fighters — the whole jack of all trades, master of none,” said McSally, a retired colonel who served 26 years in the Air Force and was the first female pilot to fly in combat.

The Congresswoman said that her concerns include the low number of bullets carried by the F-35 and a reported loiter time of less than an hour.

Plus, she said, Pentagon officials have indicated that the F-35 “would not be able to survive a direct hit like the A-10 can, and still allow the pilot to at least fly to friendly territory so that they’re not taken POW and lit on fire in a cage like we’ve seen happen to the Jordanian pilot” who was killed by the Islamic State group.

She noted that Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark A. Welsh had called the idea of a head-to-head test between the F-35 and A-10 “silly,” but said she believes it’s a good idea.

“I think it’s a very good use of taxpayer money,” she said. “The F-35 is going to replace the A-10. We need to identify whether we’re going to have a decrease in the unique capabilities in that mission set.”

However, McSally said she is still concerned about the way the test might be conducted.

“I’m skeptical about it, quite frankly, with all the things we’ve seen the Air Force try to do to go against the will of this Congress, and go backdoor retiring the A-10,” she said. “You can set up a test to get any result you want.”

Lt. Gen. Christopher C. Bogdan, program executive officer for the F-35 Joint Program Office, said the service needs to do “testing in a realistic operational environment with the CAS mission that the Air Force intends the F-35 to do — not the mission that the Air Force intends the F-35 to do looking like the A-10.”

He compared it to an Olympic decathlon runner and a 100-meter sprinter. If you line up both runners at the start of a 100-meter dash, you don’t really need to run the race.

“I know the outcome of that test,” Bogdan said.

“I don’t need to test the A-10 to figure out what the F-35 can do in a close-air support role,” he said. “What I would prefer to do is test the F-35 in its close-air support role as the Air Force sees the requirements for that mission, for the F-35.”

But McSally said she believes it’s unrealistic to think the Air Force won’t find itself in situations that demand the close-air support capabilities from planes like the A-10, situations “where guys are on the run, they’re out of ammo."

Maj. Gen. Jeffrey L. Harrigian, director of the Air Force’s F-35 Integration Office, said the service is formulating what the tests might look like, in both contested and permissive environments, including testing range, time to arrive on target and loiter time for the F-35.

It’s part of ensuring that “at the end of the day, we’re delivering a platform that’s effective and suitable for the environments it will be operating in,” he said.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,210
Reaction score
397
Ask her which she'd rather fly in a contested environment. ;)
 

AeroFranz

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
2,166
Reaction score
26
do you end all your posts with a wink? is that a thing? i need to do that. ;)
 

LowObservable

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,169
Reaction score
27
Of course it's a trick question. If you're doing CAS in a contested environment you're already doing it wrong. Also, if you're up against Pantsyr doing CAS (rather than blowing through on the way to somewhere else) it doesn't make a lot of difference whether you're in an A-10, an F-35 or an LRS-B.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,210
Reaction score
397
LowObservable said:
Of course it's a trick question. If you're doing CAS in a contested environment you're already doing it wrong.
You mean troops don't ever need help when there's enemy air overhead? On what planet? Oh, right, you're going to get air superiority with those fighters that grow on trees. Minor detail I realize. Please forgive me for overlooking it. Then the good Senator should have made sure to qualify her statement with "after everybody else has made it safe for the A-10s to fly. . .".

LowObservable said:
Also, if you're up against Pantsyr doing CAS (rather than blowing through on the way to somewhere else) it doesn't make a lot of difference whether you're in an A-10, an F-35 or an LRS-B.
LOL. Pretty sure it does. One is going to light up like the 4th of July on the other guy's radar while the other 2 do not.[/quote]
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,210
Reaction score
397
AeroFranz said:
do you end all your posts with a wink? is that a thing? i need to do that. ;)
Mission accomplished.
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
9,042
Reaction score
208
AeroFranz said:
Apparently. 2 posts and counting. ;)
I dream when one day I am judged by the content of my posts and not the color of my emojis :eek:
 

AeroFranz

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
2,166
Reaction score
26
I dream when one day all our respectful disagreement can be expressed with something other than sarcasm and mockery.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,210
Reaction score
397
AeroFranz said:
I dream when one day all our respectful disagreement can be expressed with something other than sarcasm and mockery.
I dream of a day when the News reports news, and reporters report fact not opinion. Now back to the show:
 

Attachments

LowObservable

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,169
Reaction score
27
How do you know it's news if it's not on the news? If a news story falls in the forest and hits a bear having a ****, but nobody hears it, is it a news story?

And invert the problem: If you have TIC and enemy air is overhead, you have pushed too far forward. Unless you have a completely invisible airplane you will be under threat and not able to do effective CAS. Unless you're expecting CAS to be shot down in droves (Eastern Front).

Neither did I mention radar. If you're low enough to lase targets and/or to have an acceptable weapon TOF, you're going to be detected.
 

Jeb

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
263
Reaction score
15
sferrin said:
AeroFranz said:
I dream when one day all our respectful disagreement can be expressed with something other than sarcasm and mockery.
I dream of a day when the News reports news, and reporters report fact not opinion. Now back to the show:

BIG BURNER. Dang.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
213
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"AF leaders testify on F-35 progress"
By Senior Airman Hailey Haux, Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs Command Information / Published October 28, 2015

Source:
http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/626221/af-leaders-testify-on-f-35-progress.aspx

WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- Leaders in the F-35 Lightning II Joint Program Office and the Air Force F-35 Integration Office testified on the fifth-generation aircraft’s development before a House Armed Services subcommittee Oct. 21 on Capitol Hill.

Fielding a number of questions from Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee representatives, Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, the F-35 program executive officer, and Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Harrigian, the F-35 Integration Office director, Headquarters Air Force, assured them the program is making progress.

“The F-35 program today is executing well across the entire spectrum of acquisition, to include development and design, flight test, production … and building a global sustainment enterprise,” Bogdan said. “The program is at a pivot point today, where we are moving from slow and steady progress to what I call a rapidly growing and accelerating program.”

Overall, the program has flown more than 42,000 hours, to include the international jets and the U.S. service-specific variations.

The F-35 is a complex program made more challenging by the fact that it’s still in development, even as we are flying it in the field. Recent tests on the safe-escape system revealed a problem that would result in lighter-weight pilots possibly suffering major neck injury upon ejection.

“The program is working with our industry partners on three specific improvements that will provide lightweight pilots that same level of protection and safety as all other F-35 pilots,” Bogdan said in his written testimony. “These three improvements are: one, a reduced weight helmet that weighs 6 ounces less than the current helmet … two, a pilot ‘weight switch’ on the ejection seat that reduces the opening shock of the parachute by slightly delaying the parachute’s opening for lightweight pilots; and three, a head support that will be sewn into the parachute risers that will reduce the rearward head movement of the pilot when the main chute of the ejection seat opens, reducing the pilot’s neck loads.”

Comparing the F-35 with the F-16 Fighting Falcon’s maneuverability was another concern; however, both generals were confident in the F-35 program and its capabilities.

“The F-35’s technology is designed to engage, shoot and kill its enemy from long distances, not necessarily in visual ‘dogfighting’ situations,” Harrigian said in his testimony. “There have been numerous occasions where a four-ship of F-35s has engaged a four-ship of F-16s in simulated combat scenarios, and the F-35s had a clear operational advantage because of the sensors, weapons and stealth technology. The F-35 has been optimized for the current trends of warfare, where the enemy is engaged and defeated from long distances, but it will still be able to maneuver aggressively when required to defeat and kill threats.”

Overall, the F-35 program is on track to be delivered on time and on cost, and Bogdan and Harrigian agree it’s a capability needed for the joint force to be successful.

“As with any big, complex program new discoveries, challenges and obstacles will occur; however, we believe the combined government/industry team has the ability to overcome current issues and future discoveries in order to successfully deliver the full F-35 capability to the warfighter,” Bogdan said. “The Joint Program Office will continue executing with integrity, discipline, transparency and accountability, holding ourselves accountable for the outcomes on this program.

“We recognize the responsibility the program has been given to provide the backbone of the U.S. and allied fighter capability with the F-35 for generations to come, and that your sons and daughters, grandsons and granddaughters may someday take this aircraft into harm’s way to defend our freedom and way of life. It is a responsibility we never forget."
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
213
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"Top F-35 leader to help Lockheed absorb Sikorsky"
by Max B. Baker
Oct 29, 2015

Source:
http://www.star-telegram.com/news/business/article41873685.htm

FORT WORTH--Lorraine Martin, who oversaw steady improvement in Lockheed Martin’s F-35 program as executive vice president and general manager, is being promoted to help the aerospace giant with its acquisition of the Sikorsky helicopter business.

Martin, who has worked on the F-35 program for four years, will serve in a newly-created job as deputy executive vice president for Mission Systems and Training, the division that is set to absorb Sikorsky, which Lockheed agreed to buy in July for $9 billion.

Martin will be replaced in Fort Worth by Jeff Babione, who has been serving as Deputy General Manager on the F-35 program. He will lead the development, production and sustainment efforts across the fighter jet’s three variants.

Babione will oversee the anticipated ramping up of production at the Lockheed plant west of Fort Worth as well as achieving initial operational capability, or “combat ready” status, for the jet by the United States Air Force in 2016 and the Navy in 2018.

"For the past three years Jeff Babione has served as Lorraine’s deputy. He has the skills and leadership necessary to continue the advancements we’re making in the F-35 program". Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, F-35 program executive officer

“He brings a deep understanding of the F-35 program, strong customer relationships and a collaborative leadership style that will ensure we continue the positive momentum of the program,” said Orlando Carvalho, executive vice president at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics.

Martin stepped into a leadership role with the F-35, the nation’s most expensive weapons system, after it had been rocked by cost overruns and technical failures. At one time, the F-35 ran so far over budget and fell so far behind schedule that the Pentagon put the program on probation in 2010.

Eventually, two years were added to the program, along with $4.5 billion more for development. Since the probation was lifted in 2012, performance has improved and the F-35 program has won praise from its customers.

Earlier this month, Martin said the program has been able to “meet all of our milestones,” including the fighter being declared combat ready by the Marines, while also bringing down the costs.

Martin’s new job will include a significant increase in responsibility, the company said. Currently the Systems and Training division is a $7.2 billion business with more than 18,000 employees. But it will double in revenue and workforce once the Sikorsky acquisition is completed, Lockheed officials said.

“I congratulate Lorraine on her new position. Since 2013 we worked together on the F-35 program to deliver a world-class weapons system to the warfighter and improve government and contractor relations,” said Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, the F-35 program executive officer.
Read more at the source.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,210
Reaction score
397
United Kingdom F-35B Testing

"The system is clearly impressing Beck, who is a former Tornado pilot. “I simply cannot explain to you how good this sensor suite is,” he said. “It is mind-blowing. We don't actually even need to carry a weapon, albeit we can. I can track targets, identify them all, after having turned [nose] cold [away from the targets], then datalink that information to my Typhoons. The Typhoon pilots can then carry their ordnance to bear against the targets.

“So, I’ve identified everything at distances that no one thought previously possible,” Beck continued. “I’ve shared that data with other assets. I can lead them all into the fight. We are very focused on getting value for money and we can do a lot more by blending our assets.

“This jet isn’t just about the weapons — it’s a game-changing capability. The Tornado GR.4 can't just stroll into a double digit SAM MEZ [Missile Engagement Zone]. In the F-35 I can generate a wormhole in the airspace and lead everyone through it. There isn’t another platform around that can do that. This isn’t all about height and supercruise speed — it’s the ability to not be seen,” added Beck.

Waterfall added: “The F-35 is providing the pilot with all the needed information; it is largely irrelevant where that information has come from because the aircraft is manipulating all of the sensors available and taking the best of those sensors, correlating the information and presenting it to the pilot.”

Beck noted: “We can never be explicit about the true capabilities of this jet, we've got to hold our cards close because otherwise people will try to reverse engineer it. This aircraft is so sophisticated that no pilot who has actually flown it says a bad thing about it. That tells you a lot about what this can do.”"

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=182

There's a guy over on F-16.net, not sure it's the same person, but they are also a former Tornado pilot transitioning to the F-35B. Interesting stuff.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,330
Reaction score
77
"Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is being awarded a $120,555,991 modification to the previously awarded low-rate initial production Lot IX F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter advance acquisition contract (N00019-14-C-0002) to procure the non-recurring engineering effort necessary to develop build-to-print packages by variant (F-35A, F-35B, F-35C), to provide Group A and Group A enabler provisions to support future Band 2/5 capabilities of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, Texas, and is expected to be completed in June 2018. Fiscal 2015 research, development, test and evaluation (Air Force); fiscal 2016 research, development, test and evaluation (Air Force and Marine Corps); and non-U.S. Department of Defense participants funds in the amount of $36, 287,605 are being obligated on this award, $9,190,887 of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity."

Empahsis mine.
Band 2/5: VHF/UHF
 

Dragon029

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
684
Reaction score
36
https://www.f35.com/news/detail/f-35a-completes-first-aerial-gun-test

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-OyE45DEac
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,210
Reaction score
397
But, but. . .everybody knows they won't be able to shoot the gun until 2019. Clearly this more of Stanley Kubrick's work.
 

Arjen

It's turtles all the way down
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,374
Reaction score
105
Can you *aim* the gun?
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,210
Reaction score
397
Arjen said:
Can you *aim* the gun?
Has being able to aim the gun in 2015 ever been a requirement? (That would be, "no".)

"The gun system will be further tested with a production F-35A next year for integration with the jet's full mission systems capabilities. The test team will demonstrate the gun's effectiveness in both air-to-air and air-to-ground employment when integrated with the 5th generation fighter's sensor fusion software, which will provide targeting information to the pilot through the helmet mounted display. At the end of the program's system development and demonstration phase in 2017, the F-35 will have an operational gun. "

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/168430/f_35a-completes-first-aerial-gun-test.html

2 years before 2019. (The year the usual crowd likes to trot out.)
 

Arjen

It's turtles all the way down
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,374
Reaction score
105
Means "no". Check.
Can't remember mentioning 2019.
 

Arjen

It's turtles all the way down
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,374
Reaction score
105
I'm not part of 'the usual crowd', then. What have they got to do with it?
sferrin said:
2 years before 2019. (The year the usual crowd likes to trot out.)
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,210
Reaction score
397
Arjen said:
I'm not part of 'the usual crowd', then. What have they got to do with it?
sferrin said:
2 years before 2019. (The year the usual crowd likes to trot out.)
But of course you are.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
213
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"F-35 Data Smuggler Sentenced to Jail"
by Lara Seligman 1:27 p.m. EST November 3, 2015

Source:
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense-news/2015/11/03/f-35-data-smuggler-sentenced-jail/75097272/

WASHINGTON — A former Connecticut resident has been sentenced to 97 months in jail for attempting to send sensitive technical data on the F-35 engine to Iran.

Mozaffar Khazaee, 61, was sentenced Oct. 23 to 97 months of imprisonment followed by three years of supervised release, according to a recent Pentagon Inspector General statement. Khazaee also was ordered to pay a $50,000 fine.

Between 2009 and 2013, Khazaee tried to send secret U.S. defense technology to Iran, according to the release. Khazaee, a dual citizen of Iran and the United States, with a degree in mechanical engineering, was employed by three different defense contractors between 2001 and 2013.

Although the statement did not name his employers, engine manufacturer Pratt & Whitney has confirmed that Khazaee was an employee of theirs during this period. Pratt manufactures the engines for both the F-22 and F-35.

“Mozaffar Khazaee betrayed his defense contractor employers and the national security interests of the United States by stealing and attempting to send to Iran voluminous documents containing highly sensitive U.S. defense technology,” said Deirdre Daly, United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut, according to the statement.

Beginning in 2009, Khazaee corresponded by email with an individual in Iran to whom he sent sensitive documents containing information about the Joint Strike Fighter program, according to the statement. Khazaee was apparently seeking a job back in Iran, frequently contacting state-controlled technical universities offering access to the data.

Federal agents began investigating Khazaee in 2013 when he attempted to send a large shipping container to Iran. When agents inspected the container, they found thousands of pages of documents, including diagrams, test results and blueprints of the F-35 and F-22 engines, according to the statement.

Khazaee was arrested Jan 9, 2014, at the Newark Liberty International Airport before boarding a flight to Iran, the report said. Agents found additional information related to U.S. military jet engines, as well as $59,945 in as-yet undeclared cash, in Khazaee’s checked and carry-on luggage.

In addition to the F-35 and F-22 materials, Khazaee also stole documents from numerous other U.S. military engine programs, including the V-22 Osprey, the C-130J Hercules and the Global Hawk engines, according to the statement.

Khazaee pleaded guilty on Feb. 25, 2015.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,210
Reaction score
397
How the hell does somebody like this get a job in this kind of sensitive area? :eek:
 

UpForce

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
133
Reaction score
2
sferrin said:
How the hell does somebody like this get a job in this kind of sensitive area? :eek:
Completely beyond my comprehension.

Possibly the same way someone like Edward Snowden got unfettered access to heaps of NSA data without anyone apparently asking what he was up to. Also, these sorts of events make the Chinese OPM hack (bad as it was) seem a bit redundant. I mean, why do it the hard way - just send someone to ask for what you want. Email and you shall receive. It would be comical if it weren't so serious. Single points of failure everywhere.

I hope the LRS-B program has been properly air gapped and compartmentalized from the start. At least there's no lack of case studies of what not to do. The F-35 project seems to be a prime example. Perhaps someone has kept track of just how many (un-)successful espionage cases have come to light. The sum total might be nightmarishly impressive on a single spreadsheet.
 
Top