High rear end winds cause F-35A ground engine fire:

-The US Air Force says a strong tailwind is behind the flight line fire that has grounded yet another of its F-35 fighter aircraft.

The F-35A caught fire while getting ready to fly an exercise from Mountain Home Air Force Base in Idaho. It was one of seven at the base for surface-to-air training.

The fire happened while the pilot was starting the F-35; the pilot exited the aircraft while it was extinguished, and the US Air Force says there were no injuries.

While the cause of the fire is still under investigation, Aviation Week says “initial assessments point to a tailpipe fire due to strong tailwinds as the engine was starting.”

If accurate, that would point to a buildup of excessive heat in the jet’s tailpipe. Aviation Week says at the time, winds were gusting up to 70 km/h (45 mph) from the northwest to west-by-northwest.

Last week’s fire appears unrelated to an incident in 2014, when an F-35 at Eglin Air Force Base caught fire due to excessive blade rubbing in the jet’s Pratt & Whitney F135 engine.

The US Air Force grounded the whole F-35 fleet after the 2014 incident, until the problem was fixed.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/09/25/back_end_flameout_roasts_f35_on_runway/

Well… At least it wasn’t technical. Just make sure you don’t start the plane in a 45-50+ mph tail wind.

15 F-35 Models Grounded Due to Wiring Issue:

-WASHINGTON — The US Air Force has ordered the grounding of 13 F-35A models, as well as a pair of Norwegian F-35As, following the discovery of “peeling and crumbling” coolant tube insulation.

The issue appears to have been with a supplier of coolant lines, which are installed in the wings of the jet. During a routine maintenance check, it was discovered that the insulation on the lines were in some cases decomposing, which left residue in the fuel itself, according to a release from the Norwegian government on the grounding.

The issue has been traced back to the insulated coolant tubes manufactured by one particular provider that have only been installed in the wing fuel tanks of the 15 aircraft — 10 from Hill Air Force Base, Utah, two US and two Norwegian F-35As at Luke AFB, Ariz., and one plane at Nellis AFB, Nev.

The problem was first discovered this summer during depot maintenance of an F-35A being prepared for initial operational capability, Lockheed Martin spokesman Mike Rein said.

After maintainers found three aircraft with crumbling coolant tubes, Lockheed conducted subsequent tests that “indicated it was possible for this crumbling insulation to become lodged in the siphon lines connecting wing and fuselage fuel tanks,” said US Air Force spokeswoman Ann Stefanek. “This could result in excessive negative pressures in the fuel tanks during flying operations or excessive positive pressures during air or ground refueling. In either case, the under- or over-pressure could cause structural damage to the fuel tanks.”

Lockheed works with several suppliers that are responsible for manufacturing the coolant lines, but Rein declined to disclose which of its subcontractors had been responsible for the nonconforming part. The company plans to continue to work with that supplier in future F-35 lots, he said.

“There has been no discussion about changing doing business with them,” he said.

Stefanek said the Air Force ordered the temporary suspension of flight operations for those jets out of an “abundance of caution” regarding potential effects from the degraded insulation.

“Although testing and simulation are ongoing, initial indications are that impacts are either minimal or can be mitigated. However, it is too early to outline specific issues that might arise,” she said. “Again, our primary concern is the safety of our pilots. This is a prudent precaution. Identifying and addressing issues is a standard part of the lifecycle of any of our aircraft.”

The impact expands further than the operational F-35 inventory, as there are 42 aircraft currently on the production line that have received parts from the same provider. That includes three three Norwegian aircraft scheduled for delivery early next year. It is unclear if those parts will need to be replaced or if other nations planes will be impacted.

According to an Air Force press release, engineers from the F-35 Joint Program Office, Lockheed AFB and have inspected eight aircraft and are working on a plan for mitigate issues connected with the pause in flight operations. The service expects a proposed mitigation strategy as early as next week, but even after a fix is identified, it could take “days to weeks” to repair each airplane, Stefanek said.

Lockheed is developing potential fixes for the impacted jets that would allow them to return to flight as soon and as cheaply as possible, but Rein declined to comment on when the company would have a plan finalized. It is also working on a root cause analysis.

The F-35 JPO stressed that the problem was caused by a manufacturing defect rather than a technical problem that would affect the aircraft’s performance.

“The root cause of the problem was determined to be use of nonconforming material for the tubing insulation and improper manufacturing processes during fabrication of the cooling lines,” it said in a statement. “The non conforming material that was used is not compatible with fuel, causing degradation of the insulation and resulting in it falling off the tubing.”

In a statement, Maj. Gen. Morten Klever, director of the Norwegian F-35 Program Office, emphasized that the issue was not a design flaw but instead was caused by a supplier using improper materials and techniques for the parts.

“I expect Lockheed Martin to identify the appropriate measures to correct this issue, and that they implement these as quickly as possible,” Klever said.
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/15-f-35-models-grounded-due-to-wiring-issue

DEATH SPIRAL HAS BEGUN!! 😀

[ATTACH=CONFIG]248147[/ATTACH]
Lockheed reports successful F-35 integration with Aegis system:

-WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE, N.M., Sept. 13 (UPI) — Lockheed Martin reported Tuesday that the F-35 Lightning II and and the Aegis weapon system worked together for the first time during a live-fire exercise.

The joint exercise Monday between the company, the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Marine Corps was the first live-fire missile test that successfully demonstrated the integration of the F-35 to support Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air, the company said in a statement.

During the test, an unmodified Marine Corps F-35B acted as an elevated sensor and detected an over-the-horizon threat.

The jet sent data through the aircraft’s Multi-Function Advanced Data Link to a ground station connected to Aegis on the USS Desert Ship, a land-based ship.

The target was then engaged and intercepted with a Standard Missile 6.

Lockheed said the test reflects how the 5th-generation fighter can be a force multiplier.

When the capability is fully realized, it will increase situational awareness using Aegis and the F-35 together to better understand the maritime operational environment.

“Using any variant of the F-35 as a broad area sensor, the aircraft can significantly increase the Aegis capability to detect, track and engage,” Lockheed said.
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2016/09/13/Lockheed-reports-successful-F-35-integration-with-Aegis-system/3731473773308/

Awesome.

you have to give it to warisboring: first they revealed F-35 cant keep up with an old F-16D,
then they revealed the coverup on that debacle by burying it under pep-talk, both reports classified

Hmm. You watch RT news?

This video should help you understand the whole AF-2 vs F-16.

Pilots Say F-35 Fighter Is A Winner. So Where’s The Media Coverage?:

-Media coverage of new weapons being developed for America’s military is almost always negative. If a program is behind schedule, or over budget, or exhibiting shortfalls in performance, you’re sure to hear about it. If everything is going fine, there’s no coverage — at least, not in the national media.

Which is why you never hear much anymore about the F-35 fighter. The F-35 program will replace the Cold War tactical aircraft of three U.S. military services and a dozen allies with a family of multi-role fighters designed to be at least five times better than legacy planes at defeating threats in the air and on the ground. It’s a really ambitious program — in fact, one of the greatest engineering challenges of this generation.

And it is doing fine. The cost of both the airframe and the engine is declining in each successive production lot, with the most common variant — the Air Force version — likely to cost no more than the legacy planes it replaces. Each of the fighter’s three variants is delivering all of its promised performance gains in flight testing and operations at eight bases (soon to be 25 bases). Nearly 200 planes have been delivered. 300 pilots and 3,000 maintainers have been trained. To quote Pentagon managers in March testimony before Congress,

The F-35 program is executing well across the entire spectrum of acquisition, to include development and design, flight test, production, fielding and base stand-up, sustainment of fielded aircraft, and building a global sustainment enterprise…Our overall assessment is that the program is making solid progress across the board and shows improvement each day while continuing to manage emerging issues and mitigate programmatic risks.

And it isn’t just the managers who are singing F-35′s praises. The pilots are impressed. I heard a senior Marine officer say this summer that his service doesn’t like to make pilots in older fighters fly exercises against the F-35 because it’s too demoralizing — the F-35s always win. Navy pilots say landing the highly automated F-35 on a carrier deck is much easier and safer than it was with Cold War planes.

An Air Force pilot quoted in one of the service’s local outlets at Eglin Air Force Base reported that flying against the F-35 in training exercises is like being blindfolded because the plane is invisible to radar: “We turned hot, drove for about 30 seconds and we were dead, just like that. We never even saw [the F-35].” That’s precisely the kind of performance military planners were looking for 20 years ago when they proposed a family of stealthy fighters with integrated sensors and secure networking that could deliver superior situational awareness to pilots.

So maybe I’m just overly impressed because several of the companies on the F-35 team contribute to my think tank or are consulting clients. But I would think that when the Pentagon’s biggest program is making steady progress and exhibiting breakthrough performance gains, that would be considered newsworthy at places like the New York Times and CNN.

Apparently it isn’t. The national media are ignoring the fact that F-35 is delivering on everything that was promised — just as they ignored when the Navy variant had the most successful initial sea trials ever in 2014, and when the projected life-cycle cost of the program fell by $60 billion in a single year in 2015. I wrote both of those stories up for Forbes when they broke, but if you are a casual consumer of news then you probably still think F-35 is a troubled program that doesn’t work as intended.

I’ve actually heard smart people whom I respect say that recently, even though it’s completely untrue. All three variants of the plane — the Air Force version that many of our allies will buy, the Marine Corps version that can land on a dime, the Navy version that will greatly increase the reach and lethality of carrier air wings — are all performing magnificently. So where are the news stories?

I’ve seen this happen before. The revolutionary MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor was dogged by concerns about safety long after it had become the safest rotorcraft in the Marine fleet. To this day, few national media outlets have made the effort to explain how an aircraft that combines the speed and range of a plane with the vertical agility of a helicopter has transformed combat operations. They were never reluctant to report the MV-22′s real or imagined faults, but they just don’t seem to care that Osprey is now a smashing success.

So why should the F-35 fighter be any different? Even though it has surmounted its developmental challenges to be praised by pilots and even though its success is pivotal to preserving America’s warfighter edge in future conflicts, it just isn’t news unless something goes wrong. If you want to understand why many voters think America isn’t great anymore even though it is the greatest nation in history, you might begin by contemplating what is considered news in the national media.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2016/09/06/pilots-say-f-35-fighter-is-a-winner-so-wheres-the-media-coverage/#77ff9cc44984

Well good news is bad news for the F-35 contras. And Bad news is good news. I thought everyone knew this?

China’s J-20 Vs. F-35? Meh, Says CSAF Goldfein; Pilot Crisis Noted:

-PENTAGON: I thought I could hear Air Force and allied F-35 pilots around the world smiling when the new Air Force Chief of Staff said today that comparing the F-35 to the Chinese J-20 “is almost an irrelevant comparison.”

The F-35, said Gen. David Goldfein, is “about a family of systems and it’s about a network — that’s what gives us an asymmetric advantage.” Instead of comparing the J-20 to the Joint Strike Fighter, Goldfein said, it made more sense to compare the J-20 to the F-117 he flew years ago. When he piloted the F-117 into combat, he pushed the wonderfully named “stealth” button and all his antenna withdrew and his seat dropped down to make the pilot a smaller target. The plane had no connectivity with other aircraft once it went into combat.

“That’s why when i hear about F-35 vs. J-20, it’s almost an irrelevant comparison,” Goldfein said. There’s been enormous amounts of speculation about the Chinese J-20 and J-31 but relatively little comment by American officials. The 2016 Annual Report To Congress about China offered this: “PLAAF leaders believe stealth aircraft provide an offensive operational advantage that denies an adversary the time to mobilize and to conduct defensive operations.”

Perhaps the most troubling news from today’s State of the Air Force briefing here concerned the difficulties the service is having retaining pilots. Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said the service faces a 700-pilot shortfall by the end of this year and that will rise to 1,000. That includes, most crucially, drone pilots, to whom the service will be offering an increased retention bonus of $35,000, an increase of $10,000.

What’s causing the shortage? The most powerful factor is increased hiring by airlines, but the other factor is the service’s difficulties in training enough pilots fast enough. The service plans to build two new training centers by the end of 2016, James said. While the service has had pilot shortages before, this time it’s particularly challenging because the Air Force is the smallest it’s ever been, and it’s been flying combat and transport missions for 26 years straight, starting with the 1991 Gulf War and the “no fly” patrols that followed.

James reiterated her concerns about a long-term Continuing Resolution, which Congress may well pass given lawmakers’ fixation on their own reelection and the presidential reelection. It will, as Breaking Defense readers know, mean no starting new programs and no approval for upgrades. That would put paid to 60 new starts and upgrades to programs including those planned for MQ-9 Reapers and B-52s, James said. It would also, perhaps pressingly for combatant commanders, mean that production of JDAM smart bombs would be limited to the quantities bought in fiscal 2016, “which we feel is unacceptable” given the rate they’re being used, the secretary said.

Overall, a CR would mean $1.3 billion less for the Air Force in 2017 than requested. The Air Force was already claiming to be overly strapped when the 2017 budget was released. But can Congress act?
http://breakingdefense.com/2016/08/chinas-j-20-vs-f-35-meh-says-csaf-goldfein-pilot-crisis-noted/

Didn’t know where to put this article but since it talks about the F-35 i posted in here.

I never considered the possibility that you were simply functionally illiterate. That would explain a lot actually…

100% of pilots surveyed would prefer to fly the F-35 over their current aircraft in a BVR engagement, by far the most important metric.

Even when you restrict the comparison to a WVR fight the overwhelming majority of F-16 pilots would choose the F-35 over the F-16.

:stupid:

Not only 100% of pilots would prefer the F-35 for BVR but over 80% would prefer it for WVR.

-Pilots also selected the F-35 over other jets 100 percent of the time when they were required to spot a threat outside of their visual range, and more than 80 percent of the time in dogfighting, or the air maneuvering warfare that critics have said the F-35 fails at.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pilots-say-f-35-beats-out-a-10-in-new-report/article/2598652

But what do pilots know when we have an expert in here.

I never considered the possibility that you were simply functionally illiterate. That would explain a lot actually…

100% of pilots surveyed would prefer to fly the F-35 over their current aircraft in a BVR engagement, by far the most important metric.

Even when you restrict the comparison to a WVR fight the overwhelming majority of F-16 pilots would choose the F-35 over the F-16.

:stupid:

But those are pilots so what they prefer doesn’t count.