Page 21 – Key Publishing

jessmo24

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 301 through 315 (of 583 total)

← 1 2 3 … 20 21 22 … 37 38 39 →

Author

Posts
September 2, 2010 at 7:58 am in reply to: F-35 news thread II #2414419

jessmo24
Participant

F-35B delays lead to re-phased flight test schedule

The F-35 programme will likely reshuffle the flight test schedule again as Lockheed Martin continues to struggle with the reliability of the short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing variant (STOVL).

It is not immediately clear if the possible “rephasing” of the flight test schedule would result in a new overall delay for any of the three F-35 variants. Addressing a group of market analysts on 1 September, Lockheed Martin CEO Robert Stevens says a recent push to improve the reliability of the F-35B STOVL variant has fallen short of expectations.

As a result, an ongoing technical baseline review commissioned by the F-35 joint programme office is focusing on the viability of a dramatically reduced flight test schedule adopted earlier this year.

“I’m quite sure we’re going to see a re-phasing of the STOVL flight test programme to recognise actual performance to date,” Stevens says.

The previous schedule called for Lockheed to complete more than 1,200 flight tests by all three variants in Fiscal 2010. Earlier this year, government officials relaxed that number significantly , dropping the overall number to 394 flight tests in FY2010 and about 1,000 in FY2011.

But the STOVL version has failed to keep pace with the government’s reduced expectations.

Stevens says that a series of reliability improvements has delivered positive results for the flight test programme, but not enough to overcome the increasing delays.

“We’re catching up but not at the rate at which we had [predicted] in the initial plan,” Stevens says.

The results of the technical baseline review will be finalised by November, Stevens says.

Re-phasing the flight tests will allow Lockheed to “move resources and talent in place to improve the flow of reliable parts and recover flight tests and test points”, he says.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/09/01/346888/f-35b-delays-lead-to-re-phased-flight-test-schedule.html

September 2, 2010 at 7:49 am in reply to: F-35 news thread II #2414421

jessmo24
Participant

A Conversation with an F-35 Maintainer about the Impact of the New F-35 Actuator System on Maintenance

One system, which was discussed in the article, was the new approach to building and maintaining hydraulic systems. The article discussed the impact of the EHAS or the electrohydrostatic actuation system. According to Bob Fiorentini, who was interviewed for the article, “The EHAS is a revolutionary step in the control of aircraft surfaces. Hydraulic systems for the F35 are not centralized. EHAS allows each unit on the surface to control itself.” Fiorentini added that this “significantly reduces the risk of catastrophic failure. And the EHAS systems reduces the amount of maintenance for the aircraft by eliminating a number of components in the airframe such as hydraulic tubing, hose lines goring through the airframe.”

In this interview, SLD followed up with a key player in shaping the maintenance approach, Armando Martinez. Martinez has many years of experience with the F-16 program before moving over to the F-35 program. When interviewed in late June he was involved with F-35B from the BF-2 through BF-4. He has just been assigned to the test program supporting the F35-C or CF-3, the aircraft that will be tested on the aircraft carrier.

According to his resume, Martinez has “Supervised the interior and exterior completion of Joint Strike Fighter F-35/Block 52 & 60 F-16 Aircraft to include sub-assemblies, avionics, mechanics, and aircraft production sites. Ensure customer, engineering, and FAA specifications and regulations are met on a daily basis.”

In this interview, the focus was on the testing program and on the impact of some of the new build items on the F-35, which affect the maintainability, and performance of the aircraft. A major focus of the interview is on the impact of the EHAS.

SLD: One issue, which was raised in our conversation with the Gunny Sgt. in charge of maintenance on the test aircraft at Pax River, is the cultural change from older aircraft to the F-35. Have you experienced that issue as well on your test flight line here in Fort Worth?

Martinez: Absolutely. I have worked on the BF-2 through BF-4, the STOVL aircraft. I’m telling you right now, it’s not a Harrier at all. You cannot even compare those two aircraft. You can’t compare nomenclature. The only thing you can probably say about the Harrier and the F-35, and I’m talking the STOVL, is that they’re aircraft. The only comparison you can make is they’re aircraft, and that’s it, and people got to draw this line that you cannot compare the Harrier to the F-35 at all. They are maintained completely differently, and because the F-35B is a new aircraft, with new approaches to maintenance, we are shaping new approaches to supporting the aircraft.

And you can ask the question in reverse. Let me take my crew and then try to go maintain a Harrier that we know nothing about. I’ve never worked a Harrier in my life, ever. So if they put me on a Harrier, I would not have a clue what to do with it.

(Credit Photo: Lockheed Martin)

(Credit: Lockheed Martin)

SLD: What are you seeing as you are dealing with the 35 that could be exciting possibilities of maintaining this aircraft?

Martinez: I’ll give you one main exciting development, as a maintainer is that you have self-sustained hydraulic systems. Do you know how difficult it is to change hydraulic lines? Now you’ve got less hydraulics to worry about, a lot less, and most aircraft leak all the time. Ours is going to be a lot easier to maintain.

wow so that’s where they get all of the space for extra fuel!

http://www.sldinfo.com/?p=10850

September 1, 2010 at 9:16 pm in reply to: UK to ditch F35B for Super Hornet? #2414703

jessmo24
Participant

I get that same impression, that there may well be replacements for some of these munitions by the time the UK has a substantial fleet of F-35`s, in which case there`s no sense in paying for integrating something that will be replaced soon. Since it also looks like many of the other European partner nations will be delaying their buy, there could be an intent to sychronize with that, so as to share the burden of weapon integration as much as possible with other users. Probably also a sense that this sort of thing (external Brimstones, etc) can be dealt with after getting out of the woods, so to speak (budget wise), with a better eye as to what capabilities will actually be needed closer to 2020.

However long legacy platforms are retained, tasking them to CAP until their last flights hours seems the most likely scenario, which means that isn`t a high priority for F-35. …After all, CAP can be done alot more cheaply than F-35. The pounds to integrate/certify more weapons/pylons can be used for UCAV`s that are much more efficient CAP for theatre`s where the UK is currently involved.

@jessmo: I doubt anybody thinks it would be `an issue` WRT weight, but it still costs pounds to certify any weaponry on a new pylon.

what about just letting the US certify SDB and then buying them?
The F-35B will be gimped with out either SDB or laser Jdam. This is all turing out to be a real cluster of a mess.

September 1, 2010 at 8:41 pm in reply to: UK to ditch F35B for Super Hornet? #2414753

jessmo24
Participant

here is an old pic of a F-35B dirty

How much do brimstones weigh? if it can carry 500 pounders on the stations brimstones should not be an issue.

September 1, 2010 at 8:04 pm in reply to: The Rafales radar Not good enough for the UAE? #2414771

jessmo24
Participant

I thought all these things where on the Rafale? I thought spectra could do most of the work? How will the squall ever compete with the F-35 if it doesn’t even have the capabilities of other rival 4.5 generation fighters?

September 1, 2010 at 7:48 pm in reply to: The Rafales radar Not good enough for the UAE? #2414781

jessmo24
Participant

1. The UAE will not likely get the F-35 for many years you can thank the IAF for that.

2. when they do get them don’t expect a radar upgrade that better than the IAF version.

3. I know you’ll point to the F-16 block 60. But I think the F-35 is more of a game changer than a block 60.

4. The radar area on the F-35 is sealed, and the F-35s radar will already be a step up from the block 60. I just cannot see what the next step is right now.

September 1, 2010 at 7:26 pm in reply to: The Rafales radar Not good enough for the UAE? #2414840

jessmo24
Participant

I think your missing the irony here.

September 1, 2010 at 7:11 pm in reply to: F-35 news thread II #2414861

jessmo24
Participant

21:05 GMT, March 22, 2010 SAN JOSE, Calif. | Vision Systems International, LLC (VSI), a leader in advanced Helmet Mounted Display (HMD) technology, announced the successful first flight of the F-35 Gen II Helmet Mounted Display System (HMDS) on the F-35B Lightning II Short Takeoff/Vertical Landing (STOVL) jet.

VSI is currently performing under a Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) contract to Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. for the delivery of the F-35 Gen II helmet displays and aircraft ship-sets in support of the F-35 Lightning II HMDS program. VSI has also received contracts for production tooling and initial funding for the Pilot Fit Facility Standup at Eglin Air Force Base for the HMDS program.

“The most advanced helmet mounted display system in the world flew a very successful flight on the F-35,” said VSI President Drew Brugal. “The Gen II system is the culmination of extensive VSI R&D. It provides the F-35 aviator unmatched situational awareness presenting symbology and pilot selectable augmented reality in a wide field-of-view display format. The “virtual” Head-Up Display (HUD) presented by the HMD replaces traditional HUD systems and gives the pilot precise, stable symbology in the forward cone and a seamless transition to mission critical symbology in the remaining field-of-regard.”

The F-35 Gen II HMDS displays biocular video and symbology information on the helmet visor, providing pilots with all information necessary to execute both day and night missions under a single integrated configuration. The system enables pilots to accurately cue onboard weapons and sensors using the helmet display.

The HMD also allows the aircraft systems to alert pilots of potential threats and hazards, significantly improving situational awareness. Advanced night imagery is provided by the helmet mounted night camera and aircraft Distributed Aperture System (DAS). The F-35 Gen II HMDS’s accuracy and very low latency enables the F-35 to be the first front line tactical aircraft in decades to eliminate the traditional HUD. The HMDS is the “virtual” HUD of the aircraft.

http://www.defpro.com/news/details/13949/

August 31, 2010 at 10:08 pm in reply to: UK to ditch F35B for Super Hornet? #2415427

jessmo24
Participant

so you will go on record as stating that the split island design is perfect for cat launch and recovery?

August 31, 2010 at 8:20 pm in reply to: UK to ditch F35B for Super Hornet? #2415532

jessmo24
Participant

The QE Class Aircraft Carrier were designed, from the word go, to allow the fitting of CATOBAR, it is no huge job to fit them,

I tell you now, no British Government would survive sending British, RN sailors to die for a French National interest and, no doubt this would be true of a French Government and its sailors. The whole thing is utter fantasy and will never happen, thank the Gods.

I didn’t say the CATOBAR wouldn’t be a fit. I’m asking is the deck layout optimized for it? is the bunkerage optimized for it? with one hand you will pay a little less for lifetime sustainable costs of the F-18. and on the other hand you will pay through the nose for carrier quals for F18 pilots.

August 31, 2010 at 7:54 pm in reply to: UK to ditch F35B for Super Hornet? #2415598

jessmo24
Participant

1. has anyone even asked if the F-18 is compatable with the QE?

here is a good quote from someone in the know.

There are serious issues involved with the, crazy decision to go with a split island on the QEs (shortest vent route distance from the engine rooms), bungled flight deck layout that resulted, and the plane handling issues.this caused, ***** decisions followed as to hanger layout from the stack exhaust routing. This also involved lift placement, as the split island cut into usable available below and above storage, plane park space, and plane movement routes.

These plane handling decisions are not as involved or critical when the planes are VSTOL, where either fore or aft lifts can serve as either feed or strike below, but remember how a CATOBAR aircraft carrier actually works?

Rear lifts feed the catapults, and the waist and forward lifts strike planes below. Planes move in a conveyor fashion from stern to bow on the flight deck, are parked everywhere, where space that does not foul the clear run can be found and the planes, that are struck below decks, are moved from bow to stern to the feed lifts behind the catapults…

The QEs may have a CATOBAR design add on provision as the UK claimed, but they were never CATOBAR optimized or intended..

As for the PA2, can I believe this at all? First, where is the funding? Second, from the same bunch that created the CdG, with its original bungled takeoff runs and bad island placement, you expect a competent CATOBAR design mod of a QE STOVL carrier? Please don’t make me laugh so hard.

http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/6-72504.aspx

IMO GF is one of the smartest guys on that page. The QE my be able to use CATs but it isn’t exactly optimized for it

2. The only area a F-35 is inferior is range! it can hit the same number of targets as an F-18E ( using SDB) it can penetrate better than a F-18,
it almost certainly will out accelerate a F-18. why are you painting a picture of a vastly inferior aircraft? Load up both with A2A loads, a 4 ship F-35B formation and a 6 ship F-18 E formation. Start at BVR and then tell me who you think will win.

3. Why is the UK throwing good money after bad money? your gonna spend insane amounts of money to refit the carriers to cat then train F-18 drivers to qualify, then spend almost what the F-35s would cost on the jets?
They will do all of this and still end up a generation behind, by 2020?

4. UK is betting that they wont need 5th generation capability? they are betting that they wont fight enemies with out the US? is that what history says? Does history tell you that traditional enemies like Argentina, Iran, ect will stay in the dark ages?

August 30, 2010 at 5:36 pm in reply to: F-35 news thread II #2416786

jessmo24
Participant

August 30, 2010 at 5:33 pm in reply to: F-35 news thread II #2416789

jessmo24
Participant

SDB II + F-35 update!

Fit checks were also conducted at Langley AFB, on the F-22 Raptor, verifying that the Raptor can carry eight weapons in its internal weapons bay, along with two AMRAAM missiles. All versions of the F-35 will also be able to carry eight GBU-53/Bs and two AMRAAMS in the internal weapons bay. Fitting the weapon into these internal bays was not easy, said Schulte. “we needed to shorten the weapon’s length in order to meet the government requirements to carry eight weapons in the Marine Corp’s Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing F-35B Joint Strike Fighter. Without reducing the weapon’s length, the F-35B would be limited to six

alot more after the link

http://www.defense-update.com/products/s/sdb_2_25082010.html

August 30, 2010 at 5:12 pm in reply to: YF-23 versus T-50 versus X-32 #2416793

jessmo24
Participant

also I think cooling will be an issue. from my understanding aesa produces a lot of heat. the F-35 has some heat issues cooling 1, Now you will have 5 that need cooling. This will add weight, the T-50 has a long road ahead.

August 30, 2010 at 6:08 am in reply to: YF-23 versus T-50 versus X-32 #2417113

jessmo24
Participant

these 5 radars all over the T-50 will be a signals management nightmare wont they?
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 301 through 315 (of 583 total)

← 1 2 3 … 20 21 22 … 37 38 39 →