F-35A most likely delayed 6 month, IOC

The potential 6 month delay relates to the start of IOT&E (Late 2017 to Early 2018) which has nothing to do with F-35A IOC (Mid to late 2016), they are two distinct events.

I had always understood that the difference between the 2B software the USMC went IOC with and 3i software was that 3i worked on the aircraft made or upgraded to the new Hardware Refresh, 3i as far as I understood did not add any other capabilities to the F35A, so no external stores etc. Whilst 3F, that the USN has decided to use for its IOC, was initially described as full warfighting capability, external stores, gun on the B&C etc. I personally feel taht there is a material difference between 3i and 3F.

You are correct that 3i is 2B with updated hardware (Tech Refresh 2) and a couple of patches (primarily ALIS). This is one of the reasons why there was a data sync issue with 3i but not 2B. There is a HUGE difference between 2B/3i and 3F, primarily having to do with weapons certification, then gun, and external stores.

This potential delay has to do with the start of IOT&E. It will not delay Block3F being released to fleet, IOC, or purchase decisions of allies. It may sway the stupid and ill-informed, but that’s about it.

You’re mixing the issues….

On the interconnect side, simple solution that they have already talked about: Upgrade the interconnect transceivers & F-35 middleware.

They have been talking about multi-band/frequency laser transceivers to use the existing fiber interconnects so that you would get a huge boost in bandwidth with the needs to rewire the jet.

On the exterior datalinks… MADL is already the biggest secure pipe flying.

If they come up with something better, upgrade the transceivers & middleware… (see a trend?)

Point being, nothing is “frozen”.

IMHO The quickest way to restart F-22 production “if” new/updated avionics are needed is to adopt the F-35’s avionics package, lock, stock, and barrel (Yes, including the AEOTS).

The only significant change would be to increase the size of the array for the APG-81 and adapt the sensor bays to the Barracuda ESM.

Obviously the middleware packages will need to be redone to interface with F-22 specific hardware such as flight controls, engine controls, misc sensors, etc.

An added benefit of this is that the F-22 would get feature updates when the F-35 does (weapons, radar & ESM modes, threat libraries, etc)

All that being said, it’s not likely to ever happen (restarting the program)

I also used to think that the F-35 only had a boom receptacle – but ‘our’ version – the F-35B, has a probe.

So, presumably the F-35B (US Marines) and F-35C (US Navy) can also only use Probe-and-Drogue?

By default the F-35A uses the boom and the F-35B/C use Probe & Drogue.

However, to enable our allies to use the F-35A with their current IFR fleet, the F-35A was designed so that Probe & Drogue can easily be added back in (only during prod, not after).

[ATTACH=CONFIG]245141[/ATTACH]

Nobody involved at this stage has the right of free speech (publically).

There is free speech and then there is sworn testimony (ie, you lie you go to jail). Funny how the later tracks with the former.