I did walk it back a bit.

I was able to find a quote on LM paying for all cost overruns since LRIP6 and the 50/50 split.

When I said “concurrency costs”, I am speaking of the fixes that are not part of the planned block upgrades and I am still trying to find a direct quote about it. Based on previous announcements, we might have to wait for the LRIP8 contract to be finalized.

-Update

I found this quote from June of 2013.

The Pentagon has been pushing Lockheed Martin to assume a portion of the concurrency costs. The LRIP 5 contract, according to the report, requires Lockheed to evenly split with the government costs for all changes discovered before the beginning of that production lot. “This concurrency cost sharing is intended to motivate Lockheed to put concurrency changes into production as quickly as possible in order to avoid cost sharing and will continue to be implemented in future LRIP contracts,” according to the report.

Here is the latest report to Congress on the Concurrency issue and their cost

http://breakingdefense.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/06/F-35-Concurrency-Report-April-2014.pdf

Yes, you can have both

[ATTACH=CONFIG]232755[/ATTACH]

The decision to add a weapon as part of the post SDD program is made by the JPO as a whole. Each partner nation has a vote. Since there are many European nations in the program that currently are also part the Meteor program or use it, it’s inclusion in Block 4/5 is almost a certainty. btw, ASRAAM is already part of the SDD program, ie Block 3F.

On the Meteor fitting, they have already made fit checks and the only think needed are changes to the missile (modified fins) and NOT the F-35’s bay.

AMRAAMs cannot be guided by either EOTS or EODAS, only AIM-9X. Even if you had target lock with EOTS, the AMRAAM fired would still be in LOAL mode.

This is a VERY big and long-lived misconception.

Because the F-35 uses a completely fused avionics system, any target track (regardless if what sensor/datalink generated that track) can guide any weapon. The obvious exception is LGBs that require the EOTS (or other off-board laser) to designate the target.

I’ve seen that but I was going off a quote from a Cockpit Demo Video. The “1000’s” quote may apply to the sensor themselves where only relevant tracks are sent to the rest of the avionics suite.

Per the Video below at 1:48, the F-35 (Block spec unknown) can simultaneously track:
8 A2A Weapon’s Grade targets
16 A2G Weapon’s Grade targets
100+ “Situational awareness tracks”

You are getting your EODAS videos confused.

The one in post 1651 is NOT the one showing a Falcon9 rocket at 800nm.

For example at the first rocket launch, you can hear the controller call out” we have launched the Terrier Oriole”. The second rocket is a “Terrier Malemute”, third was “Terrier Improved Orion”.

That being said, the video that has the Falcon 9 (post 1643) shows a “horizon break” message indicating that the missile was not visible at launch.

The 10x refers to the video, not the actual image processing. The EODAS units themselves do not have any optical zoom functions of their own, but the pilot can choose digital zoom as needed. Unlike narrow FOV sensors like EOTS, the EODAS never stops looking at and processing the entire 360 space around the F-35, regardless of any digital zoom the pilot chooses.

Spud. If EOTS is needed over EODAS for ID, why does LM specifically say it is used for search and track?

Because you can Search for or Track something without knowing what it is. Once the F-35 ID’s an object (through the EOTS, radar, ESM, datalink, etc) then the track provided by EODAS is all that’s needed. You don’t need to dedicate one of the small FOV systems like radar or EOTS to maintain the track and the EODAS can also maintain the track in areas where the EOTS or radar can never maintain a track like to the side, above, behind, etc.