Those articles are identicle, by the same staff writer.
The report also calls for the Block 3 mission system software to be tested on a simulated battlefield because existing test ranges are not adequate to test the F-35’s sensor arrays.
“Open-air testing is constrained by range limitations that are incapable of providing realistic testing of many key capabilities provided by Block 3 aircraft,” the report says.
I’d love to find out what sytems this covers.
Let’s take a look at the issues in that article.
1. Both the Air Force F-35A variant and Marine Corps’ F-35B model experienced “transonic wing roll-off, [and] greater than expected sideslip during medium angle-of-attack testing,”
Solved in a software update released at the end of 2010.
2.Pratt and Whitney F-135 engine has encountered an afterburner “screech,”
Solved and new engines are already being installed in test aircraft.
3. problems with the aircraft’s helmet-mounted display.
Since it’s a supplier issue, it is likely a small one or software related. In other words, easily fixed and retrofitted when complete.
4. “The OBIGGS system fails to inert the fuel tank ullage spaces throughout the combat flight envelopes evaluated,” the report says.
They just need to upgrade it’s capability and since it’s a FRU, replacing older units with the new ones will not be an issue or showstopper. Heck, it can even be a good training experience for the maintainers.
Well, looking at that list I see the two biggest issues (screech and handling) already taken care of.
[sarcasm]If I did not know any better, I would think LM might just know what they are doing.[/sarcasm]
Sign In
