FBW@Msphere:
DOT&E does not “do” testing. Do you know who does? Test pilots like Berke who was an OT pilot for the Raptor. Those reports you trust are generated from the testing they do.
Their job is not to “buttercreme” but to expose and test fixes for the aircraft. flight test reports are critical, that is why the DOT&E reports read like a laundry list of problems. The issue with Gilmore had more to do with his recommendations, which were typical “cover your rear” bureaucratic infighting. The JPO never argued with the DOT&E reporting testing issues as they were well aware of them from doing the testing, it was Gilmore’s recommendations that were not supported by those doing the testing.
Gilmore’ recommendations: prolong testing to complete all points, prolonged testing will lead to cost overruns. 3I software isn’t reliable, recommend postponing 3I integration. Delay to 3I will risk IOC date. The reason his recommendations were largely ignored was directly due to: those doing the testing disagreed with his opinion, and he was consistently wrong about delays. His vacillating always reminded me of Vizzini from “princess bride”- “you are a man of learning, and you’ve must have learned man is mortal. So you would have wanted the poison as far away from you as possible. So, clearly I cannot choose the wine in front of me”.
FBWI’ll ask you again, did you actually listen to the podcast?
This was not some pilot blindly extolling the virtues of the F-35. This was a highly experienced combat veteran who has a unique perspective because he was an OT pilot for the F-22 program.
It wasn’t interesting because he was “buttercreaming” the F-35, but was speaking about experiences and the future of Air warfare. But you and Haavarla would not know that because you didn’t listen. Don’t try to present yours and Haavarla’s commentary as a relativized “other side of the coin”. You need to have actually listened and then formed an opinion. That sort of open mindset obviously is not a strong suit.
And if you don’t want to listen, don’t. I certainly wouldn’t force you to if it is of no interest. But then, don’t comment about it because you have no basis to make informed opinions and it leaves both of you sounding incredibly ignorant.
FBWCan’t speak for all on the other side of the Atlantic, but nothing would make U.S. Aerospace corporations happier than what you propose TooCool. That would the end of European aerospace companies, and the majority of European air forces. While I don’t doubt the Pak-Fa program will eventually yield a very capable aircraft, it still has a looonnnggg road to go, and considerable uncertainties. There would be a lot of imaginary aircraft filling those tarmacs as far as the mind’s eye can see.
FBWSorry if I offended you by listening to the podcast and posting a reaction. Did you listen to it? Did you find the rambling conspiracies of Spray convincing? Instead of adding sour, divisive comments, why don’t you try actually adding something constructive to the conversation. We already have one Haavarla adding irrelevant negativity.
Btw, isnt it interesting that so many jump to conclusions about the credibility of current pilots, and a retired Lt.Col, who actually has a wealth of experience, yet parrot poorly sourced, poorly researched, and clickbait articles from the likes of defense-aerospace and Pogo? At this late date, it’s pretty clear some of the more vociferous posters on this forum holding a negative view of the F-35 program are akin to the Roman inquisition charging Galileo with heresy- holding onto outdated beliefs as the evidence mounts that their opinions were flawed, yet too stubborn to amend views.
FBW@sintra-
I don’t know about the whole sfc part of that statement. Those small diameter, high thrust to weight turbofans like the M88, F414, EJ200 tend to be on the high side of sfc. Never seen a credible source for the F135, but it’s a large engine with a relatively high bypass ratio. Wouldn’t be surprised it’s sfc in military thrust was lower than the aforementioned (and it’s probably a hog in augmented thrust sfc). The difference is mostly in future proofing. The F135 has considerable growth potential, even with AETD/ATEP program ongoing , PW still has plans for testing third stream fan technology for the F135 on top of the proposed thrust and fuel economy improvement from the existing core/fans.
A future platform is probably going to need an engine with a larger core than the existing turbofan options available in Europe in order to incorporate adaptive fan/ variable cycle technology. I would bet on a “clean sheet” design for these reasons.
FBWUseless? Did you listen?
If not I would not comment about the podcast. Berke had some interesting observations, and his experiences flying the F-16, -18, -35, are worth listening to, as well as flying as a OT pilot for the F-22
Edit- considering the dearth of recent information about ongoing fighter projects from Russia and China, i personally find listening to a recently retired pilot speaking on his experience flying a variety of platforms and observations far more interesting than pouring over glossy photos like they are playboy centerfolds. “Did Sukhoi paint a smiley face on the left LEVCON of the Pak-fa?, wow.” “That is Totally different from T-50-9”.
Different horses for different courses. A bit of snark, but it’s the weekend and I’ve not had my coffee yet.
FBWBerke only seemed to lose his composure once when Sprey insulted him by alluding that he was being a mouthpiece of good p.r. for L-M. But you also got a sense that he quickly realized Mr. Sprey had no idea what he was talking about and a “debate” based on point-counterpoint wasn’t in the offing. Instead, the Lt.Col did a good job of explaining his experience with the aircraft.
Mr. Sprey needs to get back to his job as a RT guest analyst, perfect platform for a man of his unique talent for self-delusion. When even host/moderator is contradicting his comments, it’s time to stop providing him with a credible platform.
FBWLet’s break down your ToT claims to date:
1. Turkey has full ToT to produce GE-F110 or PW-F100 engines- I’ve stated before that ITAR precludes tech transfer of the specific parts of the -229 due to inclusion of technology from the F119 and F135. Ditto with the GE-129.
2. You claimed that Turkey received ToT on manufacture of blisks and F135 engine tech, read ITAR again
3. You claim that RR and EJ are handing over ToT on engine technology that: a. In the case of RR would require RR to basically hand proprietary technology to a competitor. And in the case of EJ, hand over technology with the complicit ok of the U.K. Government that is not entirely theirs to give.
4. That Russia is transferring technology of the S400 system to a NATO member state.
I don’t know or much care who your source is for ” inside information”, because it is not credible on the face of established policies that require government approval. For example, please point out where the U.S. Congress wavied the new ITAR for ToT of hot and cold compressor technology regarding the latest U.S. turbofans. Or Russian release of IP regarding the S400.
Not to mention the most obvious issue, if the U.S. handed over all the proprietary technology for manufacturing even the older versions of the F110, why is Turkey seeking a partner with RR, or EJ, for the TFX engine? Perhaps it’s because your overstating what has actually been shared.
FBWRead the carefully worded parts about training Turkish engineers, again it’s a fantasy of you really believe ToT includes specific technology that is proprietary to RR or to the EJ200. But this has been par for the course for your assumptions. “ToT” is the most abused term on this forum. The devil is in the details.
FBWWith respect you have misinterpreted the article. The reference to a “double firewall” is with respect to Rolls-Rolls vs Eurojet EJ-200. Rolls-Royce is entering the TF-X engine tender with the Eurojet EJ-200 on the one hand and then on the other hand with a Joint-Venture between Kale/JJ on a new co-developed engine. So as to prevent collusion between the Rolls Royce EJ-200 team and the Rolls-Royce/Kale team he is saying there will be a double-firewall to prevent information exchange between the 2 Rolls-Royce teams. See Page 3, First Column Last Paragraph.
You have misinterpreted this to mean that there is an information barrier between Rolls-Royce and Kale (Turkey).
You would also note that the Rolls-Royce executive mentioned that RR has already obtained “export approval from the British Government” for the engine technology. See Page 3, end of Column 2 and 1st paragraph of column 3. It clearly states “technology transfer”.
You have a blanket assumption that ToT means “all technology” That is not how these work. The firewall is to prevent RR, EJ, and Kale from exporting technology developed from the JV from running into restrictions. If you really believe that RR, and EJ are handing over IP to a competitor you aren’t thinking clearly. They are competing to aid in the development of a separate turbofan, giving technical support and training. Even that requires government approval.
FBWFirewall-IP is not shared. For example, BAE does not share information between US based corporation and parent company. RR is helping Kale develop a turbofan, it will share experience and expertise without compromising sensitive and proprietary technology that is how these JV generally work. As far as specifications, as the article states: they are still in a very early stage. Nowhere does it state the goal is an F119 class engine, despite your above claim.
FBWBayar, did you read the article you posted and do you understand the meaning of the part about “double firewall”. This is a JV between RR and Kale. Rolls will not transfer IP that is proprietary. What is developed from the JV will be Turkey’s, exactly what data will be transferred isn’t defined at this early stage.
This is another example of jumping to conclusions. Please illustrate where in the document it specifically states that this JV will produce an engine technologically superior to the EJ200 and equivalent in power to the F119.
FBWWhen is a carrier going to be conducting launch operations in a tailwind, the answer is never.
This issue is not unique to the f135 engine btw.
FBWThey haven’t reduced the program of record, in fact the total procurement number was recently reaffirmed. The buy is stretched by 6 years to make up for the lower number to be aquired per year.
FBWFour are part of the JOTT fleet at Edwards currently. Whether some of those are reassigned for training in U.S. or not, they will need more than four training airframes.
The 2018 beddown plan shows only one staying at Edwards and one at Luke. So they may be on the move soon.
I remembered incorrectly, 323 squadron at Edwards has two F-35’s. The next lot of 8 ordered by the Dutch aren’t due until 2018-19.
Sign In
