F-35 Lightning info

[ThreeHoler]

In this day and age of aviation technology which the F-35 allegedly belongs to, you would think that the radar would be able to sort itself out.  For example, during engine start, if a motor on the 787 encounters a problem, it will stop the start, motor the engine, and reattempt start 3 times all by itself before it gives up.  You would think an electronic glitch on the radar would easily trip a function to reboot the system itself.

But does it automatically shut down the motor in-flight? My guess is that requires pilot input.

Wouldn't the pilot want to be the final arbiter over whether to shut down the radar? What if he's in the middle of an engagement when it starts to degrade? He may still be getting *some* capability from it.

The Airbus Sully was flying wouldn't let the motors keep running due to the logic in the FADECs. Something about "motor damaged, can't start."

[Clark Griswold]

What could have been....

Just grist for the mill but some articles on what if the X-32 had been chosen or a split buy had been pursued rather the one for all....

https://gizmodo.com/the-fighter-jet-we-could-have-built-instead-of-the-f-35-1603031982

https://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/04/18/boeings-joint-strike-fighter-blues/

Found a couple of concepts of what an F-32 vice an X-32 might have looked like, the X-32 had such a high fugly factor on it that I wonder if on just looking at it, it was not going to win... 

 

[SurelySerious]

It was also overweight and couldn't meet requirements at the early DT stages, if my memory of the PBS series serves me well.

[Lawman]

I don't anything about the F-35 radar and I'd agree with your thought regarding min function vs no function. However, technology exists for electronic systems to self correct. Why doesn't this radar do that?

I don't know, maybe it's the familiarity with Black Box intensive aircraft, but turn it off/on is a hell of common trouble shooting technique in far more than just the F-35.

I think the reason this is even in the news is like any other issue its ignored unless it involves the F-35 and then it's screamed about because the media isnt looking into "flaws" in the Strike Eagle, Apache, or Viper.

[Jaded]

Yeah, I've never had to turn the radar off and back on again in the viper.

[Steve Davies]

4 hours ago, Lawman said:

I think the reason this is even in the news is like any other issue its ignored unless it involves the F-35 and then it's screamed about because the media isnt looking into "flaws" in the Strike Eagle, Apache, or Viper.

In addition, the F-35 is still in the middle of a planned, *iterative* development programme, which is something that the detractors of the F-35 never mention. 

If you applied the same level of criticism to the F-15 at the time it entered service as the media and bloggers do to the F-35, you'd have had to have gotten all hysterical about how the APG-63 didn't work very well and how the Air Force had pushed it into service without any self-protection capability. And yet the F-15 went on to get 105 kills for zero losses (and counting).

I think it's fair enough to lambast the acquisition element of the programme, but it's tiring reading self-professed experts take the F-35 apart without talking about Blocks and tapes, and without acknowledging that the aircraft is still in development.

Edited March 14, 2016 by Steve Davies
Clarification.

[Clark Griswold]

6 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

It was also overweight and couldn't meet requirements at the early DT stages, if my memory of the PBS series serves me well.

Yep, it was in "Battle of the X-Planes" by NOVA, good PBS documentary, not sure where in the documentary but I believe it was in the VTOL demonstration phase they had to take off part of the lower intake to achieve weight for vertical takeoff...

 

 

 

[DFRESH]

21 hours ago, Steve Davies said:

But does it automatically shut down the motor in-flight? My guess is that requires pilot input.

Wouldn't the pilot want to be the final arbiter over whether to shut down the radar? What if he's in the middle of an engagement when it starts to degrade? He may still be getting *some* capability from it.

Shack

[Lawman]

Yeah, I've never had to turn the radar off and back on again in the viper.

Ok how many times has the quick answer to your airplane waking up stupid been come of power, and come back up on power. I found it funny being told by a viper driver that the "Lockheed Reset" is the same thing we call the "Longbow Reset."

We have Mission processors fail in flight near routinely with the E model Apache. It's what happens when you took six black boxes from the D and made it do all those jobs in two. The procedure is to reset the non primary after a switchover or degraded mode so if MP1 is crapping out, hard select 2, then back to auto. These systems are... 7ish years old.

This isn't an F-35 specific problem.

[Breckey]

Good old Sikorski reset fixes almost every problem except AFCS. Funny thing is that there was no "Huey reset". Mostly because there weren't enough avionics to actually reset and the damn thing never broke.

[Lawman]

Good old Sikorski reset fixes almost every problem except AFCS. Funny thing is that there was no "Huey reset". Mostly because there weren't enough avionics to actually reset and the damn thing never broke.

Exactly.

The problem is we are combining the ever increasing technology in every modern aircraft with the demonstrated trend to over report the hell out of anything even rumored to be a problem. And that's in whatever modern weapons system development the media makes its money writing against not just F-35. It makes me view this kind of stuff with a lot of skepticism as to how bad it is.

Is there a problem, yeah sure I'll bet there are lots of problems, but there are lots of problems with airplane's we e had for 40 F'ing years and they still won't get it all fixed in the next lot/Blk update.

[Clark Griswold]

Just when things seemed to be going better you find out something shitty:

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-f-35-stealth-fighters-dirty-little-secret-now-out-the-16211

Only about 20-25% parts commonality among the different models.

[SurelySerious]

This is my surprised face.

[Clark Griswold]

True - just didn't realize it was that bad

McCain is trying to close the JPO for the F-35 and split responsibility to the USN & USAF SPOs - my bet is that will give the Navy freedom to curtail their buy

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RTB]

IOC today.

https://www.defensenews.com/story/breaking-news/2016/08/02/f35-ioc-air-force-operational-acc-combat/87948142/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Breaking News 8.2.16&utm_term=Editorial - Breaking News

[Clark Griswold]

Yup - got the software stability issues addressed to an acceptable level and that was probably the biggest rock to IOC.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/f-35-locked-and-loaded-with-improved-block-3i-softwa-425098/

 

[Clark Griswold]

Another fire, B model inflight.  Pilot landed safely but plane was a Class A.

https://www.businessinsider.com/marine-f-35-fighter-fire-2016-11

[Homestar]

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/812061677160202240

Trump tweets. Says he's asked Boeing to price a super Hornet due to Lockheed cost overruns. 

[Jaded]

2 hours ago, Kiloalpha said:

Love or hate the guy, but he knows how to stir the pot. Lockheed is now going to try and protect their baby by lowering the costs of the F-35. 

LOL.

[Clark Griswold]

On 12/22/2016 at 7:07 PM, Jaded said:

LOL.

You never know...

Lockheed Martin CEO promises Trump she'll cut F-35 costs

[Jaded]

" The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is finally getting more affordable. According to comments by manufacturer Lockheed Martin's CEO to CNBC, planes bought in 2019 will be cheaper by a factor of nearly one half. "

- July 11 2016

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a21776/f-35-cheaper/

[Clark Griswold]

This might be what actually brings the F-35 Joint Strike Money Black Hole to heel...

https://warisboring.com/the-official-f-35-price-tags-are-bogus-99d67799e2ac#.viq3ct932

From the article:

I suspect Trump can recognize when he is being scammed. In this case, the Pentagon is telling him American taxpayers can get F-35s for only two to four times what they originally advertised. 

It would be pretty much impossible to cancel the project now, not to mention Congress would never actually do that due to the well distributed nature of the sub-contracts but could/would a Trump administration punish the DoD, Congress and LM by proposing offsets to cover the growth of the F-35's cost? 

The USAF has to loose an MWS and/or X bases, the USN looses two carriers, etc... not rooting for this but as a taxpayer and semi-responsible citizen, someone/something has to be held to account for this.  

Edited December 26, 2016 by Clark Griswold

[Clark Griswold]

B model chalked up an assist...

https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2016/11/f-35b-just-got-lot-deadlier/133379/?oref=d-dontmiss

and SECDEF is taking a second look at the C model compared to the AC SH...

https://news.usni.org/2017/01/27/mattis-orders-comparison-review-f-35c-advanced-super-hornet

 

Edited January 29, 2017 by Clark Griswold
tidbit

[Dynamite]

F-35 held its own at Red Flag 17-01. With some help.

https://theaviationist.com/2017/02/05/f-35s-kill-ratio-with-aggressors-stands-at-151-during-red-flag-17-1-most-probably-thanks-to-the-supporting-f-22/

[MitchS]

DT might think he "negotiated" a decrease in the price, but it coincides conveniently with one of the many scheduled price reductions along the LRIP road to full production...