Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 8 of 21 FirstFirst ... 45678910111218 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 240 of 606

Thread: F35 News only thread for 2013

  1. #211
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,442
    This thread is for news not opinions. Use the other thread to debate facts.
    Go Huskers!

  2. #212
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,442

  3. #213
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,577
    Interesting news from the "Stars and Stripes":

    "The plan is to build 2,443 JSF’s for the U.S., about 750 for the eight partner nations, and probably somewhere around the same for other program members, Burbage said. That would be between 3,500 and 4,500.

    He said the cost of the first planes off the line would calculate to about $67 million each but design, uniformity, life of the F-35 trims the price per plane cost significantly and further in time they are very competitive with the historical lifetime cost of other planes like the F-18 Super Hornet."

    Right, if I order some of the first planes off the line, I would pay about $67 million each and the F-35 lifetime cost will be very competitive with the historical lifetime cost of other planes like the F-18 Super Hornet.

    Was this a quote from Burbage in January 2013 or has the (not very objective from the sound of its name) Stars and Stripes reported what Burbage said many years ago?

  4. #214
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    virginia beach,VA.
    Posts
    746
    I think they left the "1" off the front of that $67 million fig.

  5. #215
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    537
    Standard technique in JSF marketing is to make lofty claims that can't be refuted directly, because they are predictions far in the future.

    However, if anyone can wrangle a $67 million price tag out of any current official figures (and including the bit that makes the jet go) they are welcome to try.

    Exclusive video of LockMart marketing training:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJ5CbLnSjo0

  6. #216
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Dijon , France
    Posts
    1,038
    What a bunch of crap . Propaganda at its best ...

    Cheers .
    I say what I mean and I do what I say .

  7. #217
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,577
    Quote Originally Posted by LowObservable View Post
    Standard technique in JSF marketing is to make lofty claims that can't be refuted directly, because they are predictions far in the future.

    However, if anyone can wrangle a $67 million price tag out of any current official figures (and including the bit that makes the jet go) they are welcome to try.

    Exclusive video of LockMart marketing training:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJ5CbLnSjo0
    Be fair on Mr Burbage, the article just stated:

    "He said the cost of the first planes off the line would calculate to about $67 million..."

    Burbage did not say the $67 million price tag was for an aircraft capable of taking to the sky, did he? Give the man a break. Next thing you'll be telling me is that when my local Ford dealer gives me price on a car, the cost should include extras such as an engine!

  8. #218
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,952
    Bad part and not bad design likely cause of the F-35B grounding.

    It should be fixed and cleared for flight ops soon.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...90R0PE20130128

    (Reuters) - Pentagon and industry investigators have pinpointed a manufacturing quality problem as the most likely cause of an engine failure that led to the grounding of the Marine Corps version of the Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter jet, sources familiar with the investigation told Reuters.

    Pentagon officials are expected to finalize the finding and the proposed fix at a meeting on Monday, said the sources, who were not authorized to speak publicly. They said the F-35B should be able to resume flights as soon as the "nonconforming" parts supplied by a unit of Parker Hannifin Corp are replaced.

    The grounding did not affect the Air Force or Navy versions of the radar-evading new fighter since they do not use the same part.

    The Pentagon grounded all 25 F-35B jets on January 18 after a propulsion line associated with the B-model's exhaust system failed just before takeoff during a training flight at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida.

    The part in question enables actuator movement for the exhaust system associated with the B-model's engine. Instead of traditional hydraulic fluid, it uses fuel as the operating fluid to reduce weight.

    An initial inspection discovered a detached propulsion line in the rear part of the engine compartment, and subsequent tests showed the line was not built to specifications by Stratoflex, a unit of Parker Hannifin.

    "It wasn't built to specification as it should have been," said one of the sources. "But there's a very small population of the tubes, and the problem should be fixed soon."

    Stratoflex is a subcontractor to engine maker Pratt & Whitney, a unit of United Technologies Corp, which builds the engines for the single-engine, single-seat fighter jet along with Britain's Rolls-Royce Plc.

    No comment was immediately available from Stratoflex.

    The speedy conclusion of the investigation is good news for the F-35 program, which is racing to complete an aggressive schedule of flight tests this year.

    The F-35 program has completed about 34 percent of its planned test flight program, but Lockheed is already building production models of the new warplane.

    Lockheed is building three different models of the F-35 fighter jet for the U.S. military and eight countries that helped pay for its development: Britain, Canada, Italy, Turkey, Denmark, the Netherlands, Australia and Norway.

    The Pentagon plans to buy 2,443 of the warplanes in coming decades, although many analysts believe U.S. budget constraints and deficits will eventually reduce that overall number.

    (Reporting by Andrea Shalal-Esa; Editing by Lisa Von Ahn)
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  9. #219
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,417
    as the most likely cause
    Interesting tidbit from your article
    "allah akbar": NATO's new warcry.

  10. #220
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,126
    The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter promises a military future for Cherry Point air station as it replaces older Marine Corps aircraft, but it already has a growing impact for North Carolina’s civilian economy

    In this one sentence, they describe the problem with not only the F-35 but defence procurment as a whole.

    Military acquisitions are no longer viewed as a part of defending the realm but rather job creation programs.

    And job creation programs are seldom run efficiently and seldom result in improvements in defence or tax payer efficiency.

    E.g. Australian Collins Class subs.

    Or even less topically - licence assembly of UH-60s - I once read that it took 36,000 hours to assemble each Blackhawk in Australia rather than 7,000 hours for assembly in the USA.

  11. #221
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,952
    It's official now (Hat tip to Spaz for posting on F-16.net)

    F-35B’s Grounding Traced to Crimped Fluid Line, Pentagon Says Tony Capaccio Monday, January 28, 2013

    http://bloomberg.finanza.repubblica....MVHUAPT3HMTD4I

    "Jan. 28 (Bloomberg) -- An “improperly crimped” fluid line was the probable cause of a propulsion-system leak that led the Pentagon to suspend flight tests of the F-35 fighter’s Marine Corps version, according to the Pentagon.

    The investigation “ruled out any design or maintenance issues,” Pentagon spokesman Joe DellaVedova said today in an e- mailed statement. The evidence revealed “a quality discrepancy” resulting in the crimped line, he said...."
    ________________________

    Engineers discover culprit behind F-35B fueldraulic line failure Dave Majumdar 28 Jan 2013

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...ailure-381574/

    "...The investigating team found that six other aircraft had the same manufacturing defect. The faulty parts have been returned to F-35 propulsion system prime contractor Pratt & Whitney for replacement. The fueldraulic line is built by Stratoflex. The company, along with Rolls-Royce and Pratt &Whitney, has "instituted corrective actions to improve their quality control processes and ensure part integrity," the JPO says.

    The fueldraulic line powers the actuator movement for the F-35B's STOVL vectoring exhaust system. Instead of traditional hydraulic fluid, the system uses fuel as the operating fluid to reduce weight.

    NAVAIR and the JPO are currently "developing a return to flight plan which details the removal and inspection requirements of currently installed fueldraulic lines on the 25 F-35B variants affected by the flight suspension." The B-model has been grounded since 18 January
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  12. #222
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    194
    Quote Originally Posted by thobbes View Post
    E.g. Australian Collins Class subs.

    Or even less topically - licence assembly of UH-60s - I once read that it took 36,000 hours to assemble each Blackhawk in Australia rather than 7,000 hours for assembly in the USA.
    Would be interested in some references on this if you have some handy ? if you could post in the naval aviation thread, not sure on your jibe at the Collins though, and what is has to do with what you stated ?

    Cheers

  13. #223
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,952
    Northrop Grumman AAQ-37 Sensor System Demonstrates Hostile Fire Detection Capability
    BALTIMORE, Feb. 11, 2013 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Northrop Grumman Corporation's (NYSE:NOC) AN/AAQ-37 Electro-Optical Distributed Aperture System (DAS), developed for the F-35 Lightning II, has added hostile ground fire detection to its capabilities by successfully detecting and locating tanks that were firing live rounds during preparations for a military exercise.


    A video accompanying this release is available on YouTube at:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHZO0T5mDYU


    While being flown on Northrop Grumman's BAC 1-11 test aircraft, the DAS detected and located tank fire from an operationally significant distance. In addition to artillery, the system is able to simultaneously detect and pinpoint the location of rockets and anti-aircraft artillery fired in a wide area.


    The AN/AAQ-37 DAS provides passive spherical awareness for the F-35, detecting and tracking aircraft and missiles in every direction simultaneously, providing visual imagery for day or night navigation and targeting purposes.


    "The DAS continues to show its ability to gather and analyze data for a wide range of missions not initially contemplated for this sensor system. These flight test results are just the latest example of the situational awareness capability of this revolutionary technology in action," said Mark Rossi, Northrop Grumman's DAS business area director.


    Although hostile fire detection is not an F-35 requirement for the DAS, the system design makes it ideal for this mission. This inherent capability enables DAS to harvest, process and deliver key battlespace information to ground forces and other aircraft autonomously, without the need for cueing or increasing pilot workload. The ability to gather this live fire data expands the mission possibilities of the sensor to include close air support and ground fire targeting.


    Northrop Grumman is a leading global security company providing innovative systems, products and solutions in unmanned systems, cybersecurity, C4ISR, and logistics and modernization to government and commercial customers worldwide. Please visit www.northropgrumman.com for more information.


    Just to be clear, this is not a Blk3 capability, but a follow-on development.


    With that being said, the EODAS clarity s amazing!
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  14. #224
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    virginia beach,VA.
    Posts
    746
    How much more of this will there be?! http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013...des-jet-specs/

  15. #225
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Toronto ON, Canada
    Posts
    580
    As a Canadian taxpayer I hope and pray that we do not hitch our national defense to this pig in a poke of an aircraft.

    All the debate in this thread strikes me as the most moot of arguments. This plane is failing left right and centre and is having its specifications re-written (on a downward trajectory of performance mind you) around it each and every time it fails to meet a benchmark! And notwithstanding that it might offer some aspects of credible performance down the road in SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS it will never be what it was intended to be - a swiss army knife LO plane that could do all reasonably well.

    At best it will turn out to be a sluggish LO bomb truck with next to no growth potential, a massively high flyaway cost and if the stealth/LO is countered technologically down the road (entirely possible) it becomes at best a downgrade from the F-16/AV-8B/F-18's it is designed to replace at a massively inflated price.

    Canada for one should go the F-18 E/F route with the F's wired for "Growler" duty. NATO is always screaming for EW resources and the RCAF could really punch above its weight by adding a capability to its arsenal that it currently does not possess.

    And one engine is nuts in Canada. Simply nuts.
    "It was a magnificent display of trained and disciplined valour, and its assault only failed of success because dead men can advance no further."

  16. #226
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,952
    Please keep opinions and hit pieces on the debate thread, this is the news thread.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  17. #227
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    virginia beach,VA.
    Posts
    746

  18. #228
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    2,710

    which matters not, because CUDA is real...

    So once they are airborne again the F35s will be able to take on anything with LM controversial new weapon:

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...issile-382670/

  19. #229
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,165
    Quote Originally Posted by mrmalaya View Post
    So once they are airborne again the F35s will be able to take on anything with LM controversial new weapon:

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...issile-382670/
    CUDA is a CAD design in LM´s computers.
    Its not on any Pentagon budget, program, whatever, there´s not even a requirement for it, good luck...

    Did you read the "low cost weapon" bit?!!!!
    Given LM past history, if this CUDA transformed itself into actual hardware (it wont) i am wiling to bet that it would double the cst of one AIM120.
    Last edited by Sintra; 23rd February 2013 at 17:55.

  20. #230
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,066
    Quote Originally Posted by Sintra View Post
    CUDA is a CAD design in LM´s computers.
    Its not on any Pentagon budget, program, whatever, there´s not even a requirement for it, good luck...

    Did you read the "low cost weapon" bit?!!!!
    Given LM past history, if this CUDA transformed itself into actual hardware (it wont) i am wiling to bet that it would double the cst of one AIM120.
    Everything starts somewhere... and given the scale and importance of the F-35 program I expect there to be a great deal of interest in this missile or something very much like it.

  21. #231
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,165
    Quote Originally Posted by hopsalot View Post
    Everything starts somewhere... and given the scale and importance of the F-35 program I expect there to be a great deal of interest in this missile or something very much like it.
    Good luck with that.
    Its not a program, there are no requirements, the Pentagon is broke... Excelent timing for the USAF and the US Navy to fund a new generation AAM, and one that its not needed at that.

  22. #232
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    4,022
    Quote Originally Posted by SpudmanWP View Post
    Northrop Grumman AAQ-37 Sensor System Demonstrates Hostile Fire Detection Capability

    Just to be clear, this is not a Blk3 capability, but a follow-on development.
    With that being said, the EODAS clarity s amazing!
    Not that I don't agree but this is what a tiny M24 palm-sized thermal imager can do today weighing only 14oz..

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UwzcjkQB-4

    From the ad videos it might look as if there was anything extraordinary in spotting enemy fire at few kms.. it isn't.. you can see that with a decent thermal device with the cost way under $10k.. important is what you can identify...
    Last edited by MSphere; 23rd February 2013 at 22:25.

  23. #233
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,952
    I was speaking of clarity in the context of an NVG replacement.

    Try that handheld unit from 10,000ft up and get back to me

    Besides, it's easy to say things like "it isn't", but when you consider that the F-35 is the only thing that can.. it is.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  24. #234
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    4,022
    Quote Originally Posted by SpudmanWP View Post
    I was speaking of clarity in the context of an NVG replacement.
    Thermal systems don't even approach NVG in terms of clarity and resolution. Current 6-micron pore GaAs image intensifiers have minimum requirement of 64 lp/mm, with 2-micron pore systems in trial phase expecting around 200 lp/mm - that is a resolution close to 16MPixel digital camera. Compare that to this 640x480 FPA.

    TI and NVG are complementary systems. They cannot replace each other as they both have their own undisputable virtues.

    Quote Originally Posted by SpudmanWP View Post
    Try that handheld unit from 10,000ft up and get back to me
    With ease. The only thing I need to do is to replace the handheld's objective lens which is only 18mm in diameter, for obvious reasons. Additional $2,5k-3k investment in a decent sized Germanium lens will put your EODAS to shame..

    Quote Originally Posted by SpudmanWP View Post
    Besides, it's easy to say things like "it isn't", but when you consider that the F-35 is the only thing that can.. it is.
    I'd rather say it is easy to get impressed if you know next to nothing about the subject..
    Last edited by MSphere; 24th February 2013 at 00:15.

  25. #235
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,952
    As a 19K I have used both NVGs (IR and LI) and thermal imagers (rifle, tripod, and vehicle mounted) and I can tell you without a doubt that thermal wins every time.

    NVGs have problems with any light flares, washout at range, and does not provide the capabilities of EODAS.

    Here are some examples of what a NVG shows and is clearly inferior to what EODAS provides.










    Now compare that to EODAS




    Look at the video again and show me a NVG that can show you that much detail at those distances.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHZO0T5mDYU#!

    It's not just about pixel count, but about what kind and how the data is being presented.

    ------ DAMNIT ----------

    You sucked me in again.... this is the news thread, not the debate thread.
    Last edited by SpudmanWP; 24th February 2013 at 01:07.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  26. #236
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    virginia beach,VA.
    Posts
    746
    Long live the M-1!!!!!!!!!

  27. #237
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    4,022
    Quote Originally Posted by SpudmanWP View Post
    As a 19K I have used both NVGs (IR and LI) and thermal imagers (rifle, tripod, and vehicle mounted) and I can tell you without a doubt that thermal wins every time.

    NVGs have problems with any light flares, washout at range, and does not provide the capabilities of EODAS.

    Here are some examples of what a NVG shows and is clearly inferior to what EODAS provides.

    Now compare that to EODAS


    Look at the video again and show me a NVG that can show you that much detail at those distances.


    It's not just about pixel count, but about what kind and how the data is being presented.

    ------ DAMNIT ----------

    You sucked me in again.... this is the news thread, not the debate thread.
    1.
    NVG do not have digital output, the real imagery looks much better than the pictures you have presented. You cannot be serious comparing TI imagery taken via digital output with NV imagery taken via a mobile phone in a shaky hand through the ocular lens of an ANVIS goggle.
    2.
    NV and TI are complementary systems is a general statement - the advantages of each technology are very application specific. There are good reasons why the industry has moved in the direction of TI+NV fusion (AN/PSQ-20 ENVG) instead of simply replacing NV with TI.
    3.
    BTW, it did not escape me that you have only answered the first part (NVG vs TI) which was only briefly mentioned by chance while the really interesting issue, the fact that EODAS roughly provides you with the same capability as six contemporary $10k systems connected together would, was left unanswered.

    This is pretty much the essence of my post - EODAS is by no means a bad system but it can be replicated at fraction of the cost today and the marketing around it is foolish. It has started with that ICBM detection and it now continues. Bragging about how EODAS can see artillery muzzle flash at few miles distance and how much of a surprise it came is kinda awkward - every comparably sized thermal imager can do that and there is no surprise here, at all. I would rather concentrate on the true 360deg FOV as that is the really impressive feature of the system.
    Last edited by MSphere; 24th February 2013 at 03:12.

  28. #238
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    birthplace of aviation
    Posts
    8,819
    Quote Originally Posted by Sintra View Post
    Good luck with that.
    Its not a program, there are no requirements, the Pentagon is broke... Excelent timing for the USAF and the US Navy to fund a new generation AAM, and one that its not needed at that.

    I agree, the CUDA is in the same boat as a F-15 Super stealth or whatever boeing has hinted. The main point here is that there has been some murmurs in the defense industry ever since Aim-120D ---> JDRADM research that the Dod MAY be interested in a long term A2A weapon development. The CUDA is probably LMA's foot in the door in case such a wish ever materialize.
    Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies

  29. #239
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,165
    Quote Originally Posted by bring_it_on View Post
    I agree, the CUDA is in the same boat as a F-15 Super stealth or whatever boeing has hinted. The main point here is that there has been some murmurs in the defense industry ever since Aim-120D ---> JDRADM research that the Dod MAY be interested in a long term A2A weapon development. The CUDA is probably LMA's foot in the door in case such a wish ever materialize.
    Interested i am quite sure they are, if that translates into a totally new AAM for the foreseable future...
    I could be entirely wrong but at least for the next decade anything other than low (Pentagon low) budget prototying and technology insertions into the AIM120/AIM9 will be quite a surprise.

    Cheers

  30. #240
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    111
    what is the range? hopefully it will come to fruition soon

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES