F-35 News

[Penguin]

(...)

While both Wheeler and Sprey are respected academics, other attacks on the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program have come from less reputable sources. In the Australian media, the JSF was assailed by allegations that the fighters were "clubbed like baby seals" during a table top war-game held in Hawaii by the U.S. Pacific Command. Later, when the source of the report was revealed to be an erroneous backup slide for a RAND Corporation presentation, RAND not only disavowed the slide in question, but also issued a strong denial that the report was ever designed to be a detailed simulation of the capabilities of any warplane- much less the F-35. However, the damage to the public perception remains.

Major General Charles Davis, USAF, the Program Executive Officer of the JSF program, explained that critics of the F-35 simply do not understand the fundamental requirements and technologies behind the aircraft, nor have these critics been briefed about the true capabilities of the new warplane. The F-35 is "not designed for an air-show in Paris," Davis said referring to the thrust vectoring Russian Su-35 aircraft which regularly performs spectacular routines at air-shows around the world. Davis said that while the F-35 was not designed as a pure air superiority machine, the program has a requirement to defeat any threat aircraft today- or any projected threat aircraft in the future.

The JSF accomplishes this feat by relying on its incredible suite of sensors, its stealthy airframe, and a surprising level of agility. The F-35 is not only equipped with the APG-81 active electronically scanned array radar (AESA), which according to Lockheed Martin F-35 Chief Test Pilot Jon Beesley, is the most advanced fighter radar system in the world, but also a host of other sensors. The radar can track an enormous numbers of targets in the air at phenomenal ranges while simultaneously operating air to ground modes, Beesley said.

Complementing the radar, the F-35's airframe is also lined with antennas that gather vast amounts of electronic information from the jets surroundings. The system allows the fighter to target and identify the electronic emissions of hostile radars in the air or on the ground with startling precision, Beesley said. The data gathered from these sensors allows the aircraft to track, identify and attack the sources of these signals without giving away the F-35s' position.

Furthermore, the F-35 has two separate types of infrared sensors that allow the jet to track targets passively. The Distributed Aperture System (DAS) is a system of cameras that feeds an infrared image of the planes' surrounding to the pilots' helmet, Beesley explained. The computer fuses the images from the six cameras and merges the images into a single seamless picture that allows the pilot to see 360 degrees around the aircraft, including through the cockpit floor and indeed the pilots' own body. The DAS also acts as a missile warning system (MWS) that alerts the pilot to incoming missiles. The second infrared sensor, called the electro-optical targeting system (EOTS), allows the aircraft to target, track, and identify object in the air or on the ground at long ranges and high resolutions, Beesley said.

The F-35 is able to transmit the wealth of data that the warplane gathers to other aircraft and to ground forces. Not only does the F-35 carry the standard Link-16 data-link to transmit information to over 100 other types of NATO platforms, the jet will carry data-links to communicate with ground forces and other stealth aircraft. A next-generation data-link called the Multifunction Advanced Data-Link (MADL) which will be carried by the F-35, will allow the plane to stealthily share data with the F-22 air dominance fighter and B-2 Spirit stealth bomber, enhancing the capabilities of all the aircraft involved. Additionally, the fighter's communication suite is based on an open source software programmable system. Thus as new technologies become available, new hardware and software can be added without the difficulties typically encountered with upgrading military systems, Davis said.

The F-35 is a stealthy airframe. Because the F-35 is designed to fly and fight in even the most heavily defended airspace, stealth is an essential component of the jets' design. The stealthy airframe is tailored for the mission of flying into the teeth of the most advanced air defences that the enemy can muster where conventional aircraft are vulnerable, Davis said. While the aircraft has a different radar cross section depending on which aspect angle is facing a threat radar, the plane meets the stringent requirements set forth by the U.S. military services based on more than 20 years of American experience with stealth aircraft design, Davis explained. Furthermore, stealth does not merely apply to an aircraft's radar cross section, an aircraft's infrared signature is similarly tailored to be less detectable by the enemy, Davis said. The sum total is an aircraft that is less vulnerable to the enemy from the air or ground.

The F-35 carries a diverse load of weaponry. Almost every air to ground weapon in the U.S. arsenal will eventually be integrated into the jet. These weapons include a host of laser guided weapons, satellite guided munitions, and air to ground missiles. While the perceived lack of weapons payload is the one of the main criticisms levelled at the JSF, Davis points out that the aircraft can carry a huge load of weapons externally once the enemy air defense systems have been destroyed. During the opening days of a war, Davis said weapons have to be carried internally in order to maintain the maximum level of stealth. In a full stealth configuration, the primary weapons load is limited to two 2000 lbs JDAM satellite guided munitions and two air to air AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles. In the future, however, the JDAM will be exchanged for as many as eight, possibly more, 250 lbs Small Diameter Bombs (SDB), allowing a single jet to strike as many as eight or more separate targets, Davis said.

In a pure stealth air to air configuration, the F-35 currently carries four AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles internally in its weapons bays, Davis said. While this configuration gives the jet a significant punch, Davis said studies have been undertaken that would increase the stealth air to air war load to six to possibly as many as eight air to air missiles which would be carried internally. The jet can also carry air to air missiles externally should the need arise and stealth is no longer a concern, Davis said.

In terms of aerodynamic performance, the F-35 is an excellent machine, Beesley said. Having previously been only the second man ever to have flown the F-22 Raptor, Beesley became the first pilot ever to fly the F-35 in late 2006. As such, Beesley is intimately familiar with both programs. According to Beesley, the four current test pilots for F-35 have been most impressed by the aircraft's thrust and acceleration. In the subsonic flight regime, the F-35 very nearly matches the performance of its' larger, more powerful cousin, the F-22 Raptor, Beesley explained. The "subsonic acceleration is about as good as a clean Block 50 F-16 or a Raptor- which is about as good as you can get." Beesley said.

The aircraft flies in "large measure like the F-22, but it's smaller, and stiffer" than the Raptor however, Beesley explained, adding that the aircraft handles superbly. The reason for the similar flight characteristics, explained the test pilot, is because the man who designed the flight control laws for the Raptor, is also the same man who is responsible for the flight control software for the F-35. As Beesley explains, the flight control laws of modern fighters determine to large extent the flight characteristics of a given aircraft. Beesley said that the aircraft is so stable and so comfortable that the test pilots find themselves inadvertently drifting too close to their wingmen in formation.

What Beesley expects will surprise future F-35 pilots is the jets' superb low speed handling characteristics and post-stall manoeuvrability. While the F-22 with its thrust vectored controls performs better at the slow speeds and high angle of attack (AOA) flight regime, the F-35 will be able match most of the same high AOA manoeuvres as the Raptor, although it will not be able to do so as quickly as the more powerful jet in some cases. Turning at the higher Gs and higher speed portions of the flight envelope, the F-35 will "almost exactly match a clean Block 50 F-16 and comes very close to the Raptor", Beesley said.

Ironically, the Navy version, which has larger wings but a lower G limit of 7.5G, has the best turning capability of the three F-35 versions Beesley explained. The Air Force version, meanwhile, has the best acceleration and is rated for 9Gs, Beesley said. Davis, explaining that the Marine Corps deemphasizes manoeuvrability in its air combat doctrine, said that the short take off, vertical landing (STOVL) USMC plane has a 7G limit. Beesley said that the aircraft makes up for the lower G limit by offering the flexibility in basing required by the Marines. Nor does the STOVL give up too much in range because of the engine driven lift fan installed behind the cockpit, Beesley said. The jet has "a range of more than 500 miles", while the Air Force and Navy planes both have ranges greater than 600 miles, Beesley explained, adding that the USAF version has as much internal fuel capacity as the larger twin engined F-22 Raptor.

While supersonically the F-35 is limited to a seemingly unimpressive Mach 1.6 in level flight, Davis explains that the JSF is optimized for exceptional subsonic to supersonic acceleration. Transonic acceleration is much more relevant to a fighter pilot than the absolute max speed of the jet, Davis said. Davis, who was previously the program manager for the F-15 Eagle, explains that while the Eagle is a Mach 2 class fighter, it has rarely exceed the threshold of Mach 1.2 to Mach 1.3 during it's entire 30 year life span. Additionally, the time the aircraft has spent in the supersonic flight regime can be measured in minutes rather than hours- most of the supersonic flights were in fact during specialized flights such as Functional Check Flights (FCF). "I don't see how that gets you an advantage" Davis said, referring to the Mach 2+ capability. Beesley said that in terms of supersonic flight that the F-35 is still more than competitive with existing designs.

Comparisons to the F-22 Raptor are unfair as "supersonically, the Raptor is in a class by itself. It lives there," Beesley explained. "In many ways the Raptor is the first true supersonic fighter," Beesley added, referring to that aircrafts' much publicized and unique supersonic cruise capability.

Beesley explained that the F-35 is different from legacy fourth generation fighters such as the F-15, F-16, F/A-18, or even more modern aircraft such as the Eurofighter, in that the primary weapons load is stored internally. This arrangement means that there is no added drag to the airframe from externally carried weapons, fuel tanks, or sensor pods as in older aircraft types. The outstanding handling, acceleration, and the maximum speed of the aircraft is useable in a combat configuration unlike in legacy fighters. Beesley said that recently he flew an F-35 test flight with a full internal load of two 2000 lbs JDAMs, and two AIM-120 missiles. The aircraft "felt like it had a few thousand pounds of extra fuel" but otherwise Beesley said there was practically no degradation in the aircrafts' performance.

What this means for the pilots who will fly the F-35 over future battlefields is that the Lightning II will be an aircraft that will excel in a multitude of roles. The JSF will provide the troops on the ground with close air support (CAS). However, the way the F-35 will carry out the CAS mission will be significantly different from the way the current A-10 Warthog performs the mission. There will be less emphasis on flying at low altitudes and absorbing ground fire and more emphasis on intelligence gathering and precision guided strikes, Davis explains. The F-35 will use its superb sensor capabilities and data-links to transmit real time imagery and sensor data to the troops on the ground in addition to using its 25 millimetre cannon and SDBs to provide fire support, Davis said. The jets' stealth capabilities will allow the jet to do so even in a high threat environment.

The most challenging mission for the JSF is where the F-35s will have to penetrate deep into a dense integrated air defense system reinforced by enemy fighters and strike a target with no support, Davis said. This is the most difficult mission for the F-35, but it is also one that is near suicidal for current aircraft such as the F-16. Modern Russian built surface to air missile systems such as the SA-20 are deadly to conventional aircraft, Davis explained. A package of four, six, or even eight F-35s would have to divide up the responsibilities for the suppression of enemy air defenses, mapping out the target, clearing the skies, and striking the target, Davis said. The larger number of aircraft is necessary since the F-35 "doesn't have the kinematics of the F-22", Davis explained, "we're a slightly fatter, slower aircraft, so it takes a few more planes to get the job done."

Beesley for his part, when asked which aircraft he preferred, said that "for clearing the skies" he'd have to pick the Raptor, but for everything else the F-35 would be his pick he said, adding,

"The F-35 offers a greater depth and breadth of missions." Beesley said, given the F-35s' awesome capabilities, "The only airplane that can complete with it is the Raptor. Everything else is playing in a different league."

http://www.livescience.com/technology/0 ... -jets.html

[Penguin]

Israel To Buy F-35s With Cockpit Mods

Aug 27, 2010

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... pit%20Mods

[Penguin]

8:30 Drop test...interessante.

[Penguin]

Northrop Grumman Distributed Aperture System (DAS) for F-35 Demonstrates Ballistic Missile Defense Capabilities


(Source: Northrop Grumman Corp.; issued September 7, 2010)(Source: Northrop Grumman Corp.; issued September 7, 2010)



BALTIMORE --- Northrop Grumman Corporation's AN/AAQ-37 Electro-Optical Distributed Aperture System (DAS) for the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter successfully detected and tracked a two-stage rocket launch at a distance exceeding 800 miles during a routine flight test conducted aboard the company's BAC 1-11 test bed aircraft.

"The DAS could fill critical capability gaps in the area of ballistic missile defense (BMD)," said Dave Bouchard, program director for F-35 sensors at Northrop Grumman. "We have only scratched the surface on the number of functions the F-35's DAS is capable of providing. With DAS, we've combined instantaneous 360-degree spherical coverage, high frame refresh rates, high resolution, high sensitivity powerful processors and advanced algorithms into a single system. The number of possibilities is endless."

An operational DAS system is comprised of multiple DAS sensors whose images are fused together to create one seamless picture. DAS successfully detected and tracked the rocket during a nine minute, two-stage, flight period from horizon break until final burnout through multiple sensor fields of regard. Unlike other sensors, DAS picks up targets without assistance from an external cue. Because DAS is passive, an operator does not have to point the sensor in the direction of a target to gain a track.

"The DAS software architecture already includes missile detection and tracking algorithms that can be applied to the BMD mission," Bouchard added. "The results of the flight test were extraordinary. We found that the data gathered during this flight validated our performance predictions. In fact, we knew we could have seen the rocket at a longer distance."

The AN/AAQ-37 DAS is a high resolution omni-directional infrared sensor system that provides advanced spherical situational awareness capability, including missile and aircraft detection, track and warning capabilities for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. DAS also gives a pilot 360 degree spherical day/night vision, with the capability of seeing through the floor of the aircraft. Northrop Grumman is now exploring how the existing DAS technology could assist in several additional mission areas, including Ballistic Missile Defense and irregular warfare operations.

Northrop Grumman's Electronic Systems sector designed and produces the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter AN/AAQ-37 DAS. The DAS F-35 software that includes algorithms for all JSF functions was delivered to Lockheed Martin Corporation earlier this year. Northrop Grumman also designed and produced the AN/APG-81 AESA radar system, and designed and produces the F-35's Communications, Navigation and Identification (CNI) system.


Northrop Grumman Corporation is a leading global security company whose120,000 employees provide innovative systems, products, and solutions in aerospace, electronics, information systems, shipbuilding and technical services to government and commercial customers worldwide.

[Penguin]

Ares Blog
Six-Shot Lightning Makes The Movies
Posted by Bill Sweetman at 9/8/2010 7:00 AM CDT
We have talked before about a six-internal-AMRAAM configuration for the Joint Strike Fighter, but for the first time it has been graphically illustrated by the company, in a recently released promotional video:



Notably, the missiles look as if they are vertically and horizontally staggered, the outer weapons slightly above and behind the inner missiles. It's a uniquely tight fit and will require an ingenious launcher design, particularly if it is to be compatible with the existing weapons bay, which only provides for a single weapon launcher. With the staggering (which keeps the wings and fins of each missile separate) the pair of 12-foot AIM-120s is about as long as a 152-inch JDAM. The video shows six AMRAAMs on an F-35B, despite its smaller weapon bays.

There is still no firm timetable or budget for the upgrade. A brief to Norway in 2008 puts the capability in "notional" Block 5, which will now appear in 2020.

Here's the entire Lockheed Martin video, and it is quite the classic of its genre, complete with a macho narrator who is apparently taking a break from Ford truck commercials:

[Penguin]

Photo Release -- Northrop Grumman Distributed Aperture System (DAS) for F-35 Demonstrates Ballistic Missile Defense Capabilities
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/photo- ... _news_stmp

BALTIMORE, Sep 7, 2010 (GlobeNewswire via COMTEX) -- Northrop Grumman Corporation's (NOC 56.81, -0.04, -0.07%) AN/AAQ-37 Electro-Optical Distributed Aperture System (DAS) for the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter successfully detected and tracked a two-stage rocket launch at a distance exceeding 800 miles during a routine flight test conducted aboard the company's BAC 1-11 test bed aircraft.

Photos accompanying this release are available at http://media.globenewswire.com/noc/medi ... pkgid=7952

"The DAS could fill critical capability gaps in the area of ballistic missile defense (BMD)," said Dave Bouchard, program director for F-35 sensors at Northrop Grumman. "We have only scratched the surface on the number of functions the F-35's DAS is capable of providing. With DAS, we've combined instantaneous 360-degree spherical coverage, high frame refresh rates, high resolution, high sensitivity powerful processors and advanced algorithms into a single system. The number of possibilities is endless."

An operational DAS system is comprised of multiple DAS sensors whose images are fused together to create one seamless picture. DAS successfully detected and tracked the rocket during a nine minute, two-stage, flight period from horizon break until final burnout through multiple sensor fields of regard. Unlike other sensors, DAS picks up targets without assistance from an external cue. Because DAS is passive, an operator does not have to point the sensor in the direction of a target to gain a track.

"The DAS software architecture already includes missile detection and tracking algorithms that can be applied to the BMD mission," Bouchard added. "The results of the flight test were extraordinary. We found that the data gathered during this flight validated our performance predictions. In fact, we knew we could have seen the rocket at a longer distance."

The AN/AAQ-37 DAS is a high resolution omni-directional infrared sensor system that provides advanced spherical situational awareness capability, including missile and aircraft detection, track and warning capabilities for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. DAS also gives a pilot 360 degree spherical day/night vision, with the capability of seeing through the floor of the aircraft. Northrop Grumman is now exploring how the existing DAS technology could assist in several additional mission areas, including Ballistic Missile Defense and irregular warfare operations.

Northrop Grumman's Electronic Systems sector designed and produces the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter AN/AAQ-37 DAS. The DAS F-35 software that includes algorithms for all JSF functions was delivered to Lockheed Martin Corporation earlier this year. Northrop Grumman also designed and produced the AN/APG-81 AESA radar system, and designed and produces the F-35's Communications, Navigation and Identification (CNI) system.

(Photo: http://www.primezone.com/newsroom/prs/?pkgid=)

(Photo: http://www.primezone.com/newsroom/prs/?pkgid=)

Northrop Grumman Corporation is a leading global security company whose120,000 employees provide innovative systems, products, and solutions in aerospace, electronics, information systems, shipbuilding and technical services to government and commercial customers worldwide. Please visit http://www.northropgrumman.com for more information.

This news release was distributed by GlobeNewswire, http://www.globenewswire.com

SOURCE: Northrop Grumman Corp.

[Penguin]

Ares
A Defense Technology Blog

Canada Names Operational F-35 Bases
Posted by Robert Wall at 9/9/2010 11:41 AM CDT

Canada will base its F-35 Joint Strike Fighters at Cold Lake and Bagotville, equipping 4 Wing and 3 Wing respectively.
The basing plan was announced by defense minister Peter MacKay during a visit to 3 Wing at Bagotville.

In announcing the move, chief of staff Lt. Gen. Andre Deschamps notes in a statement that “3 Wing Bagotville and 4 Wing Cold Lake have long and proud histories of protecting Canadian and North American airspace at home and contributing to coalition operations abroad.”

Each base will get 24 of the fighters. The rest of the 65 units will go to a training squadron. Where that will be situated remains to be determined. Canada hopes to start taking delivery of the F-35 in 2016.

[Junker]

Esse debate da segunda turbina ainda vai longe.

Doing what's right



Defense Secretary Robert Gates is trying to cut waste in the Pentagon's budget. | AP Photo

By DAVID M. WALKER | 9/7/10 4:19 AM EDT

Defense Secretary Robert Gates should be commended for his efforts to end or cut back a range of overly expansive or outdated weapons programs. He has also acknowledged more recently that the Pentagon has become a bloated bureaucracy that has way too much tail (or overhead) for the amount of tooth (or war-fighting capability). Taking on these historically sacred cows — especially while U.S. troops are in the field — may be controversial. It is, however, both correct and courageous.

There is huge waste in the Defense Department, other national security agencies and other parts of the federal government. We must begin to move aggressively to eliminate it, given our huge structural deficits and mounting debt burdens that threaten our ship of state.

Unfortunately, there is not a budget-line item for "waste." It is a lot more difficult to identify and eliminate than many people realize. Why? Many reasons, including a lack of transparency, inadequate performance metrics, myopic budget processes and the many vested interests in the "status quo."

What is waste? It represents the failure of the taxpayers to receive reasonable value for money, both today and over time. Waste exists throughout government to varying degrees. In addressing it, we must recognize that we ultimately have finite resources. Therefore, waste is likely to result in higher taxes and an inability to address legitimate societal needs — including national security needs — over time.

Gates was able to prevail over congressional protests last year in connection with a number of major weapons systems — including the Army's Future Combat Systems, the Navy's DDG-1000 Destroyer, the Marine Corps' new presidential helicopter and the Air Force's F-22 program. This year, he has set his sights on two additional programs: the C-17 and the alternate engine program for the Joint Strike Fighter.

While Gates's arguments in connection with the C-17 program have merit, his position on the alternate engine program is inappropriate and needs to be reconsidered. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office and even the Defense Department have noted that the JSF alternate engine program has not been subject to competitive bidding. That is shocking, considering that it represents an approximate $100-billion acquisition program that will stretch over 30 years. Full and fair competition is in the best interest of the taxpayers and our war fighters. It has proved to result in reduced costs and improved performance.

Prudence and best practice dictate that all major acquisition programs should be the subject of competitive bidding. The JSF engine program should be no exception. In addition, history has shown that repeated competition from dual sourcing arrangements can result in even more savings and performance improvements over time.

There are many similarities between the JSF engine program and the F-16 engine program. Both involve large purchases over many years, for both the U.S. military and various U.S. allies through foreign military sales. The JSF alternate engine program is actually even bigger and more important. Unlike the F-16 engine program, it involves aircraft for the Air Force, the Navy and the Marine Corps.

The F-16 engine program was subject to competitive bidding. In addition, it involved a dual-sourcing arrangement that included additional competition over many years. The GAO has reported that this approach resulted in reduced risk, improved performance and significantly lower cost over time. This sounds like a win-win situation to me.

So why is Gates proposing a different course for the JSF alternate engine program? Only he knows. But it may be because of the federal government's myopic budgeting and appropriations processes. Specifically, the federal budget and appropriations processes largely involve cash-based accounting approaches. Therefore, dual-sourcing approaches can cost more money in the early years, while the savings and performance improvements occur over time.

Failure to consider the future cost savings and performance improvements can result in penny-wise and pound-foolish decisions — as could be the case with this important program. In my view, it is clearly in the longer-term interest of the taxpayers and our war fighters to ensure competitive bidding for this program — both up front and over time.

If the secretary is concerned about the additional short-term cost, there are plenty of other places in the Defense budget to cut costs.

_______
David Walker served as the U.S. comptroller general from 1998 to 2008.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/41821.html

[Penguin]

Ares Blog
F-35's Unequal Progress
Posted by Graham Warwick at 9/12/2010 9:34 AM CDT

Lockheed Martin has begun engine runs on the first production F-35 as the Joint Strike Fighter program continues its Jekyll and Hyde progress. AF-6, one of two F-35A CTOL jets in the first low-rate initial production lot, completed high-power runs last week (Sep. 8).

Thanks to the performance of the F-35A development jets, the JSF test program is running well ahead of plan for the year - 233 flights by the end of August against a plan of 196. But that disguises the fact that STOVL testing is well behind schedule, because of reliability issues with the F-35B test jets, with 122 flights by the end of August against a plan of 153 (and a target of 251 by year-end).

If you factor in the 14 flights completed by the first F-35C carrier variant (against a plan of just 4), that means the two F-35As now at Edwards AFB have logged 97 flights this year against a plan of 39 - almost 2.5 times the scheduled rate. The smooth-running As are definitely "Jekylls" to the balky F-35B "Hydes".

The imbalance wasn't quite so bad in August, as availability of the STOVL jets improved. The two As at Edwards logged 22 flights against a plan of 9, while the four Bs at Pax logged 26 flights against a plan of 28 - the highest monthly totals yet. But even that rate will not get the STOVL program back on schedule by year-end.

A critical measure is how quickly the first F-35B - aircraft BF-1 - is expanding the vertical landing envelope so the rest of the test fleet can be cleared for STOVL operations. That will require about 50 vertical landings - of which only 10 have been accomplished so far. Missing the target for fleet clearance by year-end could delay the first at-sea STOVL tests, planned for May 2011.

Inside Defense reports that STOVL testing faces challenges getting back on schedule because of operating limitations that prevent the aircraft flying in "common weather conditions such as steady wind, wet tarmac and nearby lightning" I sense the ultra-cautious hand of Naval Air Systems Command in those restrictions.

Meanwhile, the remaining JSF test jets are getting closer to flying. AF-3 is in final finishes and scheduled to fly in October; AF-4 is being prepared for engine runs and BF-5 for display checks, and both are planned to fly in the fourth quarter.

[Penguin]

USAF: F-35A
USM/RN: F-35B
USN: F-35C

[marcelo l.]

http://ericpalmer.wordpress.com/2010/09 ... ry-auspol/



Lockheed Martin brief slide contradicts marketing claims of F-35 performance #military #auspol

First up; before we look at the potential F-35 aero performance claims that have appeared which are a fair bit different than those of the seller of the aircraft; (oh wait, one is by the seller of the aircraft that goes against its sales claims….or does it?) we have to ask a question.

Who is Amicus Curiae? He has put up some interesting briefings of fighter aircraft that show he has a grasp of aero engineering.

The Amicus Curiae comparisons of fighter aircraft start at the very root of all knowledge on fighter performance. That is; things like weight, engine power and fuel fraction to name a few. His is not a total analysis. His figures are the building blocks; the starting point. This kind of work is the first stop for an engineer before they dig in and do more detailed work. For example, if AC saw the Navy performance manuals on the E and F Super Hornets, he would adjust the initial snapshot he has taken of that aircraft and point it downward. What he has done, is an excellent first look at the aircraft types. That, backed up by his wit, shows a high level of intelligence. With all that, I don’t know who he is.

The other source we are going to look at is Lockheed Martin. This chart is an add-on to this chart that I blogged on the other day. It brings into question the performance of the F-35 A and B. Instead of the LM claim that the F-35 matches aero performance of current “legacy fighters” like the F-16 and F-18, here we see that it is less. Oh, good grief. I forgot that thing of an F-16 with a center-line drop tank matching the performance of an F-35. Confused? The marketeers hope so.

To play the devils (F-35 cheerleader) advocate, you would have to consider the following. Lockheed would have to issue some kind of a clarification to their claims of the F-35 having F-16-like performance but I bet it would go something like this.

The F-35 has an internal electro-optical system and does not need drop tanks to reach their advertised range figures. What would this chart look like if you suited an F-16 up with an external electro-optical pod (SNIPER or LANTIRN) and external drop tanks or conformals? This produces extra drag. Note this gets even worse when you config the classic Hornet in this fashion and even more so with the Super Hornet.

So, an F-35 comes with all the mission equipment built in. However, stealth and weapons bays come at a price. For the F-35, you can not just punch them off and suddenly become lighter. As the top LM test pilot stated about the F-35 weapons bays; “holes are heavy”. This means any weapons bay increases weight in the aircraft design.

If you haven’t noticed already, the conclusions of F-35 performance reached by Amicus Curiae aren’t that far off from the LM slide. Amicus also states in plain English what the F-35 is; a strike aircraft which,if everything works as advertised, has some reasonable amount of range.

But let us go further on the topic of F-35 range. The aircraft design was meant to get its best range performance (depending on weight) at low and medium altitudes. A sales briefing to Norway shows claims of getting the spec sheet range with two light internal precision guided munitions (GBU-12s) 2 air-to-air missiles known as AMRAAMS and of course you get an internal gun. Your results may different if you decide to load up the heavy stuff.

The altitude shown in that brief was 25,000 feet. So from that, we see that the optimum range of the F-35 can be achieved below 30,000 feet (for a strike mission) while the LM chart that compares aircraft acceleration is locked in to a baseline of 30,000 feet (for an air intercept mission).

What the potential buyer of the aircraft has to realise is that they are getting an attack aircraft and not a true fighter aircraft in any sense of the word. Do you want a true multi-role aircraft that is affordable and lethal? Well, you want an F-16 because against growing threats, no matter if it is an F-16 or F-35, you will still need the F-22 to clear the way for you and that is the hard reality in the coming years. In other words, if you want F-16-like performance, you better get an F-16.

Until the F-35 can prove significant worth, the decision makers for air arms are going to be in the dark on the value of this flying question mark. This makes the idea of the F-35 as a solution for a weapon of war; dubious and certainly; not at any cost.

The F-35 does not have F-16-like performance unless the buyer and seller dig in and define the word “performance” to a much broader meaning than what everyone else would think that it means on the topic of fighter aircraft. Which isn’t very comforting when two of the major reference threats; the SU-35 and PAK-FA, will leave the F-16 in the dust. For the U.S. (and allied) air power road map, anything is possible if you are willing to lower your expectations.

[marcelo l.]

http://thehill.com/news-by-subject/defe ... e-fighter-

Senate appropriators reduce funding for Lockheed's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter
By Roxana Tiron - 09/14/10 12:49 PM ET
Senate defense appropriators on Tuesday significantly slashed funding for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter — the Pentagon’s largest and highest-profile program.

Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), the Senate’s top appropriator and chairman of the Defense panel, said Tuesday that his committee decided only to fund the production of 32 F-35 fighter jets, 10 fewer than the Pentagon requested for fiscal 2011. The new fiscal year begins Oct. 1.

Inouye on Tuesday said that some of the recommendations in the new Pentagon bill, including F-35 funding, would be considered “tough measures.”

“We consider them prudent,” Inouye said on Tuesday. “I would inform my colleagues that the Defense Department has not yet awarded a contract to build the 30 aircraft which Congress funded nearly a year ago.”

Lockheed Martin, the contractor for the F-35, and the Pentagon are still negotiating a fixed-price contract for 32 early-production F-35 aircraft (30 for the United States and two for international partners). A final contract agreement has been delayed for months.

The F-35, the Pentagon’s largest and most expensive program to date, has undergone significant reshaping as a result of ballooning costs and development delays.

The F-35 is meant to replace older aircraft for the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps as well as international militaries. The cost of the program has risen to $382.4 billion, a 65 percent increase from the projected costs in 2002.

Earlier this year, Lockheed CEO Robert Stevens pledged to keep the program on the right track and indicated the company would assume more risk for cost increases related to F-35 aircraft in early-stage production.

Lockheed officials have stressed that so far the company has been able to beat the government’s projections for the third batch of aircraft in early-stage production by 20 percent and is projecting it would come in more than 20 percent below the Pentagon’s estimate for the next batch, which is the one currently in negotiations.

The F-35 program is not the only high-profile program in Inouye’s crosshairs. The Defense panel also slashed funding for another Pentagon program that has strong backing from Defense Secretary Robert Gates: the Littoral Combat Ship. The LCS is viewed as a key part of the Navy’s push to achieve a 313-ship fleet.

Senate defense appropriators decided to cut funding for one ship for the Pentagon’s request for LCS, Inouye said on Tuesday.

The LCS program has not been devoid of problems. Almost a year ago, the Navy significantly overhauled the buying strategy for the project after costs escalated. Lawmakers grew frustrated with the program after the cost of one littoral combat ship more than doubled, to at least $460 million.

Teams led by General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin previously built versions of the LCS before the Navy overhauled the program.

Now the Navy is looking to award a large number of ships across several years to one contractor and build competition down the line. But in August, the Navy announced that there would be a several-month delay in awarding a high-profile combat ship contract. Lockheed Martin, teamed with Wisconsin-based Marinette Marine and Alabama-based Austal USA, a unit of Australian Austal Ltd., are competing for the contract.

“There is virtually no way that the winning contractor would be able to begin construction on four ships in 2011,” Inouye said during his panel’s deliberations Tuesday. “The two ships funded in 2010 have not yet been contracted. With the continued delays, providing funding for one LCS ship in 2011 is more than adequate for this important program.”

While the Senate panel’s decisions on the F-35 and LCS funding may create heartburn within the Pentagon, defense appropriators have not recommended funding an alternate engine for the F-35 fighter jet. President Obama has threatened to veto any defense bills that contain funding for the engine made by General Electric and Rolls-Royce. The administration has thrown its full support behind the primary engine made by Pratt & Whitney, a unit of United Technologies.

But Inouye indicated on Tuesday that the tug-of-war between Congress and the administration may not be over yet. Inouye told reporters that an amendment to fund the alternate engine might be offered when the full Appropriations Committee considers the Pentagon spending bill.

“I would think so,” Inouye said, stopping short of offering more detail.

The House defense appropriators funded the alternate engine despite opposition from the top defense appropriator, Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.).

Senate defense appropriators decided not to fund more Boeing C-17 cargo aircraft as part of their 2011 budget deliberations. The Pentagon opposes any additional funding for the cargo aircraft.

Meanwhile, Inouye is setting up for a clash with the Obama administration over funding for the Iraqi security forces. Taking a cue from the Senate Armed Services Committee, Inouye decided to slash the $2 billion request by $1 billion. The administration is fighting the defense authorizers’ decision.

“Some of us feel pretty strongly about this issue: that it's time — given the amount of money that Iraq is taking in oil revenue and the fact they cut their own defense budget in half in the parliament — it's kind of hard to justify putting billions of dollars in for the Iraq army,” Carl Levin (D-Mich.), the Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, said in May.

Overall, the Senate Appropriations Defense panel recommends $680.9 billion to fund the Pentagon’s operations in 2011. That amount also includes $157.7 billion for overseas contingency operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere. Overall, Inouye said that his panel’s recommendation is $8.1 billion below the Pentagon’s base budget request.

Inouye also said that defense appropriators reduced the dollar amount and number of member projects. The panel approved a total of $2.6 billion in earmarks as part of the 2011 bill. By comparison, for 2010, the panel officially disclosed $2.65 billion in earmarks. Watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense calculated an additional $4.5 billion in undisclosed projects it considered earmarks.

House defense appropriators slashed the number of pet projects in the annual Pentagon spending bill by more than half. House Democrats have instituted a moratorium on for-profit earmarks, while Republicans have banned pork-barrel projects from spending bills. As a result of those actions, defense appropriators approved $1.22 billion in earmarks as part of the 2011 Pentagon-spending bill.

Inouye has not instated any bans or moratoria on earmarks under his leadership.

[Penguin]

Lockheed Predicts U.S. F-35 Contract Will Be Signed Soon
By JOHN REED
Published: 14 Sep 2010 05:12
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... =AIR&s=TOP

Lockheed Martin officials once again repeated their prediction that the crucial fixed-price contract for 32 early production F-35 Joint Strike Fighters will be signed in the coming weeks despite months of delays.

Tom Burbage, Lockheed's executive vice president for F-35 programs, said Sept. 13 that "very protracted" haggling over the cost for the batch of jets, known as low rate initial production lot 4 (LRIP-4), is to blame for the delay. Burbage went on to say that friction between the Pentagon, under intense pressure to get maximum savings on the planes, and Lockheed's responsibility to produce profits has led to "marathon discussions" on the matter between the Defense Department and the Bethesda, Md.-based firm.

Burbage stuck to the company's line that the final price of the airplanes will be roughly 20 percent below Pentagon estimates from December 2009, which predicted the jets would costs as much as $76 million each in 2010 dollars.

The Lockheed executive's comments echo those made on Sept. 2 by U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz, who said that a contract for the planes should be signed in the coming weeks.

F-35 watchers see the LRIP-4 deal as being a key to proving whether the program can deliver on its stated cost goals due to the fixed-price nature of the contract that holds Lockheed responsible for any cost overruns associated with the buy. Lockheed officials have said that a signed contract for LRIP-4 is imminent since the springtime.

[P44]

Summary of Dutch MoD Report to Parliament


(Source: defense-aerospace.com; posted Sept. 24, 2010)


By Dutch analyst Johan Boeder



1) There is as yet no outcome from the CAPE analysis, but Dutch MoD worked together with JPO to do some analysis of the Dutch situation. Intermediate results show that there will be considerable consequences for Dutch F-16 Replacement Project.

In other words, costs are much higher than predicted in the Dutch F-16 Replacement budget of about EUR 5 billion.

Since 2002, a total of 85 F-35As was planned to replace the Dutch air force’s current F-16s, to be purchased in two batches (57 and 28 aircraft). At this moment purchase of the second batch seems unlikely, based at the latest price information.

2) Negotiations on the LRIP-4 contract with Lockheed-Martin are finalized. but not those with Pratt & Whitney on the F135 engine, so there is still uncertainty about F135 engine prices.

3) The Dutch budget for FY2011 shows a shift toward a delivery of first F35s in 2016 (with exception of first LRIP-3 and LRIP-4 aircraft for IOT&E) as well as a shift in F35 project expenses to other years (in general, delay of a two-three years.

This will mean slower growth in the F-35 production curve in Fort Worth.

4) The decision about how to cancel the LRIP-3 and LRIP-4 aircraft and long lead items is still waiting on cost information of the US Government and the JPO.

-ends-

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... -rise.html

[P44]

Noruega adia F-35 para 2018

New Combat Aircraft Delayed to 2018


(Source: Stavanger Aftenpost; published Sept 28, 2010)


(Issued in Norwegian only; unofficial translation by defense-aerospace.com)



The new combat aircraft for the Air Force is two years overdue. The delivery of the US-built F-35 will therefore not start until 2018. Today's F-16 aircraft have will benefit from life extension, and the choice of a new fighter base will also be postponed.


In an article published by [the Stavanger] Aftenbladet on Saturday 25 September, and reproduced on the Ministry of Defence website, Minister of Defense Grete Faremo (AP) said that the US-led development program for the F-35 fighter will be restructured and extended.

The Ministry of Defence has considered the consequences of this for the Norwegian project, both with regard to costs, delivery times and the further decision-making process.

“The conclusion is that it is in Norway’s interest to allow for the extension of development on the American side by delaying our decision-making process for both the purchase of the combat aircraft and the choice of their base,” Faremo said.

U.S. will pay

The initial delivery of the aircraft will be postponed to 2018, but the military, according to Faremo, will acquire aircraft for training in 2016. “By acquiring up to four training aircraft in 2016, we will still allow initiation of the necessary training of technical and operational personnel," said Faremo.

The United States will bear all expenses related to the delay, according Faremo.

In connection with the acquisition of Norway's future fighter aircraft, the F-35, the defense minister further said that Norwegian industry has already received contracts for 350 million US dollars - nearly 2.1 billion Norwegian kroner.

Overall, the industry has a good chance to get contracts worth over five billion dollars - almost 30 billion kroner - as a result of our acquisition of this aircraft, Faremo said.

“We have so far obtained for industry orders worth more than Norway has paid for the F-35 program,” she argues.

Fighter base choice also delayed

The postponement of combat aircraft deliveries gives the government more time to determine where Norway's future fighter base will be located.

In the summer, it was announced that this issue is scheduled to be decided politically in early 2012. It is now unclear if this decision will now be further delayed.

It is also not certain whether Norway will have one or two combat air bases, but Ørlandet in South Trondelag, and Bodø and Troms in Nordland are all candidates.

“There remains considerable uncertainty about the [aircraft’s] noise, the impact of this noise, and costs associated with the choice of base. Therefore, we will use the year 2011 to finalize the assessment work and ensure good quality in this process," Faremo said.

Parliamentary bill n° 36 of 2008 determined that the government needs 52 operational combat aircraft and four aircraft for training. The original plan was to phase out our current [F-16] fighters between 2016 and 2020, and the total cost of their replacement is estimated to be around 42 billion kroner.

-ends-

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... years.html