F-35 News

[Penguin]

[Penguin]

BAE Touts Role In F-35 Software Development
Software Engineers Play Leading Role In F-35 Development
(Source: BAE Systems; issued July 12, 2016)

Hundreds of our expert software engineers have played a leading role in creating software for the F-35 Lightning II aircraft that will be operational with the US Air Force later this year.

The software team at our site in Samlesbury, Lancashire, has worked alongside Lockheed Martin, the prime contractor on the F-35 programme, to deliver the latest update known as ‘Block 3i’. There are more than eight million lines of code required for full operational capability. Block 3i equips the aircraft with 89% of the software code required.

John Brindle, our company's principal engineer for F-35 Lightning II Development, said: “Beginning with Jaguar, BAE Systems has a long history and world-class expertise in developing software for aircraft systems. We have made a significant contribution to 3i, including producing software for the fuel management system, on-board vehicle systems, structural health management and elements of the navigation and cockpit display system.

“This milestone allows us to focus our engineering effort on the final development software which will ultimately deliver full capability for F-35 Lightning II. The delivery of the software will also enable ASRAAM and Paveway IV weapons to be used on the UK’s aircraft.”

Block 3i software on upgraded computer hardware has been proven with more than 1,500 flying hours.

The F-35 Lightning II programme expects to have the fleet of aircraft currently in service with the US Marine Corps upgraded with the new software by the end of the year.

Block 3i is the penultimate software update and is followed by Block 3F on which ongoing work includes data link imagery, full weapons and embedded training capabilities. When Block 3F is delivered the aircraft will have 100% of the software required for full operational capability.

-ends-

[akivrx78]

Opinion: Canadian government must include F-35 jets in the search for a new fighter plane
Paul Mason
Published on: July 18, 2016 | Last Updated: July 18, 2016 6:00 AM MDT

In March, 1977, Pierre Trudeau’s Liberal government, seeking to replace the Air Force’s three existing fighter fleets with a single aircraft type, ordered a full-scale competition, calling for five American and two European fighters to be evaluated. A New Fighter Aircraft (NFA) program office was quickly established, with full-time representatives from three key government departments: National Defence, Supply and Services, and Industry.

Less than three years later, following an extremely thorough evaluation of the seven contenders, the reduction to a short list of two finalists, the rigours of two intervening federal elections and two changes of government, plus intense negotiations with both finalists, the newly re-elected Trudeau government selected the CF-18 Hornet as Canada’s new fighter aircraft.

Within two months a contract was signed with the aircraft’s manufacturer, McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing), and deliveries of the CF-18 began in 1982. The CF-18 has served Canada superbly for more than 30 years, and is expected to do so for another decade or so.

Compare that success story with the sorry mess confronting the current government regarding the replacement of the CF-18. The Conservative government’s earlier attempt to acquire the new fifth-generation F-35 directly through participation in a multi-national program without a formal competition failed miserably, the result of widespread criticism based on rising costs and an array of technical problems.

Then the Liberals, capitalizing on the controversy surrounding the F-35, made an equally controversial campaign promise: that they would not permit the F-35 to be a candidate to replace the ageing CF-18s. In a stunningly contradictory pronouncement, the Liberals declared that, if elected, they would “launch an open and transparent competition to replace the CF-18 aircraft.” Today, having won the election, they face the impossible task of reconciling these two mutually exclusive promises.

Recently, carefully managed leaks to the media from government sources indicated that the Liberals believed they had found a way out of their dilemma. Citing a suddenly appearing “capability gap” and a previously unheralded urgency to replace the existing fighters for technical reasons, they indicated that they had decided upon an “interim” purchase of F-18E/F Super Hornets, these being an upgraded version of the current fighter.

It is a solution that, however attractive politically, would have serious consequences for the Air Force and Canada’s future security posture. In the first place, it would result in the Air Force having to operate and manage two quite different fighter fleets, with unfortunate consequences with regard to the duplication of training, maintenance, logistic support and operating costs.

It also raises the suspicion that the government would convert the supposedly interim buy into a full replacement program by purchasing more and more Super Hornets over the next decade or so, eventually producing a full fleet of Super Hornets. This would allow them to eliminate the F-35 from contention, while neatly sidestepping the need for a competition. It is a superficially clever plan, but one not marked by the sort of transparency that the Liberals had proclaimed.

From every strategic and operational perspective, the gambit would be disastrous. Facing a future where fifth-generation fighters such as the F-35 and Russian and Chinese equivalents will dominate military aviation, Canada’s Air Force would be relegated to Third World status. Our nation’s ability to defend itself would be seriously degraded, and our status as a reliable ally severely diminished.

To make matters worse, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently stated before the House of Commons that the F-35 “does not work,” an indefensible allegation given that almost 200 F-35s are currently flying, and these have already flown more than 60,000 hours, that 11 nations have ordered the aircraft with more in the offing, that the U.S. Marine Corps’ F-35s have been combat ready since last year, with the United States Air Force following suit later this year. Furthermore, the technical problems routinely identified in the F-35’s early years have been resolved or soon will be, as one would expect in the process of developing and testing a highly complex new fighter aircraft.

Trudeau’s remark, moreover, reveals a willingness to deprive Canada’s aerospace industry of opportunities to participate in the enormous F-35 production program. These have already resulted in more than $800 million worth of contracted work for Canadian companies.

A remarkable story is told by the recent formal evaluation conducted by Denmark in its search for a new fighter. An independent evaluation team, looking at the F-35, the Super Hornet and the Eurofighter against four criteria, namely strategic, operational, cost, and industrial factors, concluded that the F-35 was superior in all four areas. Notably, the evaluation team stated that the F-35 was considerably cheaper than the Super Hornet (quoting $80 million versus $122 million), reflecting the significant (and expected) reduction in the F-35’s price as the program matures.

Of particular interest is the fact that the Royal Danish Air Force, like all which will be flying the aircraft over oceans and in Arctic regions, discounts complaints raised by critics about the plane’s single engine.

These facts, and numerous others, make it clear that the Liberal government could not in all honesty exclude the F-35 from consideration in the Canadian case. Nor could the government dare attempt to manipulate the operational requirements in such a way as to ensure a certain outcome, which would be grossly dangerous, irresponsible, costly and possibly illegal.

In all of this, the fact remains that there is one, and only one, viable option in the search for a suitable successor to the venerable CF-18 Hornet, and that is a genuinely open and transparent competition, as promised by the Liberals in their election campaign. This would tell Canadians that their government truly seeks the best solution for replacing our old CF-18s, in a way that will give the Air Force the equipment it needs to effectively defend the nation, while showing our allies that we remain a reliable partner.

Like the New Fighter Aircraft program that gave us the CF-18 36 years ago, the new competition could be initiated quickly and conducted thoroughly and fairly. The RCAF would then receive its new fighters expeditiously, thereby precluding any need, real or imaginary, for interim aircraft, while eliminating concerns about a “capability gap”.

Most importantly, it would demonstrate that Canada foregoes political expediency in favour of national security.

Retired general Paul Manson is a former Chief of the Defence Staff. From 1977 to 1980 he led the New Fighter Aircraft program which resulted in the selection of the CF-18.

http://edmontonjournal.com/opinion/colu ... hter-plane

[Penguin]

[cabeça de martelo]

[akivrx78]

http://hiroseisibu.cocolog-nifty.com/bl ... -1485.html

Um artigo interessante sobre os custos do F-35 do Japão, os valores estão em ienes vou arrendador em 100 ienes = 1 dolar.

2012 - US$600 milhões - 4 unidades contrato inicial
2013 - US$1.332 milhões - 2 unidades
2014 - US$1.443 milhões - 4 unidades
2015 - US$1.399 milhões - 6 unidades
2016 - US$1.391 milhões - 6 unidades

Total - US$6.165 milhões - 22 unidades - US$280 milhões a unidade (isto incluem peças de reposição)

Orçamento gasto para implantar uma FACO em Nagoya.

2012 - Governo americano US$600 milhões
2013 - Governo americano US$455 milhões
2013 - Mitsubishi Heavy US$639 milhões
2013 - IHI US$182 milhões
2013 - Mitsubishi Eletric US$56 milhões
2014 - Governo americano US$940 milhões
2014 - Mitsubishi Heavy US$213 milhões
2014 - IHI US$244 milhões
2014 - Mitsubishi Eletric US$45 milhões

Total - US$3.375 milhões + US$6.165 milhões = US$9.540 milhões
22 unidades - US$433 milhões a unidade (isto incluem peças de reposição e o custo da FACO)

Ainda falta mais 20 unidades a ser adquiridas

[akivrx78]

View from the F-35 Cockpit: U.S. And Allied Perspectives at RIAT 2016

2016-07-22 When we recently visited the Air Combat Command, we were informed that at RIAT 2016, a session with four pilots had been held at RIAT 2016, which provided a perspective from the squadron pilot’s perspective.

The pilots came from the USAF, the USMC, the RAF, and the Norwegian Air Force.

The ACC later sent us a video and we created two video slices from the overall video.

The first provides an update on the USMC and the F-35 with a very good overview on USMC thinking about the aircraft, and its role in the evolution of the joint and coalition force.

[cabeça de martelo]

View from the F-35 Cockpit: U.S. And Allied Perspectives at RIAT 2016

2016-07-22 When we recently visited the Air Combat Command, we were informed that at RIAT 2016, a session with four pilots had been held at RIAT 2016, which provided a perspective from the squadron pilot’s perspective.

The pilots came from the USAF, the USMC, the RAF, and the Norwegian Air Force.

The ACC later sent us a video and we created two video slices from the overall video.

The first provides an update on the USMC and the F-35 with a very good overview on USMC thinking about the aircraft, and its role in the evolution of the joint and coalition force.

[akivrx78]

July 22, 2016
F-35 Weapons Load


Air Force photograph by SrA. Stormy Archer

Airmen from the 33rd Aircraft Maintenance Squadron load an AIM-9X missile on to a F-35As external weapons pylon July 20, 2016 at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla.

This milestone was the first time an F-35A at Eglin was loaded with internal and external weapons and will help develop weapon-loading procedures for the F-35 program.

The F-35 is capable of carrying weapons both internally and externally to adapt to mission needs.


Air Force photograph by SrA. Stormy Archer

An F-35A from the 58th Fighter Squadron is loaded with weapons in its internal weapons bays and on external pylons July 20, 2016, at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. The F-35 is capable of carrying weapons both internally and externally in order to adapt to mission needs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq2sDI9ebUw

[Carlos Lima]

Israel...



[]s
CB_Lima

[akivrx78]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUcln7StaEw

[Viktor Reznov]

Conseguiram fazer o canhão interno do F-35A funcionar?

[kirk]

Conseguiram fazer o canhão interno do F-35A funcionar?

Pela imagem não é bem um canhão interno.

[Penguin]

Conseguiram fazer o canhão interno do F-35A funcionar?

Pela imagem não é bem um canhão interno.

A versão mais numerosa, o F-35A possui canhão interno e funciona:


Já o F-35B do video e o F-35C possuem o canhão externo, em um pod.

[Viktor Reznov]

Conseguiram fazer o canhão interno do F-35A funcionar?

Pela imagem não é bem um canhão interno.

Não estava me referindo ao post anterior ao meu.