JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Austin » 22 Feb 2014 10:06

More Cracks Found In F-35B's Second-Life Testing
The Pentagon appears to feel the problem is manageable, if disappointing. “We consider this significant, but by no means catastrophic,” says Pentagon procurement chief Frank Kendall. “Root-cause analysis is still ongoing, however, based on preliminary analysis, a redesign of the affected F-35B structural members will be required. We hope to have modified parts available in time for Lot 9 and we are assessing the impact on Lot 8, the 2014 lot.”

He notes that strengthening will be needed for F-35Bs that already have been fielded.

An improved design for the second 496 bulkhead is being developed and will be ready for testing in March, Dellavedova says. Additionally, “new findings on the adjacent structure have just begun a similar design development, so estimates of when repair parts can be made available and installed are in-work, but we estimate the repairs will support a projected fourth quarter of 2014 durability test restart.”

rohanldsouza
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 16
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 19:12

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby rohanldsouza » 22 Feb 2014 14:04

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/can-the-u ... be-hacked/ - Cyberwarfare Angle (and the Usual Suspects are of Course the Chinese).

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/getting-f ... r-control/ - The Danger of Privatisation in Defense without Safeguards

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Austin » 23 Feb 2014 09:50


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Austin » 26 Feb 2014 20:49

Bogdan Warns Of Possible Six-Month F-35 Slip Beyond Development
The multinational, $398 billion F-35 could slip by up to six months with activities planned beyond 2016, though work leading up to the end of the massive development until then remains largely on schedule, according to USAF Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, program executive officer for the Joint Strike Fighter.

Deviations leading up to completion of development are largely on track, he told an audience hosted by Credit Suisse/McAleese and Associates Feb. 25. “I’m measuring the days I’m off in those milestones by days and weeks,” he said.

The Marines are slated to declare initial operational capability with the F-35B, optimized for short-takeoff and vertical landing, as early as June 2015 with the U.S. Air Force to follow as early as August 2016. Both require the 2B software while only the Air Force is awaiting delivery of new processing hardware with the 3i package for its declaration. Thus, if such a delay does take place, it will have the most dramatic impact on the Navy, which is slated to declare IOC as early as August 2018.

Bogdan’s warning is twofold. A potential choke point in testing the software is what is concerning him. In the 3F package, Lockheed Martin is required to deliver an unprecedented level of fusion among various data feeds for the aircraft. Among them are inputs from offboard sensors, including other aircraft and satellites.

Even if the 2B/3i work is finished as planned, Bogdan is worried that the time it takes to outfit the test aircraft, labs and simulators with the new 3F software will eat into time needed to actually test it. This was a concern pointed out in the fiscal 2013 testing report provided to Congress by Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon’s chief tester.

But, it is the “complexity of the software that worries us the most,” he says. “Software development is always really, really tricky,” he says. “We are going to try and do things in the final block of this capability that are really hard to do.” Among them is forming software that can proliferate the same threat picture among multiple ships across the battlefield, allowing for far more coordinated attacks.

Meanwhile, Bogdan says that the latest software release for the Autonomic Logistics Information System has addressed some of the data shortfalls of the earlier version; these forced maintainers to handle too much information manually, resulting in excessive time to turn sorties of the single-engine jet.

Previous adds to Alis were taking “one step forward and two steps back,’ he said “This time we took a step forward and didn’t take a step back.”

However, shortcomings with Alis are prompting Bogdan to consider overturning an earlier decision that restricts maintainers from releasing a jet for duty without concurrence from Alis, which handles all parts, system diagnostics and mission planning for the fleet. The feature is at times allowing for errant holds on sorties. “It is not the font of all knowledge about the airplane” as expected, Bogdan says. ‘

“Do we need to start doing that [and allowing maintainers an override]? Yeah we have to start thinking about doing that … in a measured way.” This is possible because the maintainers have been training with the aircraft for three years, giving them a level of expertise needed for such a measure.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21140
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Philip » 26 Feb 2014 21:27

Poor Gen. "Bogged -Down".He has been trying his "level best",as we like to say,in keeping the JSF on the right flight path,but the awesome "sensor fusion" that has been touted with the package has been more of a "sense of confusion" instead.Unfortunately,unlike less exotic birds,a more modest capability is still heavily dependent upon the multi-layered software architecture.It could best be described as a beautiful pack of cards,where if even one is pulled out the entire edifice crumbles.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16874
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby NRao » 27 Feb 2014 20:17

Let Humans Override F-35 ‘ALIS’ Computer: Bogdan

The head of the U.S. Defense Department’s F-35 fighter jet program said he will probably allow pilots and maintainers to manually override the aircraft’s automatic logistics system in some situations.

The Autonomic Logistics Information System, or ALIS (pronounced “Alice”), determines whether the plane is safe to fly. The system has notoriously recommended grounding functioning aircraft — against the recommendations of pilots and maintainers — due in part to faulty parts numbers listed in its database, officials said in a recent segment on the CBS News program, “60 Minutes.”

The rigidity of the technology invited comparisons not to the friendly robot R2-D2 of the “Star Wars” movies, but to the more menacing machine HAL 9000 of the sci-fi flick, “2001: A Space Odyssey.” It was something deliberately built into the system under the assumption that ALIS was always going to function properly.

“When we first put the airplanes out there, we told operators and maintainers, ‘You can never override ALIS. Ever,’” Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, who manages the F-35 program, said during a conference on the defense budget Tuesday at the Newseum in Washington, D.C. The event was hosted by Credit Suisse and McAleese & Associates, a Sterling, Va.-based consulting group.

“Well guess what?” he added. “ALIS doesn’t always work right and it is not the font of all knowledge about the airplane because I got maintainers out there who fix the airplane, I’ve got pilots who go out and pre-fly the airplane, and everyone in the enterprise thinks the airplane is ready to go except ALIS.”

Bogdan asked, “Do we need to start doing that? Yeah.” He added, “We can’t do that wholesale, but we need to do that in a measured way.”

His comments echoed those made by Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Robert Schmidle. “We need to have the ability to override the algorithms that are built into that system to determine whether an aircraft is safe to fly or not,” he said during the television segment. “I didn’t design ALIS. I didn’t develop ALIS. I’m trying to do everything I can to make ALIS work for us.”

The system within the past two weeks received a software update that should help to fix some of the previous problems, Bogdan said. He was confident of the upgrade and encouraged attendees to check in with maintainers directly to see how it’s performing. “This time we actually took a step forward and didn’t take a step back,” he said of the computer fix.

Even so, Bogdan acknowledged the system is “way behind” where it needs to be at this stage of the program.

The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program is the Pentagon’s most expensive acquisition effort, estimated last year to cost $391 billion to develop and build a total of 2,457 F-35 Lightning IIs. The fifth-generation, single-engine jet is made by Lockheed Martin Corp. and designed to replace such aircraft as the F-16, A-10, F/A-18 and AV-8B.

The helmet-mounted display, which receives data from the plane’s radar, cameras and antennae, “is doing OK” — good enough to warrant canceling the development of an alternative helmet, Bogdan said.

The testing of fusing sensor data into the F-35 computer from other platforms — F-22, ground radar, satellites — will begin in 2015, Bogdan said. Such so-called multi-function fusion “is a hard thing to do” and is an area of risk, he said.

While he said he remains concerned over recent cracking to the bulkhead of the F-35B model — the subject of a recent test report — Bogdan said it likely stemmed from a previous decision to change the material to aluminum from titanium to reduce the weight of the aircraft.

That version of the plane is for the Marine Corps and needs to be light enough to land like a helicopter aboard amphibious ships and other naval vessels.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16874
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby NRao » 27 Feb 2014 22:26

Image

Composite image, built from 17 photos of the F-35 doing an aileron roll.

The maneuver itself is far from being special. It’s a standard 360-degree roll, that the F-35A AF-1 completes with external weapons load (4 x GBU-12s and 2 AIM-9Xs).

Still, the composite image is quite interesting as it shows the whole maneuver in a singole composite photo, which shows the Joint Strike Fighter lost some altitude during the roll.

Image credit: Matthew Short via Lockheed Martin/Code One

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Austin » 03 Mar 2014 19:36

First F-35 British STOVL (HD)


Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21140
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Philip » 05 Mar 2014 06:46

Oooh...err! From Reuters/WP.

Xcpts:
As the United States prepares plans to downsize its military, the Navy is set to order fewer Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter jets than previously expected over the next five years.

Citing an unnamed defense official, Reuters reported that beginning in the 2015 fiscal year, the Navy will request the purchase of 36 F-35C fighter jets, which are designed to land on aircraft carriers. That’s nearly half as many as the 69 originally projected.

The Air Force, meanwhile, is postponing its own request for four F-35A jets for one year. Beginning in 2016, however, it remains on track to move forward with its purchases as planned, an arrangement that will see the Air Force purchase about 238 jets total.

The Marine Corps stands out as the sole player committed to its original plan, still expected to request 69 F-35B jets over five years. These are scheduled to be combat ready and in use by mid-2015.

The fleet of 2,443 fighter jets is expected to cost $392 billion, a 68 percent increase over original projections from back in 2001. According to the Washington Post, this has led the military to cut back on the number of planes it first expected to purchase by more than 400. Additionally, the Post noted statements by the Pentagon’s chief tester, who in January said the jet “wasn’t sufficiently reliable in training flights last year.”

Other performance and manufacturing setbacks have also hobbled the program as it unfolded. Last year, a Pentagon report found issues with the jet’s internal software, while leaked budget review documents suggested some within the government would consider cancelling the project.

Still, the military has continued to reiterate its confidence in the program’s ultimate success.

"The basic design of the F-35 is sound, and test results underscore our confidence in the ultimate performance that the United States and its international partners and allies value so highly," Air Force Lieutenant General Chris Bogdan, who heads the F-35 project, said last year. "Of course, we recognize risks still exist in the program, but they are understood and manageable."

The decision to purchase fewer jets also comes amid reports that Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel is planning an overhaul of the US armed forces in order to fulfill President Obama’s goals of scaling back overseas military operations while remaining capable of waging war when necessary. Under Hagel’s proposal, US troop levels would fall somewhere between 440,000 and 450,000, the lowest level scene since World War II.

According to Reuters, the sequester could also come back to affect the F-35 project. Just last week, Hagel said that if Congress does not revoke or somehow deal with the automatic cuts scheduled for the 2016 fiscal year even fewer jets may be bought.

tushar_m

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby tushar_m » 07 Mar 2014 09:03

F135 Fan ‘Blows’ During F-35 Engine Trial
http://newz.defenceradar.com/f135-fan-b ... ine-trial/

Pratt & Whitney is investigating the cause of an F135 fan failure that developed in the first stage of the Joint Strike Fighter engine’s three-stage unit during ground tests in Florida in December.

The fan crack occurred on Dec. 23 during accelerated mission tests (AMT) on ground engine FX648 at Pratt’s West Palm Beach facility, as the engine reached 77% of its required life, says F-35 Program Executive Officer Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan. Discussing the problem at Aviation Week’s Defense Technologies and Requirements Conference in Arlington, Va., Bogdan says Pratt may have “underestimated the stress at low-cycle fatigue” of the fan, which he says “blew” during the test.
“Our investigation is ongoing, but we have determined this incident does not pose a flight safety risk and will have no near-term impact to the operational fleet,” says a statement from Pratt. The engine maker says it will continue to monitor operational cycles for each engine in service, and is confident there is no safety issue because of the low-cycle fatigue conditions of the failure.

The specific engine involved was the highest-time F135 in the test fleet, with 2,200 hr. of running time, or approximately nine years of service as a test engine. In terms of hours, Pratt says FX648 had more than four times the hours of any engine used in F-35 flight testing, and more than 10 times the hours of any operational F135 engine.

The failure, which occurred in the front stage of the F135’s three-stage fan with the engine operating in conventional mode, did “pretty good damage” to the cold section of the engine but did not effect the hot section or the lift fan, Bogdan says. The unit, which is common to all variants of the F-35 engine and located aft of variable-geometry inlet guide vanes, combines the roles of a conventional fan with that of a low-pressure compressor. The stages are made up of integrally bladed rotors (IBR), the first of which is constructed from hollow titanium. The second and third stages are made from solid titanium.

Pratt declines to comment specifically on whether potential flutter or other factors are being considered in the investigation, but adds “we are looking at a variety of factors, including stresses on the region and the rigors of the AMT test.”
Bogdan says manufacturing and cost challenges associated with the hollow IBR already had prompted Pratt to start a redesign of the fan, which was under way when the failure occurred. Fixes based on lessons learned from the failure in December will be incorporated into the redesign, which involves producing the first-stage IBRs from solid titanium. The redesign is expected to add about 6 lb. to the total weight of the engine, but should ease manufacturing significantly. The change effectively represents the second redesign for the IBR, which was changed to a hollow unit as part of a weight-reduction effort.

Pratt confirms the planned modification is already under way, saying: “Prior to this incident, Pratt & Whitney initiated a redesign of the IBR to further reduce costs. We will be able to incorporate these changes with minimal impact to the operation of the F-35 fleet. We are confident the solid IBR design will resolve the issue.”

Although the F135 has encountered several development issues since engine tests began in late 2003, there have been few reported incidents concerning the fan. A problem causing damage to the first and second stages during durability tests of an F135 in September 2009 was later traced to aerodynamic disturbances caused by a worn bushing in the inlet.
News of the fan failure emerges a bit more than one year after the temporary grounding of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter had been lifted, following the discovery of a crack in a third-stage low-pressure turbine (LPT) blade on U.S. Air Force test aircraft at Edwards AFB, Calif.

tushar_m

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby tushar_m » 09 Mar 2014 18:30

F-35 Engine Part to be Redesigned

WASHINGTON — Part of Pratt & Whitney’s F135 engine, which powers the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, was damaged during a ground test in December and will need a redesign, according to the head of the F-35 program.

“You may or may not know that we managed to do some pretty good damage to an engine down in Florida,” US Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan said at this week’s Aviation Week conference outside Washington, D.C. He said the damage came during “accelerated mission testing” where engines are worn out on the ground in order to identify future problems.

The part in question is the first stage Integrally Bladed Rotor (IBR). Sometimes referred to as a “blisk,” the IBR is a one-piece combination of blade and disks — hence the “blisk” terminology. The IBR “blew” during a ground station test, Bogdan said. The engine where this particular crack occurred had undergone 2,200 hours of testing, the equivalent of nine years of service, according to company figures.

While Pratt has launched an investigation into the incident, the engine manufacturer is confident the problem will be relatively minor.

The company had already begun a redesign for the IBR as part of a movement to reduce overall engine costs, according to both Bogdan and Pratt spokesman Matthew Bates. The new design replaces the current hollow blade design with solid blades, which allow the company to use simpler, and hence cheaper, manufacturing techniques.

That redesign will add roughly six pounds to the engine; although the engine in question was a STOVL F-35B model, the IBR redesign will impact the engines for all three JSF variants. While weight is closely monitored on the F-35, Bogdan did not seem concerned about the extra weight.

“We conduct Accelerated Mission Testing on our ground test engines specifically to discover any issues early and prior to occurrences in flight,” Bates wrote in a statement. “Our investigation is ongoing, but we have determined this incident does not pose a flight safety risk and will have no near term impact to the operational fleet.”

“We expect that within this year that fix will be done, we’ll put it back on an engine and do the [qualification] testing some more,” Bogdan said. “We will cut that into production sometime in the next year.”

“The retrofit not all that significant. You just take the module out and put the new blisk in,” Bogdan said. “We would have liked it to happened at the one in a half or two time life but it happened just near the end of the first life, so we need to make sure we fix it so the engine goes full life.”

“Now we’re talking about whose going to pay for this and what the contract language needs to state going forward in the future, for any future concurrency,” Bogdan added.

Bogdan also touched on previously reported cracks to the bulkhead of an F-35B ground testing model, noting that finding cracks is part of the purpose of running those tests and promising that more cracks will be found during future life-cycle test.

“We planned for it, we budgeted for it, [and] we have the timespan to fix them, but it’s going to happen,” he said of future cracks.

tushar_m

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby tushar_m » 13 Mar 2014 09:05

Pentagon F-35 chief suggests unit cost of $80-85 million

The price of the conventional take-off and landing (CTOL) variant of the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) may have dropped by as much as 12.5% in just over a year, according to figures quoted by Lieutenant General Chris Bogdan, head of the Pentagon's JSF programme office.

Speaking to reporters in Canberra on 12 March, Gen Bogdan cited a price of USD80-85 million per aircraft in 2019 dollars, inclusive of engine, manufacturer's profit and inflation.

"We're pretty confident we are going to get there", he said, noting that this figure could fall should further orders be received but could also rise if any existing customers cancelled or deferred planned acquisitions.

Source: janes

tushar_m

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby tushar_m » 19 Mar 2014 09:49

Italy Eyes Further Cuts to JSF Purchase

New Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi has suggested Italy will cut its purchase of joint strike fighters as the government struggles to bring down state spending.

“We will continue with our international programs, we will continue with a strong Air Force, but that program will be revised,” Renzi told an Italian TV channel on March 16 when asked about Italy’s current plan to buy 90 F-35s.

“Over the next three years there are about €3 billion in savings to be made from defense spending. Not all of it from the F-35, but also from the reuse of barracks and the reorganization of military structures,” he said.

When asked about JSF cuts, Defense Minister Roberta Pinotti said, “it would be legitimate to imagine a rationalization.”
Italy has already reduced its planned JSF buy from 131 to 90 aircraft to cope with defense cuts, but Renzi, who took office last month, is struggling to find further savings in state spending as he undertakes an ambitious tax cut program.

Some members of Renzi’s party have been pushing for the program to be cut in half, with only 45 aircraft purchased.
Pinotti said she intended to push through a plan to sell off 385 underused barracks, military sites and bases in Italy. The property sell-off has been planned by successive governments but hitherto has been bogged down by red tape.

Pinotti also said she does not plan to cut particular programs until a comprehensive review of Italy’s military needs has been conducted.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21140
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Philip » 19 Mar 2014 15:13

Eventually,it will be the US who operates it in significant number,can't ditch it after so much of effort and money,not the allies who will park a few in the garage for snob value,while using legacy
bomb trucks" to do the business. Whether it will financially break even is a moot Q,but Uncle Sam will get the US taxpayer to pick up the tab someway or another.

However,if it is going to succeed globally,it has to achieve the foll:
Reasonable cost,around $85-90M,easy support and maintenance plus cost of spares,etc. ,lower operating costs than current estimates-much more than existing aircraft,and excellent reliability of its software systems,the heart of its much touted capability.

tushar_m

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby tushar_m » 25 Mar 2014 07:45

South Korea boosts air defenses with about $6.8 billion budget for F-35s

South Korea expects to pay around 7.34 trillion won ($6.79 billion) for 40 Lockheed Martin (LMT.N) F-35 fighter jets, two sources with knowledge of the matter said on Monday, as Seoul boosts its air defenses amid simmering tensions in the region.

South Korea also confirmed plans to buy four Northrop Grumman (NOC.N) Global Hawk unmanned aircraft to monitor its prickly neighbor North Korea. The drones will cost about 880 billion won and will be delivered starting 2018, one of the sources said.
The defense deals also come as ties between Japan, China and South Korea have chilled over the past year, and the region’s three powers look to beef up their defensive capabilities.

Seoul’s arms procurement agency reported the estimated budget of around 7.34 trillion won to buy the radar-evading F-35s plus support systems to a committee overseeing military purchases earlier on Monday, the second source said.
The sources declined to be identified as they were not authorized to speak to media.

South Korea says the F-35 deal will be finalized in the third quarter, with the first delivery in 2018.
The budget has received the final approval of the finance ministry, Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) spokesman Baek Youn-hyeong said.

Lockheed said in a statement it welcomed South Korea’s announcement and it would support discussions between Seoul and Washington to finalize the order this year.

South Korea decided to redraw the terms of a 8.3 trillion won tender to buy 60 fighters last year after dropping an option to buy Boeing Co’s (BA.N) F-15s in favor of purchasing a fighter with stealth capabilities.

In December, Seoul reduced the purchase to an initial 40 jets.

“Lockheed Martin agrees … that the cost of the F-35 is on a downward path that will lead to a Unit Recurring Flyaway (URF) cost for an F-35A of between $80-85 million,” said Randy Howard, Director of Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Korea Business Development in an emailed statement last week.

A separate South Korean military source briefed on the buy cautioned that although F-35 flyaway cost is expected to fall between now and first delivery, Lockheed’s projections might not fully apply to South Korea as the estimate “paints a rosy picture” that appears to presuppose “the best scenario” for the progress of the F-35 program.

The announcement provided some good news for Lockheed after a spate of critical reports on challenges with software development for the fighter, the emergence of additional bulkhead cracks during long-term durability testing, and news that Italy could further scale back its plans to buy 90 F-35s.

Italy had already cut its planned order by 30 percent two years ago.

South Korea is the 10th country to make a firm commitment to buy the new Lockheed fighter, joining the United States, Britain, Australia, Norway, Italy, the Netherlands, Japan, Israel and Turkey.

Canada and Denmark, which help fund development of the F-35, are still deciding whether to buy F-35s or other fighters. Singapore has also expressed interest in the planes.

South Korea was the eighth largest importer of major weapons in the world between 2009 and 2013, with 80 percent of the imports supplied from the United States, according to think tank Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). ($1 = 1080.2500 Korean won)

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16874
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby NRao » 25 Mar 2014 08:07

South Korea says the F-35 deal will be finalized in the third quarter, with the first delivery in 2018.


I suspect these are from either the Italian or some other nation that is cutting their numbers.

For LM this is not a +, but more a break even.

Mihir
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 880
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 21:26

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Mihir » 26 Mar 2014 03:43

More trouble for the F-35

http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/661842.pdf

Challenges in development and testing of mission systems software
continued through 2013, due largely to delays in software delivery, limited
capability in the software when delivered, and the need to fix problems and retest
multiple software versions. The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation
(DOT&E) predicts delivery of warfighting capabilities could be delayed by as
much as 13 months. Delays of this magnitude will likely limit the warfighting
capabilities that are delivered to support the military services’ initial operational
capabilities—the first of which is scheduled for July 2015—and at this time it is
not clear what those specific capabilities will be because testing is still ongoing.
In addition, delays could increase the already significant concurrency between
testing and aircraft procurement and result in additional cost growth. Without a
clear understanding of the specific capabilities that will initially be delivered,
Congress and the military services may not be able to make fully informed
resource allocation decisions.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Viv S » 26 Mar 2014 10:05

The potential delays will be a concern for the USMC since its F-18 fleet is in a flogged out state needing urgent replacement. Should have very limited impact on the USAF procurement and none at all on the USN's.


From the GAO report -

Key Flight Accomplishments -

The program successfully demonstrated the variant’s ability to launch AIM-120 missiles from its internal weapons bay and to refuel while in flight. The program also continued testing the aircraft’s ability to function at high vertical flight angles, although program officials noted that the testing took longer than expected. As of December 2013, the program had accomplished 59 percent of its total expected flight science test points for this variant.

Helmet mounted display -

The program made adjustments to the helmet design, including adding sensors to lessen the display jitter, and redesigning elements to minimize latency. The program tested these design changes in 2013 and found that most of the technical deficiencies had been adequately addressed, and that the helmet’s performance was sufficiently suitable to support Marine Corps initial operational capability in 2015.

Unit Fly Away Cost -

Current Unit Cost - $124.8 million
Target Unit Cost - $83.4 million (2019)


[The second figure is in 'Then Year' dollars. Therefore that equals about $75 million in 2014 dollars. However, from the report - ]

In addition, the program’s current funding and quantity projections indicate that unit costs in 2019 could actually be higher than the targets.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

At $75 million, its competitive on acquisition cost with even the Gripen E (higher sustainment cost though). Even assuming that they exceed the $75 million fly away cost, on upfront costs, it'll still beat most 4.5G aircraft including the Rafale.

member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby member_20453 » 26 Mar 2014 15:40

With delays in MRCA the F-35 seems to be the ideal bird to order as well, The Rafale order can't be expected end of year, more so if the next Govt. decides to investigate all such major deals for corruption as all new governements do, then the deal will be further delayed. I think with IAF, IN and IA needing air capabilities the F-35 would fit in nicely in the grand scheme of things.

IAF can have around 150 F-35A, IN based on Vishal and future needs would need 40 F-35C and perhaps another 40 F35B for Amphibious and SF ops. Delivered with IAF getting them first then IN when the carriers are ready.

I don't see why we can't have the first bird landing in India by 2017-18. I think with a big enough order, we can certainly have local assembly with major parts of the airframe made here, as for the avionics, we can opt for Israeli or even Indian avionics to be incorporated. The radar, das, EOTS remaining intact while datalinks, comms, IFF, Speech secrecy being Indian like the P-8I.

I think overall we'd have a better aircraft with 5th gen capabilities. IAf can order more 30-40 Super MKI to make for a couple of years of delays for buying the F-35.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21140
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Philip » 05 Apr 2014 05:33

http://osnetdaily.com/2014/03/stolen-f- ... h-fighter/
Stolen F-35 Secrets Now Showing Up in China’s J-20 Stealth Fighter

Photo comparison of the U.S. F-35 left and Chinese J-20. / Chinese website

Washingon Free beacon

A cyber espionage operation by China seven years ago produced sensitive technology and aircraft secrets that were incorporated into the latest version of China’s new J-20 stealth fighter jet, according to U.S. officials and private defense analysts.

The Chinese cyber spying against the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II took place in 2007 under what U.S. intelligence agencies codenamed Operation Byzantine Hades, a large-scale, multi-year cyber program that targeted governments and industry.

Defense officials said the stolen data was obtained by a Chinese military unit called a Technical Reconnaissance Bureau in the Chengdu province. The data was then passed to the state-run Aviation Industry Corp. of China (AVIC).

An AVIC subsidiary, the Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group, used the stolen data in building the J-20, said defense and intelligence officials familiar with reports of the illicit tech transfer.

Pentagon technology security officials in 2011 opposed a joint venture between General Electric and AVIC over concerns that U.S. fighter jet technology would be diverted to AVIC’s military aircraft programs. The Obama administration ignored the concerns and instead has since promoted the systematic loosening of technology controls on transfers to China.The Office of Director of National Intelligence is known to have details of AVIC’s past involvement in illicit arms transfers and its role in obtaining sensitive F-35 technology through cyber espionage, the officials said.

The F-35 data theft was confirmed after recent photographs were published on Chinese websites showing a newer version of the J-20. The new version of the radar-evading aircraft had incorporated several design upgrades since the first demonstrator aircraft was revealed in 2011.

According to the officials, the J-20 has progressed from prototype to demonstrator. One of its most significant weapons enhancements is a new electro-optical targeting system under its nose.

Additionally, protruding engine nozzles seen in the earlier version have been hidden, an attempt to further reduce the jet’s radar signature. The newest J-20 also appeared with a different radar-absorbing coating.

Photos of the newer J-20 were first posted online on Chinese military forums on Jan. 17.

The Pentagon’s Defense Science Board revealed earlier this year that system design information on the F-35 was obtained from cyber attacks.

The new Terminal High Altitude Area Defense missile systems and Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) missile defenses, along with many other systems, were compromised through cyber espionage, the board said in a report.

Most details of the Chinese cyber espionage campaign to obtain F-35 technology remain secret.

However, the Chinese probably obtained the F-35 secrets from Lockheed Martin, its subcontractors, or U.S. allies involved in the development program. Allies that took part in the F-35 program include the United Kingdom, Israel, Italy, Australia, Canada, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Turkey.

A Chinese Academy of Military Sciences official, Du Wenlong, told Chinese state television on Feb. 20 that the new J-20’s shortened exhaust nozzles, along with tail and vertical fin modifications, are designed to reduce radar detection.

Du also said that a “revolutionary” breakthrough allowed the twin engines to increase both power and reliability.

China’s inability to manufacture quality jet engines has been a weakness of its aircraft manufacturing programs.

Du also said that the electro-optical targeting system provides better surveillance and strike capabilities against both land and sea targets.

The J-20 also has a larger weapons bay than the U.S. F-22, which allows it to carry more powerful missiles that can be used against “aircraft carrier and foreign AEGIS ships,” Du said.

U.S. officials said the new J-20 had undergone ground tests, but it had not been flight tested as of early March.

Richard Fisher, a specialist on Chinese weapon systems, said the new J-20 was flight tested on March 1 and demonstrated the enhanced fifth generation jet fighter features.

Fisher, with the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said it is “very curious” that the new J-20 featured its new electronic targeting system under its nose. That location increased its field of view and is similar to the targeting system on the F-35.

“This targeting system and a set of distributed high-power infrared sensors give the F-35 a previously unrivaled ‘situational awareness,’ but the now it is clear that the J-20 will have a similar targeting system and its own set of distributed sensors,” Fisher said.

“If as part of their espionage, China had also gained engineering insights into the F-35′s very advanced sensor systems, that could prove disastrous to its combat potential barring a rapid redesign and improvements before entering service,” Fisher added.

Advanced sensors on the F-35 were intended as insurance for the jet not having the best capabilities for maneuvering in flight, he said.

“But if the Chinese, via cyberespionage, have gained insights into its sensor system, then it is to be expected that China is also working on ways to jam or otherwise degrade its advantage,” Fisher said.

The J-20 targeting system indicates that the Chinese plan to use the jet for ground attack and air superiority missions like the F-35, he said, adding that it now appears the J-20 will be comparable to the more capable F-22.

“We can be assured that J-20 production will significantly exceed that of the 187 F-22 fighters cut off by the Obama Administration in 2010,” he said.

China’s Communist Party-affiliated Global Times reported Jan. 20 that China obtained key technologies from the F-35 and incorporated them into the J-20

The newspaper did not admit stealing the technology, but stated that China “completely obtained the six key technologies” from the F-35.

Those features include the electro-optical targeting system and a diverterless supersonic inlet, a thrust-vectoring jet nozzle, and a fire-control array radar system.

The Global Times disclosures about F-35 technology acquisition were first reported in the Washington Times.

Related articles

Why is the US spending so much on the F-35 fighter jet?
Pentagon waived laws to keep F-35 on track with China-made parts
Top Official Admits F-35 Stealth Fighter Secrets Stolen

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2740
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby darshhan » 05 Apr 2014 10:11

Septimus P. wrote:With delays in MRCA the F-35 seems to be the ideal bird to order as well,
.........
I think overall we'd have a better aircraft with 5th gen capabilities. IAf can order more 30-40 Super MKI to make for a couple of years of delays for buying the F-35.


If ordering aircraft from enemy countries is OK in order to make up the IAF's shortfall, then let us also invite Chengdu Aerospace Corp as our potential vendor for J-20. I am sure it will be cheaper, more effective and most probably will also complete the development activities earlier(inspite of starting much later). I mean if America is being given a chance then why not China.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Viv S » 05 Apr 2014 14:27

darshhan wrote:If ordering aircraft from enemy countries is OK in order to make up the IAF's shortfall, then let us also invite Chengdu Aerospace Corp as our potential vendor for J-20. I am sure it will be cheaper, more effective and most probably will also complete the development activities earlier(inspite of starting much later). I mean if America is being given a chance then why not China.


You may be a tad too late; 12 C-130Js, 10 C-17s, 8 P-8Is already ordered, with another 7 C-17s, 4 P-8Is & 24 AH-64Es on the way. Plus misc items like the M777, CBU-105, GE F404/414, LM2500 etc.

I believe the horse has bolted.

Fortunately, so far we haven't had to plead for support to stop the aircraft from getting grounded.

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby TSJones » 05 Apr 2014 14:34

Viv S wrote:
darshhan wrote:If ordering aircraft from enemy countries is OK in order to make up the IAF's shortfall, then let us also invite Chengdu Aerospace Corp as our potential vendor for J-20. I am sure it will be cheaper, more effective and most probably will also complete the development activities earlier(inspite of starting much later). I mean if America is being given a chance then why not China.


You may be a tad too late; 12x C-130J, 10x C-17, 8x P-8I, already ordered, with another 7x C-17, 4x P-8I, 24x AH-64E, on the way. Plus misc items; M777, CBU-105, GE F404/414, LM2500 etc.

I believe the horse has bolted.

Fortunately, so far we haven't had to plead for support to stop the aircraft from getting grounded.


Also add to the list two super class business jets converted into battlefield management jets with the delux ground tracking computers and radars installed by Raytheon.

When you order stuff off the top shelf, might as well get the premium/deluxe service plan as well. :) Ford just releaved me of $1,400 for an extended service plan for my truck and it's not even the premium plan! :((

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2740
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby darshhan » 05 Apr 2014 15:21

Viv S wrote:
darshhan wrote:If ordering aircraft from enemy countries is OK in order to make up the IAF's shortfall, then let us also invite Chengdu Aerospace Corp as our potential vendor for J-20. I am sure it will be cheaper, more effective and most probably will also complete the development activities earlier(inspite of starting much later). I mean if America is being given a chance then why not China.


You may be a tad too late; 12 C-130Js, 10 C-17s, 8 P-8Is already ordered, with another 7 C-17s, 4 P-8Is & 24 AH-64Es on the way. Plus misc items like the M777, CBU-105, GE F404/414, LM2500 etc.

I believe the horse has bolted.

Fortunately, so far we haven't had to plead for support to stop the aircraft from getting grounded.


None of what you have posted above proves that America is not an enemy.Now if we can procure defense items from an civilizational enemy like US, we can surely do the same from China. Isn't that sweet?

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Viv S » 05 Apr 2014 19:22

darshhan wrote:None of what you have posted above proves that America is not an enemy.Now if we can procure defense items from an civilizational enemy like US, we can surely do the same from China. Isn't that sweet?


Hmm... our ancient feud with the Mississippi Valley Civilization. Thus far both sides are blissfully unaware of the titanic struggle raging around them and echoing through time, but any day now... To quote from the great Nolan epic - there's a storm's coming.

But I have no doubt us valiant Gangetic folk will eventually triumph over the forces of evil, even if we eventually have use their own weapons to do it. In the meantime we can use them to stiffen the lines against those pesky Hueng He Valley folk.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16874
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby NRao » 05 Apr 2014 20:38

In the meantime we can use them to stiffen the lines against those pesky Hueng He Valley folk.


Will not be easy.

Last we heard the Hueng He folks stole the critical designs of the bow/arrows of the Mississippi folks.

But then ..................... these are very interesting times.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Viv S » 05 Apr 2014 23:30

NRao wrote:Will not be easy.

Last we heard the Hueng He folks stole the critical designs of the bow/arrows of the Mississippi folks.


In terms of technology probably. But operationally critical information will likely be secure.


But then ..................... these are very interesting times.


Honestly I don't know how a civilisational struggle arises (if such a thing even exists) against a country that's just 300 years old. Oh well.. as you said... interesting times.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Manish_Sharma » 06 Apr 2014 08:46

darshhan wrote:
Septimus P. wrote:With delays in MRCA the F-35 seems to be the ideal bird to order as well,
.........
I think overall we'd have a better aircraft with 5th gen capabilities. IAf can order more 30-40 Super MKI to make for a couple of years of delays for buying the F-35.


If ordering aircraft from enemy countries is OK in order to make up the IAF's shortfall, then let us also invite Chengdu Aerospace Corp as our potential vendor for J-20. I am sure it will be cheaper, more effective and most probably will also complete the development activities earlier(inspite of starting much later). I mean if America is being given a chance then why not China.


Beautifully put!

These well-wishers have been asked if they are ready to provide reasons that US won't ever put sanctions, in case next PM decides to test next gen Thermonukes. But no they won't.

And this lot always goes for US platforms, f 35 - f 18 and so on. If you press and remind about bangladesh war OR how Tejas scietists were kicked out of US; even desi equipment confiscated they'll reply "...no no US was not responsible, Clinton administration was against Bharat while Clinton was pro-Bharat........... no no US administration was pro-Bharat while nickson was against....."

Its always this OR that's fault never US'.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16874
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby NRao » 06 Apr 2014 09:07

I *think* it is a terrific idea to source from China. Or for that matter even Pakistan. Why not? If they had engine know how, it would have been a no brainer.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21140
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Philip » 07 Apr 2014 04:21

AWST:
Oz is most likely to confirm an order for 58JSFs,from the earlier number of 100.While the other option of buying more SHs is also sound,future obsolescence of the SHs as opposed to the F-35s appears to have tilted the balance in favour of the F-35s + a dozen or so Growlers (The Growlers will help the F-35 in EW,as there is a window of vulnerability in the F-35s EW suite,earlier reports) .Cost,about $8B for the 58,approx $10B for 72 aircraft and another $20B to operate them until 2040.The Oz estimate per unit is around $90M.
This will come as a huge relief for the manufacturer,but being such a close ally to the US,Oz was probably assured of guarantees both financial and technical,and since it makes the tail fins,plus some other components,a buy would help retain jobs locally.Ultimately,it will have a force of around 110+ aircraft,3/4ths hopefully F-35s.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Viv S » 07 Apr 2014 12:11

Dhananjay wrote:These well-wishers have been asked if they are ready to provide reasons that US won't ever put sanctions, in case next PM decides to test next gen Thermonukes. But no they won't.


Very simple answer. China.

There are also other reasons, eg. the economic cost of sanctions, political pressures from pro-Indian lobby groups, etc. But ultimately the most important rule of international politics is that every country acts in its own best interests. And a US that will be eclipsed by China economically (and thereafter militarily) within the next two decades cannot afford to alienate India.


Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Manish_Sharma » 07 Apr 2014 13:51

Viv S wrote:
Dhananjay wrote:These well-wishers have been asked if they are ready to provide reasons that US won't ever put sanctions, in case next PM decides to test next gen Thermonukes. But no they won't.


Very simple answer. China.

There are also other reasons, eg. the economic cost of sanctions, political pressures from pro-Indian lobby groups, etc. But ultimately the most important rule of international politics is that every country acts in its own best interests. And a US that will be eclipsed by China economically (and thereafter militarily) within the next two decades cannot afford to alienate India.


China didn't exist when sanctions were applied on Tejas and Seakings?

Didn't PM Vajpayee write to that great friend of Bharat clinton that the nuke tests are done keeping china in mind and not porkis? And what did the friendly clinton do, he imposed sanctions and even shared the letter openly with chinese much to the humiliation of PM Vajpayee.

I remember natwar singh ridiculing Sh. Vajpayee in parliament about that letter.

These are all excuses:

1. Only nixon-kissinger were anti-Bharat but not US admin. (Implying US is not anti)

2. Only US admin was anti-Bharat but not clinton. (Implying US is not anti)

3. Bharat and US are joined at hip against cheen upto 2050.

Strange all the tech US easily allows cheenis to take, be it DSI strakes from f 35, W-87 warheads and so on.......... but its interests are allied with Bharatvarsh.

I hope next govt. immediately tests thermonukes just like Vajpayee govt. and truth will come out immediately.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Viv S » 07 Apr 2014 16:24

Dhananjay wrote:China didn't exist when sanctions were applied on Tejas and Seakings?


China's economy was a tenth the size of the US economy back then. Barely larger than Brazil's and smaller than Italy's. Today on the other hand, its nominal GDP equals nearly 60% of the American one. China is set to overtake the US in PPP terms by 2016 and in nominal terms in around a decade's time.

Its the same in the military sphere, where they were once building cheap MiG-21 variants, they've moved onto stealth fighters, Aegis-type destroyers and anti-carrier BMs.

So yes, unlike today, China wasn't registering particularly high on the radar back when the sanctions were applied.

Strange all the tech US easily allows cheenis to take, be it DSI strakes from f 35, W-87 warheads and so on.......... but its interests are allied with Bharatvarsh.


The Chinese were hardly 'allowed' to take that technology. The US has spearheaded the western arms embargo on China. And of our 'civilizational' allies, France has been lobbying to remove the same embargo, while Russia has continued to play a critical role in modernizing the Chinese military and developing its domestic defence industry (eg. most Chinese fighter aircraft are still powered by Russian engines today).

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2740
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby darshhan » 07 Apr 2014 22:02

Viv S wrote:Very simple answer. China.


By including China as a vendor for our weapons systems and competitor to US, I am making the whole question redundant. This is what I have been saying. If a greater enemy like US can supply us weapon systems, then what is the harm in getting weapons from China.

Viv S wrote: But ultimately the most important rule of international politics is that every country acts in its own best interests.


A rule that hardly any country follows. It is just a myth and nothing else. If anything you are batting harder for America's interests than America itself is. Today Abraham Lincoln himself would have been humbled in front of you.

Viv S wrote: And a US that will be eclipsed by China economically (and thereafter militarily) within the next two decades cannot afford to alienate India.


By the same reasoning I can say that China cannot afford to alienate India. This actually might be true since China atleast shows more rational behaviour and is more amenable to reason. America on other hand is more like a emotionally impulsive teenage girl unable to indulge in logical and reasonable behaviour.

And by the way just for your information US has already alienated lot of Indians including .....hold your breath..... The Most Probable Future PM of India at this point of time. Wonder what that says about American diplomatic strength, competence and sophistication. Trust me even Congo could do better than to piss a nation of more than 1 Billion people. And you could do better than to support a nation of fools i.e US.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16874
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby NRao » 07 Apr 2014 22:59

GAO’s F-35 Estimate Plunges $11.5 Billion; EELV Costs Soar $28.1 Billion

This comes from the Government Accountability Office’s definitive annual Assessment of Selected Weapons Report.

The GAO did not mince words in identifying the biggest winner in its analysis of the Pentagon’s major weapons programs:

The most significant of these decreases is the $11.5 billion reduction to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program’s estimate, due solely to efficiencies found within the program as no decrease in quantities was reported.



Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Manish_Sharma » 07 Apr 2014 23:03

Viv S wrote:China's economy was a tenth the size of the US economy back then. Barely larger than Brazil's and smaller than Italy's. Today on the other hand, its nominal GDP equals nearly 60% of the American one. China is set to overtake the US in PPP terms by 2016 and in nominal terms in around a decade's time.

Its the same in the military sphere, where they were once building cheap MiG-21 variants, they've moved onto stealth fighters, Aegis-type destroyers and anti-carrier BMs.

So yes, unlike today, China wasn't registering particularly high on the radar back when the sanctions were applied.


Cmmmmon, this so disappointing. When did US find out about china racing ahead? 10 days ago ? 10 weeks? Or 10 months back?

I remember in '98 itself clinton was reported to have accepted that china will be bigger economy in 20 years.

The truth is boeing was allowed to export sensitive chips and systems which could be used for missiles etc also from clinton times. Which continues till obama's times.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby Viv S » 08 Apr 2014 17:09

Dhananjay wrote:Cmmmmon, this so disappointing. When did US find out about china racing ahead? 10 days ago ? 10 weeks? Or 10 months back?

I remember in '98 itself clinton was reported to have accepted that china will be bigger economy in 20 years.


Its only over the last decade or so that the future economic predominance of China has come to be regarded as inevitable. Suffice to say it wasn't widely known or accepted back in 1998, when the PRC wasn't even member of the WTO.

And I have never heard such a comment attributed to Clinton. Kindly post a quote.


The truth is boeing was allowed to export sensitive chips and systems which could be used for missiles etc also from clinton times. Which continues till obama's times.


The embargo on China relates to 'arms and related materials'. While some European states like France, have still chosen more liberal interpretations of that, without US pressure the EU might have scrapped the embargo altogether, in its effort to 'normalize' relations with China.

Its also ridiculous to single out the US for not enforcing the sanctions better or securing its technology more effectively, while absolving the Russians (as you appear to be doing) despite the torrent of equipment and technology that they've poured into the Chinese defence market over the last two decades.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16874
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

Postby NRao » 08 Apr 2014 17:30



Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests