JSF,"turkey or talisman"?

[NRao]

Sept 13, 2013 :: Lockheed Martin: $10.5 billion of Canadian work on F35 at risk without order

Lockheed Martin says Canada’s aerospace industry could lose about $10.5 billion worth of contracts over several decades if the federal government ultimately decides not to purchase the controversial F35 Stealth Fighter.

Orlando Carvalho, executive vice-president of the U.S. defence giant, says Lockheed will honour $500 million worth of business already awarded to Canadian partners but that other work would be in jeopardy without a Canadian jet order.

READ MORE: F-35-maker makes public case for stealth fighter in skeptical Canada

Ottawa is evaluating potential alternatives to its original plan to purchase 65 F35 aircraft. A KPMG report late last year warned that the total bill, including service and support, could be as much as $45.8 billion over 42 years.

Carvalho says Lockheed estimates that Canadian industry could potentially receive $11 billion of contracts over 25 to 40 years as its builds 3,000 planes for air forces around the world.

He also says Lockheed continues to reduce the F35′s cost. He says each plane will cost Canada around $75 million in today’s dollars, or about $85 million including inflation once they are expected to be delivered to Canada in 2018.

Carvalho adds that the plane’s features, including stealth technology and surveillance capabilities, make it the right choice for Canada.

[NRao]

Sept 11, 2013 :: Jane's :: DSEI 2013: UK commits to F-35B variant only

Sooooo..... So far it looks good for the UK.

The UK will not field a mixed-variant fleet of Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) combat aircraft, as had previously been suggested, a senior government minister confirmed on 12 September.

Speaking at the DSEI defence and security exhibition in London, Philip Dunne, Minister for Defence Equipment, Support and Technology, said a split buy of F-35B short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) and F-35A conventional take-off (CTOL) aircraft was no longer being considered for the UK Royal Air Force (RAF) and Royal Navy (RN).

"We had very agonising discussions on which variant [of F-35] to buy [when the F-35B was briefly dropped in favour of the carrier-variant F-35C in 2010], and we have no intentions of reopening those discussions [with regard the F-35B and F-35A]," he said.

Plans to field a mixed-variant force first emerged in mid-2010 when Defence Secretary Philip Hammond signalled that a number of F-35As may be procured to offset a sizeable cut in the planned number of F-35Bs. At that time, Hammond said the UK would order 48 F-35Bs to equip the RN's future carrier strike force, while an undisclosed number of cheaper F-35A aircraft would be bought for land-based operations.

Having now finally settled on the F-35B as the UK's sole JSF variant, the government has made "no changes to [its] plans" regarding the timing of its orders and the numbers of aircraft to be bought, Dunne noted.

While no official announcement on overall numbers will be made until the Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) in 2015, the latest JSF production plan gives the UK's 'final number' at 138 aircraft to be procured out to 2027. Although most commentators expect this number to be cut in the SDSR due to budget constraints, Dunne said the unit cost of the F-35 is increasingly "coming into line with [the UK government's] estimates," and that he expects the UK to be paying the same price for its aircraft as the US Marine Corps.

UK military officials with industry support are currently in the final stages of negotiating the Main Gate 4 approval process to procure the country's first operational F-35 squadron. According to Dunne, this will be completed "in the coming months", with an expected order for 14 jets set to follow shortly after. With three test aircraft already delivered to the UK, Dunne said the government has not yet decided on whether it will purchase a fourth.

As the only Tier 1 partner in the JSF programme, the UK is directly responsible for 15% of each aircraft made. Speaking at DSEI, Dunne was keen to talk up the programme's long-term benefits to the UK economy, saying that the 500 UK companies involved will generate around GBP30 billion (USD47 billion) to the national gross domestic product from 2009-36, while creating more than 24,000 sustainable jobs.

"We're looking to change the attitude of the commentariat [towards the JSF], and to reset the views of some in the UK towards this jet," he said.

[NRao]

Will it fly?

A long - 7 pages - of cons. With a few pros.

[NRao]

Sept 16, 2013 :: F-35, Aerial-Tanker Programs May Have Budgetary Leeway

The head of the U.S. Air Force said Monday that he expects the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and aerial-tanker programs to have some protection next year from another round of automatic budget cuts.

The impact on defense companies and the four services of the 10% budget cuts introduced in March is expected to intensify next year, but some wiggle-room has emerged in applying them across-the-board to spending accounts.

"I expect we'll get flexibility," said Acting Secretary of the Air Force Eric Fanning, singling out the need to protect the planned ramp-up in production of the F-35 program led by Lockheed Martin Corp., LMT +0.95% as well as development of the replacement aerial tanker overseen by Boeing BA +3.90% Co..

Military leaders are due to present twin fiscal 2015 budgets to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel on Sept. 23, and are working on a proposals that include another round of sequester cuts, as well as one based on the Pentagon's 2014 budget proposal.

The sequester and existing downward pressure on the Pentagon budget has yet to doom any major programs, though many procurement decisions are being pushed out.

Mr. Fanning said the pressure to make deeper cuts to adjust to the tough budget climate would likely come when lawmakers see what he called "all the ugly" from the budgets submitted by the four services later this month.

He declined to comment on whether the Air Force may be forced to trim its share of the more-than-1,700 F-35s ordered by the U.S. military, the world's most expensive defense-acquisition program.

"That's much bigger than the Air Force," said Mr. Fanning, speaking to reporters at the annual Air Force Association conference in a resort near Washington D.C.

The Pratt & Whitney unit of United Technologies Corp. UTX +1.21% supplies the engines for the F-35—with BAE Systems BA.LN +0.65% PLC also a key partner—and the KC-46 tanker.

Mr. Fanning said the Air Force was looking at cutting whole aircraft fleets as part of its budget planning for 2015, as that was the fastest and most efficient way to secure savings.

"You have to take out some fleets entirely," he said, noting that personnel cuts can take a year to reap benefits, while lawmakers have so far ruled out further base closures.

Speculation has focused on the Air Force potentially scrappy its existing KC-10 tanker fleet as well as the A-10 ground-attack aircraft.

"Everything is on the table," Mr. Fanning said, though he declined to identify specific programs.

"We are looking most closely at single-mission fleets."

[NRao]

Sept 16, 2013 :: Modern software testing & quality assurance on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

The Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is a novel aircraft for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is its software. The fifth-generation fighter jet reportedly comprises more than 10 billion lines of software code, segmented into blocks and largely written in C and C++; yet, it also uses software code in the Ada computer programming language from the Lockheed Martin/Boeing F-22 Raptor military fighter aircraft.

The F-35 Lightning II, among the most complex military platforms to date, has suffered some production and deployment setbacks due the sheer volume of software code employed. Yet, aerospace and defense technology firms are working hard to remedy the situation.

The F-35 runs the Integrity DO-178B securely partitioned, safety-critical, certified real-time operating system (RTOS) from Green Hills Software in Santa Barbara, Calif. Datel engineers implemented the LDRA tool suite for software verification related to the F-35 engine, and developers at Parasoft Corp. in Monrovia, Calif., are working directly with Lockheed Martin engineers on static code analysis for JSF.

Engine assurances

Engineers at Ultra Electronics Controls (formerly Datel) in West London, U.K., selected LDRA software verification tools for their work on the Pratt & Whitney F135, the engine of choice for the F-35 Lightning II fifth-generation tactical fighter developed by Lockheed Martin in conjunction with BAE Systems and Northrop Grumman.

Datel engineers had specific technical requirements related to their work on the Engine Ice Protection System (EIPS) for the Pratt & Whitney F135 Engine on the Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter project, and the Wing Ice Protection System (WIPS) for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. They needed a software verification tool able to integrate with their target environment, which included the Texas Instruments TMS320F2812 and TMS320F2808 digital signal processors (DSPs).

Datel personnel made use of LDRA’s complete structural coverage analysis solution at unit, integration, and system test levels. These tests were applied to source and object code, making use of the LDRA tool suite’s red-box mode.

“It was important to Datel that it was able to develop their software to a known coding standard and, consequently, MISRA-C:1998 was selected to be applied to this code,” a company representative describes. The LDRA tool suite simplifies the process by enforcing various standards using drop-down menus, which proved important for Datel.

Datel staff also needed an automated, intuitive unit testing tool which would save time, free up highly qualified staff, increase test efficiency, and improve motivation to test through a repeatable, less error-prone process. They found their solution in TBrun, LDRA's tool for the automated generation and management of unit tests. In the end, Datel reduced the time needed to confirm the verification results and increased the repeatability of its internal process.



QA on JSF

Lockheed Martin officials in the Maritime Systems & Sensors (MS2) business unit selected Parasoft’s Jtest, C++test, and Insure++ tools in 2004 to support quality testing for its software. (The MS2 unit became the Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training, or MST, unit in 2012.)

"Our systems provide critical support when lives are on the line," Martina DelRocini, software subcontract management at Lockheed Martin, explains. "Quality assurance throughout our processes ensures our systems meet their demanding requirements."

Jtest and C++test automatically verify compliance to coding rules while generating and executing unit tests to ensure quality early in the software development lifecycle. Insure++ detects memory errors, such as corruption, leaks, and allocation errors in C/C++ code.

This relationship with Lockheed Martin “demonstrates Parasoft’s ability to help large-scale software development organizations prevent software errors in what are some of the most complex systems being developed today," adds Larry Johnsen, Parasoft director of military/aerospace solutions. Parasoft's Software Development Compliance solution provides code analysis for compliance with the Joint Strike Fighter Air Vehicle C++ Coding standards.

[NRao]

Sept 17, 2013 :: Dutch to purchase 37 F-35 fighter planes - sources

The Netherlands will purchase 37 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter planes, two sources with knowledge of the matter told Reuters on Tuesday, a decision that should end years of political wrangling over ballooning costs and delays.

The decision is a boost for Lockheed Martin (LMT.N) and Washington, which had urged the Netherlands in April not to turn to other suppliers because of fears of rising costs in a project that has been blighted by technical faults and delays.

Defense Minister Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert was due to announce the decision later on Tuesday in a policy paper setting out her long-term vision for the armed forces, the sources said.

The decision brings the number of countries with firm commitments to purchase the F-35 to seven after Britain, Australia, Italy, Norway, Israel and Japan also placed orders.

The F-35 is designed to be the next-generation fighter for decades to come for U.S. forces and their allies in NATO.

The F-35 program, hit by technical faults, is several years behind schedule and 70 percent above early cost estimates.

The Dutch, who are phasing out their F-16s by 2023, had initially planned to buy 85 F-35s, but people close to the discussions said earlier this year they wanted to scale back the order to between 52 and 68 amid deep budget cuts.

Some Dutch politicians, concerned about rising costs, had suggested going for an alternative such as Saab AB's (SAABb.ST) Gripen, Boeing Co's (BA.N) F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, or the EADS (EAD.PA) Eurofighter.

The reluctance by the Netherlands prompted the U.S. Department of Defense in April to urge The Hague to reconsider, saying it could end up paying more in the long run.

The price of the jets would be around $85 million, including inflation, according to the most recent Pentagon projections.

But actual prices for the F-35 have been coming in about 10 percent lower than that figure, one source familiar with the program said.

The Dutch government has budgeted 4.5 billion euros ($6.01 billion) for the warplanes and an additional 270 million euros per year in operating costs.

[NRao]

Sept 17, 2013 :: A Year After Blasting Contractors, F-35 Program Head Sees Progress

One year ago, Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, the incoming head of the F-35 joint strike fighter program, got up on stage at the Air Force Association’s national conference and publicly lambasted the contractors working on the Pentagon’s premiere fighter program.

The relationship between the joint program office (JPO) and the contractors were the “worst I have ever seen,” Bogdan said. Lockheed Martin, the corporate lead, and engine manufacturer Pratt & Whitney needed to shape up.

It was an unexpected shot across the bows of the corporate giants, one that caught attendees by surprise.

Today, Bogdan returned to that stage. A year can change a lot.

“I stood up here a year ago and I threw a hand grenade into the crowd,” Bogdan said at the start of his comments. “That was intentional. It’s been a year later, and a lot of things have changed.”

As an example of that cultural change, Bogdan highlighted the creation of a “cost war-room” set up between Lockheed, Pratt and the JPO. The companies are picking up the tab of the entire operation, with Lockheed providing half a floor at their D.C.-area office for free.

That office will feature cost analysts and experts taking a look at potential cost-savings in maintenance, reliability & maintainability (R&M), and the supply chain. Bogdan cited CEO-level buy-in on the project from the companies as proof of a new culture and said he was “cautiously optimistic” it will find good results.

Getting costs out of the program remains a priority, because, as Bogdan said, “If nobody can afford it, [a 5th-generation fighter] does you no good.”

He confirmed that his office estimates sustainment cost for the JSF have dropped to $857 billion, a significant step-down from a figure often cited as $1.1 trillion. That number is from a three-year-old government report, Bogdan said, and the new number reflects a more accurate read on what the program is now.

However, given the dangers of trying to predict costs and inflation of a 50-year period, even that number contains “a lot of assumptions,” Bogdan said.

The fighter came through sequestration “relatively unscathed,” without having to push its planned purchase further down the line. And while fiscal year 2014 is very much up in the air, Bogdan declared it was his commitment “that sequestration will not break this program.”

Along those lines, Bogdan expressed confidence that the JSF would not fall into the dreaded “death spiral,” where purchases would be pushed to the right, causing prices to increase, which in turn would drive customers to cut their orders. That is in large part because international purchases remain strong, including Tuesday’s announcement that the Netherlands was committing to the fighter.

[NRao]

Sept 17, 2013 :: Contractors Commit to Cutting F-35 Costs

Top executives at the four largest contractors building the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter have signed onto securing huge cuts in the jet's average cost by 2019, the head of the program said Tuesday.

Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan said the companies have agreed to cut the unit cost of what is billed as the most advanced fighter ever built to near the level of that for existing "fourth-generation" fighters with fewer capabilities.

Gen. Bogdan said it was essential to make the F-35 more affordable for U.S. and overseas customers. "I have the commitment at the CEO level," he said during a speech at an industry conference, citing prime contractor Lockheed Martin Corp., LMT +0.92% BAE Systems BA.LN -0.10% PLC, Northrop Grumman Corp. NOC +0.98% and engine builder Pratt & Whitney, a unit of United Technologies Corp. UTX +0.63%

The companies have made progress in cutting costs of the most expensive military program in history, but Gen. Bogdan said more had to be done and cited continuing concerns about the jet's software and defective parts, singling out tires that repeatedly fell off one of the aircraft types.

However, he expressed confidence that the jet was on track to enter active service with the U.S. Marine Corps in 2015 and the U.S. Air Force in 2016, followed by the first overseas buyers due to receive them, Italy and Israel.

"What I'm less confident about is what happens after 2016," he said at the annual Air Force Association meeting here.

Gen. Bodgan was fiercely critical of the relationship between the Pentagon and the contractors when he took over the program last year, but said "slow and steady progress [had been] made on all fronts."

The average price of an F-35 air frame—excluding the engines—was below $100 million in the last deal struck between the Pentagon and Lockheed, falling more than 4% from the prior batch.

Gen. Bogdan didn't reveal a target unit price for the F-35 in 2019. "The price needs to come down, no matter what," he said.

His comments came as Lockheed said Tuesday that it was preparing for more international sales of the F-35 in the wake of an agreement to sell at least 37 of the jets to the Netherlands, which has budgeted €4.5 billion ($6 billion) for the deal.

Uncertainty about overseas sales and the eventual tally for U.S. services remains a challenge to efforts to lower costs by boosting production rates.

The Netherlands, which spent 15 years deciding on replacing its aging F-16 fighters, becomes the seventh overseas customer for the F-35, with its initial delivery expected in 2019. The Netherlands cited defense cooperation with Belgium as part of its reason for the buying the F-35, raising the prospect that its neighbor would join other potential customers such as Singapore in evaluating the jet.

"We are starting to look at more [Foreign Military Sales] customers," said Lorraine Martin, the Lockheed executive who heads the F-35 program for the company.

Ms. Martin didn't detail potential buyers, though she declined to concede defeat in the contest to sell 60 fighter jets to South Korea, a contract widely expected to go to Boeing Co. BA +1.23% after the country's defense ministry said Boeing had the only qualifying bid. A formal announcement is expected as soon as next week.

Lockheed and the other F-35 contractors have come under fire from not only from Air Force officials but also U.S. lawmakers over the performance of the JSF program, which is behind schedule and over budget.

Ms. Martin told reporters at the Air Force Association meeting that production costs and projected operating expenses have continued to decline. She also said problems including software glitches and the capabilities of the pilot helmet are being ironed out.

"This is no longer the trillion-dollar [aircraft]," she said, a reference to a recent disclosure from the Pentagon that the cost of the program to the U.S. military was seen at $857 billion over its 50-plus-year life, down from a previous projection of more than $1 trillion.

She and Gen. Bogdan both said there had been no indication that the Pentagon would deviate from its plan to take more than 2,400 of the jets, even as budget cuts are pushing all four U.S. military branches to review the size and scope of their acquisition programs.

Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems declined to comment on Gen. Bogdan's remarks.

Pratt & Whitney said its president, Dave Hess, "personally met with Gen. Bogdan and has given his commitment to continue to drive down the cost of the F135 engine."

The company said it had cut the cost of the engine "by more than 40 percent already, and we expect to keep this momentum going forward."

"The aircraft is doing well," said Gen. Mark Welsh, the U.S. Air Force chief of staff, in a speech at the conference. "I'm confident we're going to get [the jet into service], assuming we have consistent funding."

The Netherlands left some flexibility in its deal to buy the F-35A version of the jet, adding a 10% reserve above its €4.5 billion budget in case costs escalate. It may also order more than 37 aircraft if costs decline and the contingency fund isn't tapped.

The country is one of nine nations that are industrial partners in the F-35 program. The Dutch aircraft are slated to be assembled at a plant in Italy by Alenia Aermacchi, a unit of Finmeccanica FNC.MI +1.44% SpA. The U.K., Italy, Norway, Australia, Israel and Japan have also placed F-35 orders.

[Philip]

The good news for the JSF is that estimates of costs are coming down as progress is being made.The bad news is that problems still remain in its development.The manufacturers hope that by LRIP-7,the bulk of the problems will be solved.

http://www.navytimes.com/article/201309 ... /309180026
F-35 costs drop as technical challenges lessen, officials say

US Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, the head of the F-35 Joint Program Office, confirmed that his office estimates the sustainment cost for the F-35 has decreased to $857 billion, a significant drop from a figure often cited as $1.1 trillion.

That larger figure was from a three-year-old government report, Bogdan said at the Air Force Association’s Air & Space Conference, and the new number reflects a more accurate assessment of the program. However, given the dangers of trying to predict costs and inflation over a 50-year period, even that number contains “a lot of assumptions.”

With 10 million lines of code on the plane, the biggest challenge remains software. “It is tricky, it is hard and it is the number one thing that paces the program right now,” Bogdan said.”

The Marine Corps and Air Force will be running the interim block 2B software when they declare IOC in 2015 and 2016, respectively. While Bogdan said he was confident those services will meet their IOC dates with 2B, the development of the more advanced 3F software “heavily depends” on the work that comes before.

“We are addressing and retiring risks,” Martin said. “These are all known issues that we have solutions for. We will continue to focus on them, but we are putting them behind us.”

With those known issues in the process of being fixed, Bogdan has turned his attention to newer issues as they arise.

“There are pieces and parts on this airplane that are simply breaking too much,” Bogdan said, likening the situation to a game of Whac-A-Mole.

When asked for specific examples, Bogdan brought up the tires on the F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing model designed for the Marines.

Tires for other jump-jet designs need more buoyancy to handle the weight of the plane coming straight down to land. But when taking off on a runway, the tires need durability — the opposite characteristic.

Because of that dichotomy, the B model is burning through tires at an unsustainable rate. So Bogdan has asked tire-manufacturer Dunlop to develop a better tire, a process that he said would not cost the US government anything.

PS:More bad news for the JSF?

Boeing moves closer to South Korean fighter jet deal
By Joyce Lee
SEOUL | Mon Sep 16, 2013 1:19am EDT

(Reuters) - Top decision makers in South Korea's 8.3 trillion won ($7.64 billion) fighter jet tender have briefed the president on the outcome of an assessment process and told her that Boeing Co's F-15 Silent Eagle was the sole eligible bid, a source with knowledge of the process told Reuters.

The country's defense minister, the head of the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) and the air force chief of staff were at the briefing on Friday, said the source, who was briefed on the meeting.

The source could not be identified due to the sensitivity of the closed-door meeting. A spokesman for DAPA confirmed the meeting had taken place, but declined to comment on what was discussed.

Boeing's F-15SE fighter was the only one of three bids that came in under budget. Rivals Lockheed Martin Corp's costlier F-35 stealth fighter and the Eurofighter consortium's Typhoon were both over budget.

The closely fought tender will be scrutinized by a final decision-making committee chaired by the defense minister. The committee meeting is expected to be held next week, the DAPA spokesman said, but a date had not been set.

The new jets are being acquired to partially replace ageing F-4 and F-5 jets.

Debate has intensified as the tender decision has drawn closer and 15 South Korean former air force chiefs signed a petition in late August opposing the selection of the F-15SE, saying it lacked the stealth capabilities of more modern aircraft.

While it is still possible that the tender could be made void by President Park Geun-hye, she has more pressing budgetary issues to address and needs to fund ambitious social spending pledges that helped her win a presidential election last year.

"Unlike the last administration, the Park administration has comparatively little interest in this program," said Yang Uk, a senior research fellow at the Korea Defence and Security Forum.

"With this year's tax revenue expected to be several trillion won short of target, the government is likely to stick with the current tender instead of possibly increasing the budget down the line," he said.

On Friday, Finance Minister Hyun Oh-seok told a parliamentary hearing that South Korea faced a 2013 revenue shortfall of up to 8 trillion won ($7.37 billion).

Lockheed Martin and Eurofighter declined to comment on the status of the tender while Boeing said in a written statement that it was waiting for the tender process to be completed.

[Philip]

The Netherlands slashes JSF numbers by half.Cost and operating cost uncertainity the cause.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.asp ... 617981.xml

September 18, 2013
Credit: Lockheed Martin

The Netherlands has finally decided to purchase the Joint Strike Fighter, but will buy fewer than half the number it originally envisioned.

The Hague says it will now purchase 37 of the 85 Lockheed Martin F-35s it had intended to purchase when it first signed up with the program in 2002. It based the decision on the need to remain within the tight €4.5 billion ($6 billion) budget assigned for its F-16 Fighting Falcon replacement program and the €270 million annual operations budget for fighter types in the service’s inventory.

“The F-35 provides the most options from a military operational perspective,” Defense Minister Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert says. “The aircraft also offers great potential for further development, especially in the area of networked operations. Also important are the opportunities for international cooperation in areas such as training, maintenance and deployment.”

The Netherlands plans to begin F-35 operations in 2019 alongside the country’s last F-16s, which will be retired in the early 2020s. The Dutch defense ministry does not rule out purchasing more aircraft “within the financial framework.” But a policy document on the future of the Netherlands armed forces that revealed the JSF buy highlights one of the ongoing frustrations of the program, as air arms try to work out the operational and ownership costs of the aircraft. As a result, the defense ministry is creating a “risk reserve” of 10% to be applied to the program and operational costs.

The ministry says the “resulting financial capacity is sufficient for the purchase of 37 aircraft.” It will now use that number for planning purposes and notify its F-35 program partners of the changed figure.

Political wrangling and program opposition delayed a final F-35 procurement decision, despite the fact that the Netherlands has already paid more than €1 billion into the program and purchased two F-35A development aircraft for use in the U.S.-led operational test and evaluation phase.

A finalized Dutch purchase had been rejected in parliament, mainly by the center-left Labor Party (PvdA) while in opposition. But that decision changed after the Labor Party formed a majority coalition in the Lower House with Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s Liberal Party (VVD) following last September’s elections.

One of the development aircraft has been in storage at Edwards AFB, Calif. since April. The other is currently flying from the Lockheed Martin factory in Fort Worth.

PS:Turkey looking at indigenous fighter to complement the JSF.
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.asp ... 580487.xml
Xcpt:

June 10, 2013
Credit: TAI concept

Turkey's aviation industry has come a long way since it began building F-16 Fighting Falcons in the 1980s. Now it is confident that it can produce an aircraft in-country that will not only replace the F-16 but complement the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter in years to come.

Turkish Aviation Industries (TAI) has been working quietly on ideas for a fifth-generation fighter, dubbed the F-X, for several years, but 2013 represents a critical year in the decision-making process for the project. A $20 million two-year concept phase, started in August 2011, will end this September, and a meeting of Turkey's Defense Industry Executive Committee, which takes place at year-end, will define how the program will begin to take shape.

At the IDEF defense show in Istanbul last month, TAI displayed three potential single-seat design concepts for the aircraft: two conventional monoplane layouts, one with a single engine, not dissimilar to the F-35, and one with two engines, while the third featured canard foreplanes and a large delta wing. Each of the concepts features elements of design associated with fifth-generation fighter aircraft, such as faceted fuselages to reduce radar cross-section, internal weapons bays, super-cruise capability as well as advanced avionics and an active, electronically scanned array (AESA) radar system. Engineers have received input from Saab, which was drafted to consult on the program.

TAI officials suggest that the two single-engine concepts will have maximum takeoff weights (MTOW) of 50,000-60,000 lb., while the twin-engine version will have an MTOW of 60,000-70,000 lb. Diagrammatic drawings of the twin-engine aircraft show two weapons bays, one located between the air intakes that can house a pair of small short-range air-to-air missiles, and the other in front of the engines housing four larger missiles around the size of the AIM-120 Amraam.

According to industry officials, the requirements defined by the Turkish air force have changed at least three times, with the specification narrowing to what TAI and Turkish industry will be able to achieve in the coming years. Of the designs shown at IDEF, the twin-engine concept meets the requirements set by the air force, say industry officials, but the service prefers a single-engine aircraft to reduce cost and complexity. Although envisaged as a multirole fighter, TAI officials say the air force may give the resulting aircraft more of an air-to-air/air-dominance role as a primary mission.

Under the current timetable, Turkey will develop the aircraft at the same time as it is paying for the F-35. TAI wants to achieve a first flight for the F-X within 10 years. While the F-35 is set to replace the F-4 Phantoms and early F-16s in the air force inventory, the service sees the F-X replacing later models of the F-16 fleet purchased through various iterations of the Peace Onyx program. The last F-16 produced by TAI was delivered to the air force in December as part of the Peace Onyx IV program.

[Mihir]

Will It Fly?

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2013 ... eed-martin

The Joint Strike Fighter is the most expensive weapons system ever developed. It is plagued by design flaws and cost overruns. It flies only in good weather. The computers that run it lack the software they need for combat. No one can say for certain when the plane will work as advertised. Until recently, the prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, was operating with a free hand—paid handsomely for its own mistakes. Looking back, even the general now in charge of the program can’t believe how we got to this point. In sum: all systems go!

A long read, but well worth the time.

[Singha]

Can the jsf become agile as a mig29 if some tech advancement endowded it a engine of same size and fuel consumption but 45,000lb thrust. Or is its small wing area , smallish control surfaces and tubby airframe a insurmountable problem?

[member_20292]

Thrust vectoring should help ,no?

BTW, can other single engines, like the LCA, get it, without fking up its weight dynamics ?

[Philip]

Mahadev,the EJ engine with TVC was shown in a poster display at the previous Aero-India.Though the IAF reportedly was impressed with it for the Mk-2,the 414's engine is almost the same size as a 404,inlet dimensions required to be larger,and had an advantage as the 404 was being used on the prototypes and Mk-1.The EJ in my opinion would've been abetter long term bet,giving the LCA even more dogfighting capability,as this seems to be its best attribute,small and agile.

[NRao]

Can the jsf become agile as a mig29 if some tech advancement endowded it a engine of same size and fuel consumption but 45,000lb thrust. Or is its small wing area , smallish control surfaces and tubby airframe a insurmountable problem?

It is not what it is designed for. Does not need that feature.

Thrust vectoring should help ,no?

For the F-35? I doubt they have even dreamt of that. Check out the next gen engine (from GE) (expected to be a mid-life upgrade for the F-35) in the international thread. I very much doubt they have a TVC feature in that.

Lockheed Martin Girds for Combat Jet Choices as Dutch Back JSF

[abhik]

PW had demonstrated 50,000lb thrust from their engine although this came at the cost of engine life. GE/RR had also demonstrated something similar.

[Philip]

There is a good AWST article on JSF fleet-management using the ALIS "Autonomic Logistics Information System", that will greatly aid logistics and maintenance support.Many years ago,a director of Singapore Airlines explained to me the revolution in aviation taking place with new aircraft being inducted.In earlier days a plumber was sent to repair an aircraft toilet,but with newer birds,it required a technician with electronics knowledge to do the business.The ALIS system is revolutionary.It has cost almost $500m to develop.If an aircraft is akin to a smartphone,then ALIS is the operating system and applications required by end users.Both are enmeshed and required for ops.

The F-35 is so data intensive,that info is exchanged when an ALIS portable aid (laptop) is plugged into the aircraft,simplistically just as one does in an auto garage to monitor faults,performance,etc.The beauty of ALIS is that it eliminates all paper manuals,info is stored in the system and updates are automatic.Each sqd, will have a std. operating unit (SOU),a server on which all aircraft data is housed.Each country will have a central point of entry (CPE) which holds all the data of its fleet.The CPE then transmits all data to the ALOU,autonomous logistics unit at LM's Fort Worth facility and acts as a "global management storage device".

A brilliant concept,but one which is making slow progress according to the USMC due to the huge software "risks".In fact,the success of the entire programme is based upon the massive levels of software,each requiring total success of the previous,building capability step by step, increasing the aircraft's performance.Given the number of allies who will also operate the JSF,once operational,it will simplify logistic support enormously.

In the Indian context,we could also take a leaf out of ALIS's book on a much reduced scale though,for logistic support off our aircraft ,esp. the large amt. of newer Russian aircraft like the SU-30s which will be the mainstay of the IAF for decades to come.Any info on how the Flankers are being logistically supported by a central support system would be welcome.

[NRao]

Su-30 MKI? Triplicate paper. Guaranteed delivery of tyres/tires in 6 months. 11 months lead time.















JK

[NRao]

Somewhere I had read that as the plane comes into land it transmits what all needs to be done, even before it lands. So that the crew is ready on the ground to tackle the issues.

AWST :: Sept 16, 2013 :: F-35’s Ambitious, New Fleet Management System

After years of technical problems, overruns and delays, Pentagon officials are saying the F-35 aircraft is largely a known quantity. They are now focused on delivering on promises and helping the U.S. Marine Corps to declare initial operational capability in 2015 with the U.S. Air Force only a year behind.

But a lesser known factor in the success or failure of fielding these first squadrons is implementation of a new fleet-wide information support system. Just as the F-35 program broke ground to standardize an aircraft design for three U.S. services and eight international partners, the Autonomic Information Logistics System (ALIS) also reflects a new way of managing a fleet. And, in the case of the F-35, it is a multinational fleet that will share global resources.

The $448 million cost of developing ALIS is dwarfed by the price to procure it for the more than 3,000 F-35s in the plan: about $1 billion. If the aircraft were akin to smartphones, the ALIS system would be the operating system and applications needed by users. The two are enmeshed and both are required for fielding.

There is potentially big money in ALIS. F-35 Program Executive Officer USAF Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan says he will look at competing unit-level ALIS operations as he considers how to reduce F-35 sustainment cost. So it is not a given for prime contractor Lockheed Martin. Once fielded, this could be worth billions of dollars as each squadron operating ALIS requires at least seven people for system administration and maintenance, says Todd Mellon, director of industrial and logistics maintenance planning and sustainment at the government program office.

With ALIS, Lockheed has developed a single system to handle the tasks now done by a host of programs for legacy fleets. With the F-16, there are distinct information systems for repair, supply, maintenance personnel and skills, mission planning and post-mission debriefings. They are standard for the Air Force and used by other fleets.



With a new system comes growing pains. The Air Force is frustrated because a single fleet-management system cannot conduct apples-to-apples comparisons of the F-16 and F-35, for example. However, Mellon says ALIS regularly delivers to the services a data package to allow for comparative analysis. “The only other solution would be for everyone to be on ALIS, and not everybody needs an ALIS solution,” he says.

ALIS, a Windows-based system, merges these functions into a single system with standard user equipment. The idea behind ALIS is a single, central fleet-management tool that will allow for truly predictive maintenance. Health data for the worldwide fleet will be collated at a hub in Fort Worth and provide analysts with insight of parts longevity or timing for inspections, for example.

In practice, it is intended to make fleet management easier from the unit to headquarters by allowing commanders a single system through which to view all aspects of the fleet. And Lockheed Martin's ALIS Program Director Mark Perreault says it is intended to make the maintainer's job easier. The F-35 is a data-intensive aircraft, and built into it are diagnostic tools that will alert ALIS based on pre-programmed parameters. This information exchange happens at the aircraft, when an ALIS portable maintenance aid (PMA) or portable classified aid (PCA)—ruggedized laptops used for aircraft management at the squadron level—is plugged into the jet for a download.

This use of digital tracking for fluids replaces use of gauges, says Sharon Parsley, a Lockheed Martin spokeswoman. The company boasts that flight-control-rigging maintenance now takes 5 min. for the F-35, compared to 8-14 hr. on legacy fighters, she adds. This is “something unique in fifth-generation systems,” says Tom Curry, Lockheed Martin's F-35 Director of ALIS, noting that its roots are on the F-22 program.

The use of ALIS also eliminates the need for paper manuals; all of the information is stored in the system and configuration updates are automatically provided.

ALIS is programmed to prioritize parts allocation based on principles agreed upon by all partners in the last Joint Executive Steering Board in March, Mellon explains. The agreement allows for squadrons in wartime operations to be prioritized no matter what nation owns them, he notes.

Each F-35 squadron will have a standard operating unit (SOU), a server on which the unit's data is housed. Each country will have a central point of entry (CPE), which holds all of the data from its fleets. Each country's CPE then transmits data to the single autonomic logistics operating unit (ALOU), which is housed at Lockheed Martin's Forth Worth facility and acts as a global fleet-management storage device. “It is the one place where you can integrate for each service and country information across the fleet,” Mellon says.

The Pentagon plans to field a second ALOU for redundancy, though funding and timing are not yet set, adds Mellon. Data are now backed up from the single ALOU on tapes, and reconstituting the system would be a timely venture, he says. Each aircraft can operate without ALIS connectivity for 30 days if needed.

Varying versions of these elements are already fielded at each F-35 site: Edwards AFB, Calif; Nellis AFB, Nev.; Eglin AFB, Fla.; NAS Patuxent River, Md.; and MCAS Yuma, Ariz. Italy will be the first foreign partner to have this equipment based on its soil. And the Air Force is planning to field the equipment at Luke AFB, Ariz., where the next F-35A unit is set to be established by year-end.

One of the complex tasks ahead, however, is to field SOU version 2, which is a more transportable and modular. This is needed to support expeditionary operations, especially those on the ship for Marine Corps initial operational capability (IOC) by the end of 2015. Though “Lockheed's past performance on ALIS has been poor, . . . over the past year they have improved their ALIS software development processes and deficiency correction process to the point where we now believe we can deliver the ALIS capabilities we have committed to support the services' IOCs,” says Bogdan. “I'm confident we'll be ready to meet Marine Corps IOC.”

Mellon acknowledges the SOU version 2 schedule is challenging. “It is not going to be a 12-inch putt, but it is not a 30-foot putt, either,” he says. “I'm pretty confident of the hardware solution. It is the other software versions . . . coupled with the hardware that presents the risk.” However, the procurement cost of the version 2 system will be about 40% less than the current version, says Perreault.

Not yet on contract for SOU version 2, Lockheed Martin has been funding the work for several months. The contract is expected by the end of September.

In concert with fielding the hardware, the company is also delivering various software versions. There have been two basic software releases for ALIS. Version 1.0.2 was the initial release fielded prior to aircraft arriving for maintainer and pilot training in July 2011. It supports operational testing. “It is a federated set of capabilities, not integrated or collocated on a single server rack,” Mellon says.

Late last year, the 1.0.3 update was issued to support operations at Eglin, Nellis, Yuma AFBs and the operational testing unit at Edwards AFB. With the improved software, “you have applications inside of ALIS transferring data back and forth,” Mellon says. “[Version] 1.0.3 is when we actually start getting that electronic link to verify data and information at the unit level to the authoritative data systems” at higher levels. Reaching that point has not been easy; this version was intended for release with the Block 1 aircraft, but delays in the aircraft delivery schedule allowed more time for engineers to work on ALIS. “Actually having an integrated solution of all the capabilities was harder than we thought,” Mellon says.

With the transition, each aircraft must be updated, a process that “takes time because the data structure going from 1.0.2 to 1.0.3 is different,” he notes. Each conversion starts on a weekend and takes up to five days.

Meanwhile, Lockheed is working on two ALIS 2 versions. The first, 2.0.0, will facilitate a transition from Windows XP to Windows 7 and operate with the Block 2B aircraft; the Marine Corps will declare IOC with Block 2B aircraft.

Eventually, ALIS 2.0.1.0 will integrate more engine data from the Pratt & Whitney F135s; today, a specialized Pratt laptop is used for life management functions, though ALIS is used for maintenance.

[Philip]

In the future with more intelligent chips and further miniaturisation,we will probably see aircraft ,given the amt. of software that flies the thing,that "heal" themselves in flight,Terminator style.Barring tyres,ordnance,EW/targeting pods,engines,etc. that require ground handling.Multi-redundant FBW systems are already with us.Conformal radars giving a 360deg. coverage are in the works being planned for the FGFA and once the hypersonic UCAVs arrive,the strike role will be gradually taken over by UCAVs with manned fighters performing more air-dominance/defence roles.However anything which reduces the time,effort and cost of supporting such advanced systems will improve combat effectiveness.As said above, I wonder what is also planned for future Indian aircraft,the LCA for example.

[NRao]

In the future with more intelligent chips and further miniaturisation,we will probably see aircraft ,given the amt. of software that flies the thing,that "heal" themselves in flight,Terminator style.Barring tyres,ordnance,EW/targeting pods,engines,etc. that require ground handling.Multi-redundant FBW systems are already with us.Conformal radars giving a 360deg. coverage are in the works being planned for the FGFA and once the hypersonic UCAVs arrive,the strike role will be gradually taken over by UCAVs with manned fighters performing more air-dominance/defence roles.However anything which reduces the time,effort and cost of supporting such advanced systems will improve combat effectiveness.As said above, I wonder what is also planned for future Indian aircraft,the LCA for example.

Not self healing, but substituting (called something else) is already here (I do not think electronics can self heal, anyone?).

Conformal/360 radar is already there - in fact 360 video is there (I do not think the FGAF will have the video part - not that it is a very big deal to implement it).

UAVs - they are not as simple as people think them to be, they are a pain in the rear for serious warfare. Even the US has not even reached there. Given Indian border topology, it is going to be extremely challenging.

WRT an ALIS type of system for Indian aircrafts? Not possible for the LCA, IIRC the AMCA has some sophisticate diagnostics, but it will not be at the level of the JSF - it cannot. Forget India, I do not think any one can come close to that level on this topic.

WRT India, the AMCA should be THE plane.

[NRao]

Aug 12, 2013 :: Don’t Ask ALIS, Yet; F-35 Wing Drop Issue Fixed

PENTAGON: The F-35′s highly-touted system designed to monitor and predict maintenance needs known as ALIS (pronounced alice) faces “really challenging issues” in the military’s biggest conventional arms program ever.

The Autonomic Logistics Information System is not really capable of sharing data from the airplane yet — as is the goal. Also, the hardware required to download and service the plane must be made smaller and the software be made both more useful and more secure, an authoritative source here told us. The Marines are most closely watching the size of the hardware since they have the earliest Initial Operating Capability in July 2015 and require the ability to service the plane in the most remote locations.

A key goal of the ALIS system is to allow F-35s to share data with the ship or base they are flying back to so crews can have parts and tools ready to fix the plane as quickly and as close to combat as possible. That requires a wireless modem, something that drone programs are keenly aware can be highly vulnerable to hacking.

I asked Lt. Gen. Robert Schmidle about this in a Friday interview and his cautious answer made clear just how closely the Marines are watching this.

“I think conceptually it makes a lot of sense, but we have to be very mindful of someone wanting to do nefarious things inside the networks,” Schmidle said. He and our other authoritative source said shrinking the hardware for ALIS shouldn’t be too hard. But ensuring the security of the network and providing robust and useful software will be a serious challenge.

On the other hand, wing drop is no longer a performance issue for the F-35, contrary to claims in some quarters, our authoritative source at the Pentagon tells us. The issue is, as almost always, much more complex than that simple statement indicates, but it’s been 18 months since the issue surfaced and software fixes leave the Joint Strike Fighter in fine shape, this source says.

What happened? Basically, new algorithmns were written, tested in the trans-sonic envelope where most of the problems occurred and the services found a solution that didn’t completely eliminate all drop at all times but left the plane performing to the highest standards achievable. In short, they found a problem and fixed it to a standard all three services could live with.

[NRao]

Sept 11, 2013 :: F-35 training unit set to start training with upgraded software

Pilots at the Pentagon's first Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter training unit at Eglin AFB, Florida, are gearing up to start an updated training syllabus that incorporates more of the jet's advanced avionics.

While F-35 students and instructors at the base currently use the rudimentary Block 1B configuration in their aircraft, later this year, the 33rd Fighter Wing will transition to operating the more advanced Block 2A configuration.

"We are going to transition to a Block 2A syllabus here in the late fall and early into next spring as we get the jets upgraded," says US Air Force Col Stephen Jost, commander of the 33rd Operations Group. The upgraded aircraft also means that the base's F-35 simulators and academic course have to be updated to incorporate the new systems.

As such, the F-35 Block 2A transition course will include flying three additional sorties over the current syllabus, which includes six flights. Those additional sorties will focus on using the F-35's Multifunction Advanced Data Link (MADL), which will enable pilots at the base to conduct more realistic tactical training in the F-35 for both air-to-air and air-to-surface missions.

"That will become operational with the 2A software, and so that is one of the key enablers that allows us to expand our mission set," Jost says.

Jost says that the Block 2A software is also expected to allow the F-35 fleet at Eglin AFB to operate at night. Pilots at the joint USAF, US Navy and Marine Corps operated fighter wing are also hoping for the release of additional flight envelope clearances. "We are hoping to get some relief on the flight controls," Jost says.

The expanded flight envelope - which will be released as test pilots put the three versions of the F-35 through its paces - should allow operational pilots to fly at higher angles of attack and possibly greater g-forces. The flight envelope currently released for training is severely restricted.

Jost could not offer any specific information on exactly how much of the F-35's flight envelope will be cleared for the pilots at the wing to use because such releases are often varied and incremental in nature.

The updated Block 2A syllabus will start clearing the way for the USMC to declare the short take-off and vertical landing(STOVL) F-35B variant of the jet operational in July 2015 with a Block 2B configuration. The USAF will declare the F-35A operational a year later in 2016 with the Block 3i configuration - which is the same software as Block 2B, but hosted on an upgraded computer system.

[NRao]

Filed under:

PS:More bad news for the JSF?

this:

Sept 24, 2013 :: SKorea Rejects Boeing, Says F-15 Not Good Enough

South Korea on Tuesday rejected Boeing Co.'s bid to supply 60 fighter jets in the country's largest-ever weapons purchase even though it was the sole remaining bidder, and said it would reopen the tender.

Boeing had offered its F-15 Silent Eagle, but South Korean critics have said the warplane lacks state-of-the-art stealth capabilities and cannot effectively cope with North Korea's increasing nuclear threats.

Defense Ministry spokesman Kim Min-seok said officials decided at a meeting Tuesday to delay naming a winning bidder for the 8.3 trillion won ($7.7 billion) purchase, and would restart the bidding process at an early date.

He said South Korea must have better air power in line with an international trend to develop "fifth generation" fighters, and said the rejection of Boeing's bid was made in consideration of North Korea's nuclear weapons program and other factors. Ministry officials said he was referring to a warplane with cutting-edge radar-evading stealth functions which Boeing's plane does not have.

Boeing said in a statement that it was "deeply disappointed" by Tuesday's decision, adding it "rigorously" followed the South Korean arms procurement agency's instructions throughout the entire process.

Lockheed Martin's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and EADS' Eurofighter Typhoon earlier competed in the bidding process but were eliminated for exceeding Seoul's budget cap.

The F-35 jet, which has been plagued by schedule delays and cost overruns, is widely regarded as a much more advanced and capable aircraft than its predecessors.

Japan announced in 2011 that it would buy 42 F-35 jets in a deal expected to cost more than $5 billion. Japan hopes to receive its first F-35s in 2016, at a cost of about $120 million per plane. But last year it threatened to cancel the multibillion-dollar deal if prices continue to rise or delays threaten the delivery date.

South Korea has traditionally favored importing fighter jets and other weapons from the U.S., which stations 28,500 troops in the country as deterrence against potential aggression from North Korea.

This spring, tensions on the Korean peninsula rose sharply, with Pyongyang threatening nuclear wars to protest toughened U.N. sanctions after its third nuclear test in February. The U.S. took the unusual step of sending its most powerful warplanes — B-2 stealth bombers, F-22 stealth fighters and B-52 bombers — to drills with South Korea in a show of force. B-2 and B-52 bombers are capable of delivering nuclear weapons.

In recent days, South Korean media, retired generals and weapons experts had pressed the government not to pick the F-15 Silent Eagle, arguing better stealth capabilities were needed.

"Only with stealth capabilities can (warplanes) covertly infiltrate North Korea and get rid of its nuclear threats," a group of 15 former air force chiefs of staff said in a recent letter addressed to President Park Geun-hye.

The rivals Koreas have hundreds of thousands of combat-ready troops along a heavily armed border as the 1950-53 Korean War ended in a truce, not a peace treaty. North Korea's air force is relatively old and ill-prepared, but has a large number of aircraft that could be a factor if a conflict were to break out.

[NRao]

image was taken by a KC-10 equipped with a hose (in place of the flying boom)

[NRao]

Filed under:

PS:More bad news for the JSF?

this:

South Korea to Hold New Fighter Tender After Rejecting Boeing

South Korea may consider acquiring a mix of fighter jet models in the future, Kim said during the briefing. The budget for the jet fighter project will also be adjusted, the procurement office said in a statement.

[NRao]

Sept 24, 2013 :: F-35: New fighter creates new culture for 21st Century and beyond

EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, Fla. (AFNS) --

She didn’t have a smudge on her. Not a leak found anywhere. She even had that “new jet smell.” Skies were blue, everything was perfect. Those were the conditions on that July day in 2011 when Lt. Col. Eric Smith took off from the Lockheed facilities at Fort Worth, Texas, in the first operational F-35 to fly to its permanent home at Eglin Air Force Base, in the Florida panhandle. And the rest, according to Smith, who would go on to pick up three of the first six F-35s from the factory, is history.

“It was just a great day – I was just a little bit nervous because I knew that if I messed it up it would be on the front page of every newspaper in the country,” said Smith. As he approached the runway at Eglin, he found bleachers full of people and a red carpet rolled out to signify the beginning of an era for not only the plane, but for the newly reorganized 33rd Fighter Wing, Eglin Air Force Base and the future of Air Force air superiority for the 21st Century.

The pick of the 33rd Fighter Wing “Nomads” to transition the Air Force’s newest and most lethal fighter into this century and beyond was no accident. With a history that dates back to World War II when the wing was a pursuit group, the 33rd showcased the F-4 Phantom during Vietnam and the F-15 Eagle through crises such as Grenada, Panama, Desert Storm, and post 9/11, when the Nomads provided armed over-watch throughout North America for Operation Noble Eagle, securing two presidents of the United States and multiple space shuttle launches.

“On Oct. 1, 2009, we stood up as an F-35 unit,” said Lt. Col. Matt Renbarger, 58th Fighter Squadron commander. “We were handed keys to an empty building, with five pilots, a technical sergeant, two lieutenant colonels and three majors.”

Renbarger and Smith both admitted that those early days, following the arrival of the first F-35, was a whirlwind of planning, creating policy and guidelines and putting together a training program with a syllabus, academics, and a completely new maintenance program.

Smith said that the early days with the first few aircraft were a challenge, not only for the pilots, but for the newly trained crew chiefs as well. “There was a lot of tech data that the technicians needed before they could work on the airplane, so the first six planes we delivered sat for about eight months before we were issued flight clearance. We didn’t receive our first flight clearance until March of 2012. “

Renbarger said that, like anything brand new and right out of the box, there were a lot of things that had to be learned that weren’t known before. He said that as a training unit, it was more Air Combat Command versus Air Education and Training Command. “It’s not a different mindset, but it’s more of a different mission. Here we create new pilots and maintainers, so we don’t have the downrange focus. Training pilots is our product.

“When test pilots at Edwards find something they tell us, and when we find something we tell them. When software is released they’ll come down here and tell us things they’ve learned. We’ll take new capabilities and bring them into our training syllabus. The folks at Edwards bring us the latest so we can teach the people who teach the people. We teach the teachers and the teachers teach the students.”

Renbarger said there is a lot to like about the F-35, from the standpoint of the pilot, the maintainer, the trainer, down to the bottom line of mission success. “I’ve never seen a pilot come back from his first sortie without a huge smile on his face. It’s something new, and programs like this only come around every 30 years or so, and to be on the ground floor – it’s the perfect time.

“Most pilots come from the F-16, F-15 and A-10 legacy aircraft. Sensors on the front of the F-35 allow us to have that 360-degree awareness. That was the big leap forward. Computer technology that is 30 years or more advanced than the legacy aircraft is what makes the F-35 so advanced.”

Lt. Col. Anthony Pelkington is the 33rd FW chief of safety and was one of the first of the legacy pilots selected for the F-35 program. He said that for pilots transitioning from those legacy systems, the F-35 is a huge deal.

“For 10 years in the F-16, I dealt with essentially monochrome cathode ray displays – approximately 6 inch square – and I’ve got two of them. Now I move up to a contiguous 8 x 20- inch color display that is a huge step forward for the pilot’s situational awareness. Plus, there’s a lot more capability in the display itself.

“In the F-16, I had a radar display with a selectable, like turning pages in a book, something that would show my ordnances like I had a stick figure map with monochrome lines on a black background. It would try to give us a semblance of where we were to maybe a weapons system. But I had to choose. Every one of those displays was limited to the confines of that small 6-inch to 8-inch screen.

“In the F-35, we now have this massive amount of screen real estate. I can now see multiple sensors at once, which is great because I don’t have to pick and choose. I don’t have to take away my situational awareness with what the radar is telling me in terms of traffic to bring up situational awareness and what the target pod looks like. It’s all there available for me.”

Pelkington added that one of the best aspects of the fifth generation fighter is its ability to communicate with all aspects of the aircraft, as well as customize information to fit each pilot’s needs. “The displays talk to each other, the sensors talk to each other, and a lot of information is displayed in sensible formats with other sensors in one combined picture. Now I can bring up large formats on displays so I can see things easier – I can even bring up many formats if I want with a different orientation on how the displays will look. Whatever I want to do to aid my situational awareness I can do and the reality, as a pilot, is that I can customize that setup quite easily to a format that best suits how a pilot understands.”

The wing’s safety chief said that one of the biggest advantages to the F-35 over legacy aircraft is the growth in options. “Choosing between a pilot’s eye and ‘god’s eye are all in the system now and weren’t in the F-16. I had one particular display option for radar format for the F-16 – I couldn’t choose anything else. I had to learn to read it in that manner. Which didn’t necessarily match how somebody looking out on a battlefield could see the picture. So you always had to do that conversion in your mind. With the F-35 you can choose the display format that best suits your ability, and there are multiple options to allow you to see things from a ‘god’s eye’ perspective. It allows me to see from a much greater perspective than the F-16 ever allowed.”

The equipment

Tech. Sgt. Andre Baskin is the wing’s aircrew flight equipment NCOIC, responsible for equipping pilots with the specialized gear required to fly the world’s most state-of-the-art aircraft. He and his small staff of specialists agree that the differences between the F-35 helmet and the rest are many.

“One of the biggest differences the F-35 helmet has over the others is that the new helmet encompasses multiple gadgets such as night vision goggles, and for that function you would have to modify the pilot’s flying helmet and add the components on there,” said Baskin. “With the F-35, it’s all encompassed in the helmet. The cameras on the jet work in sync with the helmet and whatever the jet picks up visually will be displayed on the visor in the helmet.”

From a pilot’s point of view, Renbarger agrees that the nicest part of the new helmet is that everything is self-contained. “The best thing about the F-35 helmet is that it has a big visor with a big display, and we can display a night vision camera visual on the visor and then a distributor aperture system that is basically a set of cameras that are all over the airplane and work in the infrared spectrum. That can be displayed on our visor as well.

“When we get our helmet fit, there is actually a complicated scan process that takes an image of our heads and provides a laser cut-out foam insert for the helmet that is molded to our heads. Then there’s ear cups that close the helmet around our head and a custom nape strap in the back that basically locks the helmet down on our heads. There’s very little, if any, motion in the helmet when we move our head around. Very well balanced, a very well fit and it feels great wearing the helmet. It’s very specific to each individual pilot.”

Pelkington also talked about the difference between the traditional G-suit, which offers pilots about a G and a half of protection, to the one used by F-35 pilots. “Some pilots acclimate to the Gs by genetic makeup, some by experience and can develop a tolerance for 5-ish Gs. With the new suit you can now go up to 7 or 8 Gs without ever having to strain. When you’re focused on pulling Gs -- on making sure your eyesight doesn’t gray out – your mind isn’t thinking about the adversary or the situation or the awareness of the battlespace. When you can pull 7 or 8 Gs without having to think about it, combined with the fusion of all the systems and the display on the glass set up the way you want to see it…it’s an amazing reduction in pilot workload.”

The maintainers

Senior Master Sgt. Paul Fulkerson is the production superintendent with the 58th Aircraft Maintenance Unit who is on the ground floor of maintenance for the F-35. He said that for F-35 maintainers, the biggest element that sets them apart is the electronic maintenance program called ALIS. Standing for Autonomic Logistics Information System, ALIS, according to Fulkerson, has all of the forms needed to perform maintenance on the new aircraft.

“With ALIS, there are no paper forms and the system allows maintainers to pretty much manage the fleet with the information on the computer,” said Fulkerson. “With the F-16s, we had to use paper tech data to perform maintenance, where you followed it step-by-step to do the task. With ALIS, our maintainers us ‘tough books,’ where they read the tech data on the screen.”

While a very young aircraft, Pelkington said the F-35, maintenance-wise, is very stable and makes a lot of information available to both the pilot and maintainer that isn’t available on the legacy aircraft.

“Oftentimes, in a legacy aircraft, you don’t know that something is wrong until you have a major systems failure that generates a warning in the aircraft. The aircraft can no longer perform to spec. A lot of warnings in the F-35 tend to be advisory, that says ‘this is going to have to be worked on by maintenance when you land.’ In the F-35, there’s no mission degradation. When a pilot gets back, there’s a load of data on every aspect of how the aircraft performs. From the maintenance standpoint, it gives them an awesome opportunity to catch issues before they become problems.”

Staff Sgt. Michael Sanders is an F-35 crew chief who has been with the program for the past three years and has more than a decade of experience on the F-16 and F-15 as a backshop engine maintainer. He explained that while maintainers in the legacy aircraft normally specialized in one area, such as engines or avionics, in the F-35, maintainers do it all.

“My job is completely different now from in the past. We would handle all teardown and build-up required for the engine, whereas now, we perform maintenance on the F-35 as a whole. We’re trained on all maintenance tasks, including the engine. I traveled TDY to Connecticut where I performed teardown and buildup for the new aircraft.”

Training

The F-35 Academic Training Center, or ATC, is a sprawling complex responsible for every facet of F-35 training at Eglin. From pilots to maintainers to support Airmen, the ATC has developed, or is in the process of developing, the training syllabuses, procedures, guidelines, certifications and “textbooks” that will become the training standard for decades to come, according to Renbarger.

He said that for pilots, training in the F-35 simulator is by far, the best there is. “I’ve flown in F-16 simulators and F-22 simulators and the F-35 simulator is truly state-of-the-art. They’ve got the best visuals, full dome coverage, 360-degree views, target set build-up, they have runways and very much replicates flying the airplane. I haven’t heard one pilot say it wasn’t the best simulator they’ve ever been in short of flying the airplane.”

Renbarger added that because the F-35 is a single-seat plane, the first time a pilot flies the F-35, he’s by himself, making the simulator even more critical. “The operational flight software that runs the airplane – that same software is in the simulator,” said Renbarger. “In other aircraft I have flown, there have been differences between the simulator and the airplane. This is as close as I’ve ever seen between the simulator and airplane. Exact same cockpit. The cockpit sits on a rail and you sit in the cockpit and it drives forward and raises up inside the dome and the screens you see are the exact same screens you see on the jet.”

On the maintenance side, students are confronted with a similar real-world view, with a weapons load trainer mock-up of the F-35 that contains everything but the tail and the cockpit. Tech. Sgt. Adam Zakrzewski is an ATC instructor with Detachment 19 of the 372nd Training Squadron. He said that during training on the F-35, students will practice opening and closing doors, checking the hydraulics levels, oil levels, etc., but there’s a big difference between maintenance on legacy aircraft versus the F-35.

“There are a lot more steps in gaining access to the legacy aircraft than there are to accessing the F-35,” said Zakrzewski. “I’m an old A-10 guy, where you have to unfasten 200 screws to get a door panel open. On the F-35, there’s one interface connect and click two buttons.”

Tech. Sgt. Justin Weddle is an ATC instructor and flight chief with the field training detachment of the 372nd Training Squadron, who says that in normal maintenance training, instructors would give students a PowerPoint presentation, cover some TOs and give students hands-on training on the aircraft.

“The maintenance group would have to give up an aircraft or whatever students were training on such as a weapons system, AGE, anything like that. At the ATC, and in the F-35 training plan, we begin with an EML, or electronic mediated lecture, kind of like the traditional PowerPoint, but it’s done through an electronic system.” Weddle said the student will then transition, in the same classroom and setting, to more self-paced training on the computer. “It’s just a reinforcement of what the instructor has said during his portion of the training.

“Students will then go through an ASMT, which is an aircraft systems maintenance trainer. It’s essentially an avatar, and from that you go and do whatever task you’re learning about. Whether you are installing a hydraulic pump or some other portion of the aircraft. On one side of the screen, students will have their avatar and on the other they’ll have their joint tech data laptop and they can follow all of the steps exactly. That way the training is not all front-loaded, it can be weaved in and out of the training course.”

F-35: Fighter of the future

In addition to the Air Force’s F-35A, the Marine Corps and the Navy have their own versions of the F-35. The F-35B will give the Marine Corps a short take-off and vertical landing capability, while the Navy’s F-35C will give them a carrier-based capability. Smith believes that for the future of the F-35, it may not change the way we fly, but it will make the U.S. and its allies the dominant air power for the next 30 to 50 years.

“That’s the beauty of the F-35. There are three variants out there, but all three are going to use the same system software. So as they develop something new for our country, our allies who fly the F-35 will get that same capability. That will make integration much smoother.”

Since Smith’s journey home with the first F-35 in 2011, Air Force, Marine, Navy and U.K. pilots have amassed more than 3,100 flying hours in the three versions, flying more than 2,300 sorties.

To those who have spent the past the past four or five years learning the intricacies of a new aircraft -- how to fly it, how to fix it and how to create a plan to teach it, the F-35 has become much more than an airplane showcasing state-of-the-art technology. For the men and women of the 33rd Fighter Wing at Eglin, responsible for getting the F-35 ready for its grand entrance as the dominant airpower for the 21st Century and beyond, it has spawned a completely new culture and way of life.

[NRao]

Modified Sept 19, 2013 :: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Canada's Next Generation Fighter Capability

In response to the 2012 Spring Report of the Auditor General of Canada, the Government unveiled a Seven-Point Plan to address the concerns raised in the Report. The Seven-Point Plan, which includes the establishment of a new National Fighter Procurement Secretariat (NFPS) will ensure that the Royal Canadian Air Force acquires the fighter aircraft it needs to complete the missions asked of it by the Government, and that Parliament and the Canadian public have confidence in the open and transparent acquisition process that will be used to replace the CF-18 fleet.

Under the terms of the Seven-Point Plan, Industry Canada (IC) will continue identifying opportunities for Canadian Industry to participate in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) global supply chain, as well as other potential benefits for Canada in sustainment, testing, and training, and will report to Parliament on Canada's Industrial Participation in the F-35 Program. The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program involves the development, production and sustainment of a stealthy, multirole fighter aircraft. Globally, the F-35 JSF is the largest fighter aircraft program. Canada is one of nine countries in the F-35 JSF program, along with the U.S., UK, Italy, Netherlands, Turkey, Norway, Denmark and Australia. The production of approximately 3,100 aircraft for partner countries will provide significant work for Canadian companies. Additional aircraft will be exported to Israel and Japan, and possibly others.

Canada has been a participant in the F-35 JSF program since 1997. This early involvement has been providing Canadian industry with the opportunity to become a part of the F-35 JSF supply chain. In order to maximize affordability, the partner countries agreed to a best-value approach to industrial participation which awards work to the most competitive companies. Canadian industry is well positioned and companies are gaining long-lasting, high quality business.

The F-35 JSF program delivers on the Canada First Defence Strategy's commitment to a renewed relationship with Canada's defence industry, leveraging Canada's competitive advantage and working with industry to help position Canadian companies for success in the global marketplace.

In 2006, Industry Canada signed Memoranda of Understanding–containing industrial participation plans–with each of the prime contractors (Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney). These agreements ensure that Canadian companies can compete for work on the JSF program, including the airframe, systems, engines and associated services. Opportunities include providing a wide range of manufacturing and services in areas such as major structural assemblies, electronic systems, advanced composites, high speed machining, simulation and training, tooling, sustainment, and landing gear maintenance.

Industry Canada works with partners including the Departments of National Defence and Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada, the regional economic development agencies and the Industrial Technologies Office to maximize Canadian industrial participation on the program through activities such as opportunity identification, awareness and outreach, technology investment, and capability matching. Participation in the JSF global supply chain is creating jobs and sustained economic benefits for regions across Canada.

The involvement of Canadian industry from the beginning of the multi-year, multi-billion dollar program has provided unprecedented access to a significant multinational defence program for companies across Canada, including small and medium enterprises. To date, seventy-two companies in Canada have secured work on the program and thirty-four companies currently have active contracts. As of Winter 2012-2013, companies in Canada have secured $488 million USD in contracts on F-35 development and initial production.

Further opportunities will be available to Canadian industry in areas such as sustainment, maintenance, repair, training, and simulation. Significant industrial benefits related to JSF in-service support are expected over a 40 year time span.

For more information on Canadian industrial participation, please consult the following reports: Canadian Industrial Participation in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program December 2012and Canadian Industrial Participation in the F-35 Joint Striker Fighter Program Spring 2013.

For more information about the F-35 JSF program, please consult its official website at F-35 Lightning II Program website.

[Philip]

"Keeping up with the Kims",Korean style.The uniformed men of Korea do not want the F-15 on steroids but something slinkier and stealthier.However,in mil. aviation haute couture,you've got to "cut your coat according to your cloth" and right now,the budget for the Korean birds of prey ain't enough for the F-35.One poss. solution is to buy a much smaller qty. of JSFs to "break the NoKo drawbridge down",and beef up numbers of lesser stealthier birds.The second alternative is that they collaborate with someone else,such as Turkey,earlier considered,or perish the thought even ancient enemy Japan,and develop their own bird-a single-engined concept,more easily affordable and less of a technological challenge .Whether it is from the east or west,a stealth bird is estimated to cost approx. around $100M a piece as of today,not around $70M+ as the Koreans earlier budgeted for.

Tough choices lie ahead and opening up another competition is going to add to time delays and further cost escalation.The SoKo mil. if unwilling to up the ante would be best advised to buy a smaller qty of F-35s,just like the Canadians and make up numbers with other aircraft,even F-15s on steroids.

[NRao]

Soko: There are a LOT of interesting topics..

1) Soko IS adjusting her budget to accommodate the F-35:

South Korea to Hold New Fighter Tender After Rejecting Boeing

South Korea may consider acquiring a mix of fighter jet models in the future, Kim said during the briefing. The budget for the jet fighter project will also be adjusted, the procurement office said in a statement.

They are providing more cloth so that they can cut a proper coat - a coat that fits properly !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How many is a question, right now. But the very, very good news (for LM, etc) is that this turkey has sprouted wings over SoKo.

2) SoKo has faced an increase of 10 folds on the life-cycle costs for the earlier purchased F-15s. Such costs are rarely talked about. But, that is a huge jump in costs

3) The F-15SE (on steroids plane) (nor the AHS) is not even close to the JSF. It is a financial alternative, NOT (and never will be) either a tactical/strategic (technology wise). (Even Canada, some European countries, may demand for an alternative to teh JSF, and they can find them too, no two ways. BUT they ALL will be financial alternatives, never technical ones - the JSF is years ahead of the F-15/F-18 in all respects. There can be no comparison.)

4) Cost of a "5th Gen" air craft.

(a) Current JSF costs are at $120+ (plus) mil pee plane. They have estimated that this cost - FOR the F-35A - will be brought to $85 Mil. I do not want to get into details, but it will happen. (Again, that number is for the F-35A, not the B or the C, which will be more expensive.)

(b) The "other" "5th Gen" plane that we all are familiar with is the FGFA. And THAT is estimated to cost a cool $100 mil - just want to be sure, it is not teh estimated cost for the JSF. I, for one, fully expect the FGFA cost to climb some - the Russians have ALREADY asked for a cost hike for the R&D phase, an the GoI is deliberating on that topic. The engien for the PAK-FA/FGFA will come out in 2020, which should add to the cost even further. And, of course, the FGFA will not have some of the neat features of the JSF, but that is a different story.

More later.

[abhik]

Interesting thing is that a lot of countries who are ordering the JSF now are expecting to start getting them by 2018, same time frame as the MRCA.

[NRao]

Abhik,

Fairly close. All nations get a couple to test and have their maintenance guys start to learn the ropes. A couple of years after that they start getting the production planes. However, I think the first production machines are expected in 2020, that is when the $85 mil per plane kicks in.

What is real scary is that this plane is 10 years late. It was expected to come out in 2010 !!!!! Imagine THAT.

But, I still feel that the AMCA is the right one for India. Although I have toyed around with the very, very crazy idea of a F-35C with F-35A wheels for the IAF and the F-35C for the IN. The F-35B - I do not think has a place in India. (Sleeping over the offer of EMALS, I think that is a REAL game changer for India and just maybe India may need a bigger ship. ???????)

[NRao]

Sept 25, 2013 :: F-35 fighter jet project rebooted in S. Korea

After rejecting a bid from Boeing to deliver 60 jets starting in 2017, South Korea has formed a task force to restart its fighter jet project Wednesday. {Already}

While the Boeing F-15 Silent Eagle was the only jet of three candidates to come in under the $7.2 billion budget, the new project is expected to favor the Lockheed Martin F-35 stealth jet.

Among the Boeing F-15 SE, Lockheed Martin F-35 and EADS Eurofighter, the F-35 scored the highest in combat capability {That should lay to rest that there is an alternative to the F-35. There are none}. The Defense Acquisition Program Administration's decision to reset the bidding was said to be in part over criticism it had focused too much on price, while overlooking skepticism over the F-15's stealth systems.

South Korea is facing increasing concerns over North Korea's nuclear capability, and is looking to replace its aging F-4s and F-5s with an order of 60 new jets over a 5-year period.

Both Lockheed Martin and EADS said they welcomed DAPA's decision, while Boeing called for the agency to explain its decision so it can consider adjusting the technology for the new project.

As I had mentioned the earlier decisions were financially based, not technically. And, right now, no nation can really postpone a technical solution - since the alternative still uses up financial resources and then at some point in time in the relatively near future has to replace that technology (selected because of cost) with the appropriate technologies - for which more funds have to be spent.

A smaller number of F-35s should be better than the full complement of F-15s. So, I suspect even that argument should work out.

The more I think of it, the FGFA is also in a relatively similar situation. Comparatively not technical enough to compete with the latest and greatest out there YET costing more than the latest and greatest. The only +ve I see with the FGFA is that it is far better than whatever India has, the huge -ve is the cost.

The Rafale ......................... needs to be shut down, the French need to buy the F-35 too.

JMHO.

[NRao]

Report calls on the Air Force to cut active duty, F-35 purchases

A think tank’s 27-point plan to cut defense costs calls for the Air Force to move hundreds of fighters out of active duty, and slow its rate of F-35 purchases to protect other parts of the service’s fleet.

And the report has a familiar signature: retired Gen. Norton Schwartz, the former Air Force chief of staff.

The report, produced by the Stimson Center, calls for the Defense Department to cut about $50 billion from its more than $640 billion budget. The Defense Department would save $21 billion by reducing the force by 132,100 service members from the Army and Marine Corps, $22 billion by reforming military benefitsand about $1 billion by eliminating funding for commissaries and post exchanges. It also calls for $6 billion in cuts to modernization programs, including delayed or reduced purchases in programs such as the F-35.

“A more prudent course would be to act now to prevent the disruptive effect of sequestration, along with reshaping the defense budget on the basis of a strategy that is designed to protect America’s national security interests in the years ahead,” the report states.

The Air Force-specific savings would come from moving a large part of the fighter force from active duty to the Reserve.

The Air Force flies about 1,100 fighters in the active-duty force, which is necessary for large-scale operations, but that number of aircraft is not needed as current operations decrease, the report states. Also, many of these aircraft are A-10s and older F-16s, which are less capable compared with other fighters in the active force, such as F-22s and F-15s. This, coupled with the increase of remotely piloted aircraft, means the need for a large, manned active-duty fleet is no longer needed.

“We would transfer the remaining operational F-16 squadrons in the active force to the reserve component,” the report states. “We provide an offsetting increase to the reserve components to operate these units.”

Under the plan, the number of active-duty fighters would drop to about 500, including F-22s, F-15s and more than 100 A-10s, along with F-16s for training and operational contingencies.

These moves would save about $5 billion annually, the report states.

The report also calls for slowing the purchases of F-35s across all services.

“The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is the largest acquisition program and was scheduled so aggressively that the Defense Department began to procure aircraft before they were fully developed and well before operational testing had begun,” the report says. “Technical programs have arisen with all three variants of the aircraft.”

Much of the Air Force’s F-35 procurement occurred from 2008 to 2012, while Schwartz was chief of staff.

The report calls for the Defense Department to slow F-35 procurement by cutting planned purchases by one-half each year.

The Air Force is planning to purchase 19 of its A variants in fiscal 2014 and 30 in fiscal 2015, and the report calls for the service to buy nine each in 2014 and 2015, with the planned ramp up to continue in 2016.

But while the report says procurement of F-35s should slow, it endorses the Defense Department’s plan to proceed with the long-range strike bomber.

“Strategic Ability emphasizes the importance of being able to penetrate enemy air defenses at great distances to ensure that the U.S. can defend its national security interests across the globe,” the authors wrote.

The report also calls for delaying and reducing purchases of the next generation ballistic missile submarine, shifting resources to research new technologies earlier, cutting minor procurement and maintaining “strategic depth” in the National Guard and Reserve.

[member_20453]

I would love to see the Rafale deal scrapped and us getting the F-35 with an out right buy of 250 fighters in all configs, 120 F-35A i.e 8 sqds of 15 fighters for AF, 30 F-35B i.e 2 sqds for IN dedicated for Amphibious Ops, 60 F-35B for IA or 3 sqds of 20 fighters, 40 F-35C i.e 2 sqds for IN purely for Carrier Roles.

With such a large deal, I am certain of a local assembly line for all of Asia & middle east, with the entire airframe, displays, some non critical avionics being made completely in India under TOT. With hard bargaining, major chuncks of the engine can be made in India as well. I think we are on the long run better off both in terms of capability and industry as well.

[NRao]

Pentagon aims to finalize Lockheed F-35 contract within days

The Pentagon expects to finalize a contract with Lockheed Martin Corp for the sixth and seventh batches of F-35 fighter jets within days, the deputy director of the $392 billion program said on Wednesday.

Navy Rear Admiral Randy Mahr, the No. 2 official in charge of the F-35 program, said all but two issues had been resolved, and he hoped to get those addressed soon.

"We have a few minute things that we have to finish off there," Mahr told a small group of reporters. "We just want to get it done."

He did not identify the two remaining issues.

Mahr said the process of finalizing the agreement for 71 more jets had taken less time than during the previous contract negotiations, but it was still taking longer than the Pentagon would like.

Lockheed and the Pentagon announced an agreement in principle for the 71 next fighter jets on July 30, and had hoped to finalize the details within a month.

The agreement in principle covers 36 jets in a sixth batch, with each warplane to cost about 4 percent less than the previous lot, and 35 jets in a seventh batch, also at a 4 percent discount.

Analysts say the two deals will be worth a combined $7 billion.

Lockheed and the Pentagon hope to reach agreement on pricing for an eighth batch of F-35 jets by early next year, he said.

Lockheed spokesman Michael Rein said there were 45 jets in the eighth batch, including 16 for five international customers - Britain, Italy, Norway, Japan and Israel.

Rein said Lockheed also aimed to complete the two contracts, as soon as possible.

"We'll continue to work with the (Joint Program Office) on bringing our final items to closure and believe, as they do, it will take place in the near future," he said.

[NRao]

Sept 25, 2013 :: AWST :: How to Make Sense of the U.K.'s F-35 Buy: Hire Better Sub Editors

Anyone who's taken even a cursory interest in Britain's procurement of the Joint Strike Fighter is likely to have had their head in a spin for the past few years. But one aspect of The World's Biggest Defense Program... Ever! (TM) has been gnawing away at me above all others. Finally, during the death throes of the 2013 edition of the huge bi-annual defence equipment exhibition/arms fair DSEI, I had my epiphany: in the space of one phone conversation, the mists cleared, and it all makes sense. Well, sense of the kind that prevails in the middle of the convoluted Venn diagram connecting the defence industry to government policy, and the requirements of all concerned to stay on-message at all times.

For me, one of the clearest takeaways from the Conservative-Liberal Democrat administration's Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) of 2010 was that the UK was no longer planning to buy their previously announced 138 copies of the F-35. This news was overshadowed at the time by the much more fundamental SDSR announcement concerning F-35 - the change of the UK order from the Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing (STOVL) B variant to the carrier-based C model. But there it was, in black and white, in a section of the Review that began at the foot of page 26 and ended at the top of page 27: "Accordingly we will..." - and then, second in a string of bullet points that otherwise need not detain us - "reduce our planned number of Joint Strike Fighter aircraft."

The size of the UK buy isn't just an issue that affects British military capability - the impact on British industry would, in theory, be considerable. The F-35 supply chain is as complicated and lengthy as the program itself, and the balance of work has been delicately calibrated. A key factor in deciding how much work is carried out in each different customer nation is the size of that country's order.

In November of 2011, during a visit to the production line at Fort Worth which resulted in this piece for the Mail on Sunday's Live supplement, I asked F-35 business development vice-president Steve O'Bryan what effect the reduced UK order was going to have on British manufacturing, and what work prime contractor Lockheed Martin were doing to take account of this. His answer took me by surprise.

"We have an industrial plan for each country based on the number of airplanes they tell us," O'Bryan said then. "The UK gave us an official profile, and they've always had 138 in the profile. And so far there's no reason to think otherwise, so we haven't done any planning associated with if the UK reduces its numbers."

It turns out that while the SDSR said the UK would not be buying 138 aircraft, the UK government hadn't officially communicated this to the company designing, building and project-managing the decades-long aircraft development programme. Subsequent follow-up enquiries to the Ministry of Defence yielded only the additional information that no new figure would be announced until the next SDSR, due in 2015, by which time a general election will have taken place and a new government is likely to be in power. (Since then, suggestions have been made that a new figure could arrive sooner - with the Main Gate decision, due later this year - but we'll not get into that here.)

So last Thursday, when there was a briefing at DSEI by O'Bryan and Philip Dunne MP, the minister for defence equipment, support and technology, I felt I'd have my best chance yet to get to the bottom of this. How, I wanted to ask, can the UK's position simultaneously be to tell the public, through the SDSR, that the country would be saving money by buying fewer jets, but not inform Lockheed Martin? And how would this affect the hundreds of small and medium-sized enterprises in the UK F-35 supply chain - over 500 British companies are involved in the programme - who would presumably have to bear the brunt if the UK work-share is reduced?

This might seem an arcane and inconsequential point to stress, but it's an issue I feel has to be examined carefully. And, given how the other key F-35 decision in the SDSR - the switch from B to C - was adjudged to have been based on flawed assumptions and fundamental misunderstandings, it's not like the British government's handling of the programme has been characterised by standard-setting decision-making and in-depth appreciation of the knock-on impact of the choices being made.

Back in November 2011, O'Bryan explained what would happen if, in a hypothetical situation, a purchasing nation - Lockheed Martin refer to them as "partners" - were to dramatically reduce the number of F-35s it has on order. "Let's take the extremes of it," O'Bryan said then. "If somebody went from buying X amount to one airplane, would the [international] partners want them to have the same industrial plan? No. So we need to put the F-35 work into countries that are buying the airplane, and the rest of the partnership would insist that we do that as well."

If the UK order is reduced, and Lockheed rearrange the project's international work-share to reflect that, then British industry will no longer be making the widely-quoted 15% of every jet that the country's companies stand to build at the moment. The issue isn't so much that the programme as a whole will be smaller because fewer aircraft in total are being bought, though that is a concern too - it's that the UK's 15% of each plane will drop.

So if the UK were to end up halving its order - a far from uncommon estimate, albeit one sourced solely from analysts and the media, not the UK government, whose present commitment is to an initial 48 aircraft - it is not unreasonable to imagine that Lockheed Martin will rearrange the contracting as much as they can, and that figure of 15% of the whole of every aircraft would drop. And if UK industry did go from getting 15% of around 3000 F-35s to, say, 10% or less of that work, the losers are unlikely to be the big defence conglomerates. It is clear that certain companies - BAE Systems, for instance, which operates the only facility in the world that makes the tail section common to all three types of F-35; or Rolls Royce, which is the sole source for the STOVL lift system - can't lose work, even if the UK order was cancelled entirely. So the burden of any lost work that arises from a lower UK order will fall on the shoulders of British companies who supply products to the programme where alternative suppliers exist.

Even a single percentage point reduction in the work allocated to Britain would have a disproportionate impact on smaller companies, some of whom may lose a majority - or perhaps even all - of their work on the aircraft. At the DSEi briefing, alongside presentations from representatives of BAE, Rolls and ejection-seat specialists Martin Baker, journalists heard from Matthew Shaw of RE Thompson, who put the contrast in scale starkly: his managing director, Shaw explained, was also present on Thursday, which meant that eight per cent of the Hampshire-based precision engineering firm's entire workforce was in the room. By January, their expanded work on the F-35 programme will mean that their staffing count will have gone up 16%; millions of pounds of their own money are invested in new plant bought specifically for this programme.

So I asked my question, addressing it to O'Bryan and the minister. O'Bryan was patient and polite, as ever, as he reiterated the position he had outlined a little under two years ago: "There's no reason to speculate that there is a change in the UK profile," he said. "We have been given no indication from from the UK government that there will be, so we have made no plans for that." He also explained how the UK's status as the sole Tier One partner - the country committed an initial £2bn to the project, which has given a number of benefits including the integration of British services personnel into the test team at Patuxent River Naval Air Station who are test-flying the B and C variants - makes a difference to workshare calculations, and he also pointed out that some companies in the UK have prime contractor status on the programme, because without their products there would be no aeroplane. He did not know, however, how many of the 500 British companies had that status, though reckoned it was the majority.

Dunne, too, began with patient explanatory restatement. "We have a routine, regular, five-year assessment of our military needs," the minister said. "The next one's in 2015, the one after that we assume will be in 2020 unless the next government decides to change the system. And there are no changes to our plans."

I tried to press the point, but didn't get to finish my sentence. Interrupting the question, Dunne said, forcefully: "Let me put it another way: name another program from any military context anywhere in the world that has this durability and scale. Not one." End of discussion.

I began to doubt my own sanity: had I dreamed up the whole thing about the government cutting the Labour administration's order? Wasn't it all part of an SDSR that had stressed how the purse strings had to be tightened and that the profligacy and reckless over-commitment by the previous administration had to come to an end? I went back to the SDSR: but no, it's still there - page 26/7. So I called the MoD press office to ask how it's possible that the prime contractor and the minister seem to be proceeding as if the SDSR had never happened.

"We'll get back to you," they said.

And, on Friday morning, they did.

The planned reduction in the number of aircraft was, it turns out, tied to the decision to buy the C rather than the B. The thinking - unpublished in the SDSR but known to its authors - was that the greater range of the C meant that fewer aircraft would be required to deliver the same military capability. When that decision was reversed, and the STOVL version went back on the UK's shopping list, the reduction in fleet size was also reversed, and the planned UK buy went back from the unspecified lower number to 138.

As if all of this wasn't already reading like a draft for a plot line in a future episode of Yes, Minister or The Thick of It, the reason for my confusion seals the deal. I have been confounded by a point of grammar.

The item at the top of page 27 reads, in full: "...reduce our planned number of Joint Strike Fighter aircraft. Installing a catapult on the new aircraft carrier will allow us to switch to the more capable carrier variant." Had those two sentences been rearranged and written as one - perhaps, for instance: "...Installing a catapult on the new aircraft carrier will allow us to switch to the more capable carrier variant, reducing the number of Joint Strike Fighter aircraft we need to acquire" - the meaning would have been clear.

The cut in numbers is not a separate issue from the change to cat-and-trap planes - and had those two points not been in separate sentences, everyone would have known for all this time that Britain was still buying 138 jets. My colleagues in the aerospace and defence media who have been writing those detailed editorials and speculative future-force analysis pieces for the past three years could have saved themselves all that brain hurt had a sub-editor in Whitehall managed to grasp the utility of the semicolon. Three years of everyone in the world (apart from staff at Lockheed Martin and the MoD) assuming that the spiralling financial crisis that has seen unprecedented cuts to the British armed services would not, after all, affect the amount of money the country is intending to spend on the most expensive defence equipment programme in history could have been avoided with a little more care in the presentation of two sentences in a single government publication.

Only one small issue remains unresolved. Presumably, therefore, at the time I first spoke to O'Bryan in 2011 - at which point Britain was committed to buying the F-35C - the British government's position was that it was buying fewer than 138 of them, but had not informed Lockheed Martin. Or maybe they did try to tell them, but they put a comma in the wrong place.

In the wrong hands, the English language can be a dangerous tool. At least, this time, its misuse will not - it would appear - end up costing British businesses millions. And for that, at least - and finally - I am thankful. I await Main Gate, and/or the next SDSR, with interest.

[NRao]

Sept 28, 2013 :: Lockheed Inks Two More F-35 Contracts

The U.S. Defense Department has finalized a deal with Lockheed Martin Corp. for two contracts worth $7.1 billion for 71 more F-35 fighter jets.

The Pentagon announced the agreement for the sixth and seventh batches of aircraft, excluding engines, after the close of business yesterday. Both the government and the Bethesda, Md.-based manufacturer of the plane — the world’s largest defense contractor — called it a “significant milestone” that takes into account efforts to reduce the program’s cost.

The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is the U.S. military’s most expensive weapons acquisition program, estimated at $391 billion to develop and buy 2,457 of the fifth-generation, radar-evading fighter jets.

“With each successive production lot, unit costs have declined,” Lorraine Martin, a vice president at Lockheed and general manager of the F-35 program, said in an e-mailed statement. “That’s a trend we look forward to continuing as this program moves toward full rate production and operational maturity.”

It remains to be seen whether the cost reductions are enough to appease critics of the program on Capitol Hill. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the 2008 Republican presidential candidate, this month called the acquisition effort “worse than a disgrace” and “one of the great national scandals.”

His comments came just days after the Pentagon signaled an improving relationship with the contractor. Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, the general overseeing the effort, said the relationship between the military and Lockheed, along with engine-maker Pratt & Whitney, part of United Technologies Corp., is “orders of magnitude” better than it was a year ago.

The contract for the sixth batch, or lot, is for 36 aircraft and valued at $4.4 billion — about 2.5 percent less than the existing agreement.

The arrangement calls for 23 F-35As, the Air Force’s version of the plane that takes off in a conventional manner, at $103 million apiece; 6 F-35Bs, the Marine Corps’ variant that can fly like a plane and lands like a helicopter, at $109 million a piece; and 7 F-35Cs, the Navy’s version designed to take off from aircraft carriers, at $120 million apiece.

Lockheed will begin delivering planes from this agreement — which marks the first F-35 jets for Italy and Australia — in the second quarter of 2014.

The contract for the seventh batch is for 35 aircraft and valued at $3.4 billion — about 6 percent less than the existing agreement. The deal calls for 24 F-35As for $98 million a jet; 7 F-35Bs for $104 million a jet; and 4 F-35Cs for $116 million a jet.

The company will begin delivering planes from this agreement — which marks the first F-35 jets for Norway — in the second quarter of 2015.

Under the terms of the deals, Lockheed will pay for all cost overruns. However, the company and the government will split the costs of any so-called concurrency changes arising from System Development and Demonstration testing and qualification. On the other hand, if expenses are less than projected, Lockheed will get 80 percent of savings and the government will get 20 percent.

The F135 jet engine, which powers the aircraft, is funded under a separate contract.

[TSJones]

pic of short, stubby, aircraft.....enjoy



open another window in your computer and play this :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKYIC2MPjO0

and then go back and look at the pic of the f-35 while listening to karunesh.....

[NRao]

As a FYI only: 6th Gen engine in the making