F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

[tomahawk6]

I will paraphrase a popular cartoon character I will gladly buy you a hamburger for one right now. Kick the can down the road in hopes of killing it later. Canada needs a robust fighter that has range such as an F15. Its proven technology and it less expensive. If you want cutting edge go with fighter drones and you wont need pilots just gamers out of high school.

 

[CBH99]

I will paraphrase a popular cartoon character I will gladly buy you a hamburger for one right now. Kick the can down the road in hopes of killing it later. Canada needs a robust fighter that has range such as an F15. Its proven technology and it less expensive. If you want cutting edge go with fighter drones and you wont need pilots just gamers out of high school.

Wowa!!  Ssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhh... if talk like that gets seen by someone in Parliament, that's exactly what we'll get...

 

[dimsum]

If you want cutting edge go with fighter drones and you wont need pilots just gamers out of high school.

There will always be pilots.  They may not be the same MOSID but someone has to have the wherewithal to understand that they are actually flying a large piece of metal that can hit other pieces of metal with hundreds of folks inside.  Gamers may understand the "look and shoot" mission but it's not video games. 

I would encourage anyone thinking it's like a video game to read "Reaper Force" about the RAF Reaper program.  It's pretty enlightening how personal the crews take it even when they're half a world away.

 

[FJAG]

I will paraphrase a popular cartoon character I will gladly buy you a hamburger for one right now. Kick the can down the road in hopes of killing it later. Canada needs a robust fighter that has range such as an F15. Its proven technology and it less expensive. If you want cutting edge go with fighter drones and you wont need pilots just gamers out of high school.

For the info of the younger chaps amongst us:

;D

 

[HB_Pencil]

USAF F-35As for Eielson--note they are for Pacific, do not (for time being at least) have NORAD mission. That remains with F-22s at Elmendorf (and might some F-15EXs go to Alaska for NORAD?):

Mark
Ottawa

First F-35 on NORAD Duty will happen next year when the 148th is fully stood up in Vermont.

 

[HB_Pencil]

I will paraphrase a popular cartoon character I will gladly buy you a hamburger for one right now. Kick the can down the road in hopes of killing it later. Canada needs a robust fighter that has range such as an F15. Its proven technology and it less expensive. If you want cutting edge go with fighter drones and you wont need pilots just gamers out of high school.

Oh, which remote controlled fighter drone do you speak of? I'll take anything that has a program of record.

 

[MarkOttawa]

A simulation problem with F-35 testing:

Ongoing Legal Dispute Caused 2.5-Year F-35 System Delay

An ongoing legal dispute between the U.S. government and Lockheed Martin over intellectual property rights has emerged as the source of a 2.5-year-long delay in activating a key F-35 system required to complete initial operational testing and make a full-rate production decision, according to Lt. Gen. Eric Fick, the F-35 program executive officer.

The military’s open-air test ranges lack the capacity to fully test the F-35’s advanced capabilities, so the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) office is relying on the activation of the Joint Simulation Environment (JSE).

The JSE creates a synthetic world that allows operational testers to gauge the F-35’s performance in theater-level scenarios, with multiple aircraft flying against an adversary’s full arsenal of fighters, missiles and electronic warfare capabilities.

The JSE was supposed to be activated in late 2017, but is currently scheduled to achieve that milestone in July 2020 [emphasis added], Robert Behler, the head of the DOT&E, told lawmakers Nov. 13 during a hearing on F-35 readiness.

DOT&E has completed 91% of open air missions during the Initial Operational Test & Evaluation phase (IOT&E) required to qualify the F-35 for a full-rate production decision, but the testers still need to use the JSE to complete all of the testing. 

Fick acknowledged two weeks ago that an intellectual property dispute had delayed the activation of the JSE, but added more details about the dispute in his testimony to the House Armed Services subcommittee on readiness.

The JSE requires Lockheed to supply the software to enable a function called “F-35 In a Box,” Fick says. This is a software module that allows the JSE to virtually replicate each of the F-35’s sensor subsystems, along with the sensor fusion function embedded in the operational flight program. The  government then would add software modules to replicate various threats, including aircraft, weapons and sensors of various adversaries.

But a dispute arose because Lockheed asserted an intellectual property claim over nine specific algorithms that were included in the F-35 In a Box software package, Fick says.

The government responded by bringing in the Defense Contracts Audit Agency (DCAA) to review Lockheed’s records, Fick says. The DCAA’s auditors determined they could not find the proof in Lockheed’s records that the nine algorithms had been developed solely at Lockheed’s expense, Fick says. Since Lockheed failed to prove its claim, the DCAA determined the nine algorithms belonged to the government. 

Lockheed has appealed the DCAA’s decision to the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, which is still being adjudicated, Fick says.

The dispute over JSE feeds into a larger source of tension between the government and contractors over intellectual property rights...
https://aviationweek.com/defense/ongoing-legal-dispute-caused-25-year-f-35-system-delay

Mark
Ottawa

 

[tomahawk6]

https://www.stripes.com/news/us/power-struggle-over-f-35-comes-to-a-head-as-lawmaker-threatens-to-hold-up-contract-1.607669

Power struggle over F-35 comes to a head as lawmaker threatens to hold up contract


By AARON GREGG | The Washington Post | Published: November 17, 2019

The U.S. military’s most expensive weapons program seemed to be under threat from all sides at a recent hearing before the House Armed Services Committee, as skeptical lawmakers called out supply chain problems that have meant only a third of the Pentagon’s F-35 fighter jets are capable of carrying out all the missions for which they were built.

Ellen Lord, a former defense executive who is now the Pentagon’s top weapons buyer, admitted that the complicated IT system supporting the fleet’s maintenance infrastructure still falls far short of expectations. Lockheed Martin and the Pentagon’s Joint Program Office are still embroiled in a long-running dispute over who owns the F-35’s complicated algorithms, a debate that could chart the future of the program.

And some lawmakers criticized the terms of Lockheed’s arrangement with the government, saying overly generous intellectual property agreements threaten to lock Lockheed into a wasteful long-term profit machine with limited accountability.
Rep. John Garamendi, D-Calif., threatened to hold up a multibillion-dollar contract if fundamental questions aren’t resolved, suggesting there should be a broader sea change in how military agencies work with weapons builders.
“Heretofore, the contractors have had the long end of the lever, and the government has been on the short end of the lever. … That is going to change,” Garamendi told Lockheed Martin executives assembled at the hearing. “The power is shifting … with the fulcrum moving closer to the government’s side.”

Greg Kuntz, a Defense Department spokesman, said the department’s Joint Program Office “remains committed to aggressively reducing sustainment costs and improving mission capability rates,” adding, “We will continue to partner with Congress and Congressman Garamendi moving forward.”

more at link

 

[Kirkhill]

My guess is that due to the iterative method chosen to develop the F35 and its capabilities that the 2/3  of the fleet that are non-compliant are effectively "proto-type" aircraft.  That will be clogging up the arteries of the maintenance system with lots of "princesses" needing special care and consideration.

My solution would be to set those aircraft aside.  Focus efforts on the 1/3 that are in compliance and build future aircraft to that standard.  Adjust the maintenance programme to suit. Then initiate a separate project to bring the "proto-type" fleet up to the compliant standard.

This was always going to be a feature of the F35 programme. Traditionally proto-type dollars, and even some early model dollars, were lost dollars as the aircraft saw either no service or very short service lives once the field-tested, improved models came on line.  The F35 was sold on the basis that all aircraft would be operational aircraft. But it was also sold on the Continuous Improvement model which effectively implies that the goal posts are constantly moving down field which means that the delta between the initial prototype and the current field standard is always growing. 

You can't get there from here.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Apparently JASDF F-35As can't catch Tu-160:

Russian Tu-160 Mach 2 Bomber Reportedly Left Two F-35A Fighers Behind In The Skies Over Japanese Sea
https://theaviationgeekclub.com/russian-tu-160-mach-2-bomber-reportedly-left-two-f-35a-fighters-behind-in-the-skies-over-japanese-sea/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Quirky]

Apparent JASDF F-35As can't catch Tu-160:

Mark
Ottawa

Aircraft with lower top speed can’t catch aircraft with higher top speed, brilliant reporting by aviation geek. They say journalism isn’t dead... In the end you can’t out run a missile.

 

[YZT580]

I wonder how close he got before the TU160 knew he was there?

 

[tomahawk6]

Armed the F35 would have splashed him.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

The Aviationgeek article refers to a Spanish-language article in Sputnik, a Russian government owned news agency noted for its disinformation and Russian propaganda. Here is a Google translation of the Spanish language article:

Follow us on

Two fifth-generation American F-35A fighters took on a Tu-160 bomber under surveillance, but the Russian heavy aircraft performed a surprise maneuver.

The Russian newspaper Vzglyad, with reference to the Chinese edition Sina, wrote that the American fighters 'lost sight' of the Russian Aerospace Force bomber, who easily moved away from them.

    The Tu-160 was performing a routine flight on November 3 over the Japan Sea (also known as the East Sea) when two F-35s approached, one on either side, intending to escort him.

At this point, the Russian bomber suddenly accelerated, triggering the afterburner and increasing the speed to Mach 2.05, writes Chinese media.

Impressive acceleration

According to the publication, the two F-35A fighters also reacted, but a little too late. When the acceleration was turned on, the radar still detected the Tu-160, but the pilot no longer saw it.

The Chinese edition notes how the 110-tonne Russian aircraft was able to easily move away from the 13-tonne American fighters.

Fighters from NATO and Allied countries are constantly trying to control all flights of the Tu-160 and other Russian bombers.

 

[dimsum]

When the acceleration was turned on, the radar still detected the Tu-160, but the pilot no longer saw it.

Right, because F-35s are only able to engage targets seen by the Mk 1 eyeball. 

I wonder if the AMRAAM flies faster than Mach 2.05...

 

[OldSolduer]

Right, because F-35s are only able to engage targets seen by the Mk 1 eyeball. 

I wonder if the AMRAAM flies faster than Mach 2.05...

First of all most of what I know about fighter bomber stuff and the like I learned from Tom Clancy novels.

Doesn’t the AMRAAM fly at Mach 3ish?

Pretty gud for a infuntree guy eh?

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

AMRAAM is actually Mach four-ish.

It's a beast where speed is concerned.

 

[FJAG]

Right, because F-35s are only able to engage targets seen by the Mk 1 eyeball. 

I wonder if the AMRAAM flies faster than Mach 2.05...

Wikipedia:

Mach 4 (4,900 km/h; 3,045 mph)

:cheers:

 

[MarkOttawa]

Does US want Denmark to base F-35As in Greenland?

US wants Denmark to buy more fighter jets
US ambassador to Denmark claims NATO needs more aircraft power and strengthened surveillance in the Arctic

As the budget for the construction of the F35 hangar continues to rise, now reaching 1.1 billion kroner, the US ambassador to Denmark has encouraged Denmark to buy more F-35 fighter jets.

Denmark has bought 27 F-35 fighter planes from the US, but at least five of those will remain in Arizona, where the Danish pilots are been trained.

Ambassador Carla Sands is concerned that NATO’s aircraft power and surveillance capacities are not enough in the Arctic and that Denmark should fulfill three-year-old promises to strengthen defence and surveillance there [emphasis added].

Ambassador Sands referred to a report from the Ministry of Defence on the tasks in the Arctic from 2016, which show concern about the presence of Russian soldiers in the Arctic. Sands also believes the report shows that the lack of satellites means that Denmark does not monitor Greenland’s skies or waters well enough [emphasis added].

“There are not a lot of aircraft in Denmark. You have 38-40 F-16 aircraft today. It is actually a reduction in the number of aircraft, and Denmark should probably look into it,” Sands told Jyllands-Posten. However, according to the Ministry of Defence, Denmark only owns 30 F-16 planes

An unreachable promise to NATO

The ambassador’s remarks come a few days before the next NATO summit. On December 3 and 4, the NATO Heads of State and Government will meet in London, and it is expected that the US will carry on pushing the other countries to fulfill the 2 percent promise, as it has already demanded a plan to raise the budget from each NATO country.

At the Wales NATO summit of 2014, NATO countries vowed to keep defence spending to at least 2 percent of their GDP. As of 2018, only six members have achieved it: the US, Greece, the UK, Poland, Latvia, and Lithuania. Denmark spends 1.35 percent and plans to raise it to 1.5 by 2023.

“This is the conversation we are having with our NATO partners. We have all committed to try and meet the 2 percent target. I have been here three months, and I am struck by the remarkable strong partnership we have – both bilaterally with Denmark on security issues and also the conversation within NATO,” Stuart Dwyer, US vice ambassador, told TV2.
While Dpnald Trump is not the first US President to demand NATO countries to increase their budgets, his policy style makes it unclear what the consequences will be if NATO countries do not comply.

However, the minister of defence, Trine Bramsen, told Jyllands-Posten there are no plans to buy more fighter aircraft right now. Nor should Trump expect Denmark to present a plan for an increased defence budget at the London summit.
http://cphpost.dk/news/us-wants-denmark-to-buy-more-fighter-jets.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Trump says Bulgaria is buying F-35. It isn't and no indications it's planning to:

Remarks by President Trump and Prime Minister Borissov of the Republic of Bulgaria Before Bilateral Meeting [Nov. 25]
...
They’ve ordered some F-35s and some other things.  They buy a lot of military equipment from the United States — the best equipment in the world...
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-prime-minister-borissov-republic-bulgaria-bilateral-meeting/

Mark
Ottawa