Page 113 of 114 FirstFirst ... 104105106107108109110111112113114 LastLast
Results 1,681 to 1,695 of 1702

Thread: What is up with the F-35? Part II

  1. #1681
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    3,853
    Quote Originally Posted by jlvfr View Post
    Tbh, I see France rebuilding the Rafale into a new version embodying stealth, a new engine and electronics. I'd be willing to bet France & Dassault have the next 20 years for the Rafale mapped...
    They just greenlit the F4, which will replace the Mirage 2000 C/D/N from 2025 and will be mostly an electronics and software mod focused on strike missions - including taking over the nuclear strike role.

    There are plans to start development of a "F5" (or whatever they will call it) that will basically be a Gen 4.5 aircraft with airframe modifications to embody LO supplanted heavily by a further upgraded SPECTRA ASC system. Realistically could be a possible starting point for a cooperative development. The German idea seems to be mostly a network-centric approach that could use such an airframe to host the necessary hub for data aggregation and target selection for accompanying UCAVs outfitted in a mission-specific modular fashion.

    When looking over sixth-generation concepts in the US i'm kinda missing basic development on some natural candidate electronics approaches btw. Airborne laser communications terminals for global data networking via DRS satellites for example. I mean, we've been working on that for a while, and it's likely we'll still see one even for Tornado still (beyond the prototype tests that have been done).

    Quote Originally Posted by jlvfr View Post
    Bit expensive... but they come come up with some arrangement with a neighbour flying them, to let a few german pilots fly there.
    Don't really need any new arrangements - i mean, the Dutch military is pretty much integrated these days...

  2. #1682
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,527
    The electronics part is very hush hush in the us.

    For example the f35 has built in madl, which is a phased array based directional data link, but how that's achieved is not discussed publicly beyond the very basics.

    The get also has a satellite link, but that's not discussed also.
    Last edited by citanon; 20 May 17, at 01:04.

  3. #1683
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,225
    The upgrade, which the company is calling the F135 Growth Option 1.0, could be cut into the existing production line by the early 2020s, said Matthew Bromberg, president of Pratt & Whitney military engines.

    Pratt & Whitney recently completed performance tests of an early version of the system, called the fuel burn reduction demonstrator engine, which proved that the upgrade could improve thrust by up to 10 percent and reduce fuel consumption by up to 6 percent, he said.

    “It’s very common, so we could drop this upgrade into any one of the three variants. It would be compliant with the partner requirements and go to foreign partner countries. It would be cost neutral, so the upgraded JSF motor with Growth Option 1.0 would be the same price as the existing motor.”
    More thrust and less fuel burn while remaining cost neutral? Cheers to the boys at P&W, this is the right way to try to keep a sole source contract.

    http://www.defensenews.com/articles/...engine-upgrade
    Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 01 Jun 17, at 22:09.

  4. #1684
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,527
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    More thrust and less fuel burn while remaining cost neutral? Cheers to the boys at P&W, this is the right way to try to keep a sole source contract.

    http://www.defensenews.com/articles/...engine-upgrade
    Hip hip hurray!

  5. #1685
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Mar 08
    Posts
    1,900
    Who knows, maybe we'll see a supercruising F-35 one day.

  6. #1686
    Patron
    Join Date
    07 Oct 14
    Location
    San Jose, CA.
    Posts
    251
    Mitsubishi Heavy unveils first F-35 stealth fighter assembled in Japan

    http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/201.../#.WTWvn2jyuUk

  7. #1687
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    1,773
    Oxygen system ground the USAF's F-35s?

    Wasn't this a source of problems allready?

  8. #1688
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    8,396
    Its been a problem with a couple of airframes. F-35, F-22, F-18 and the T-45.

    https://news.usni.org/2017/06/07/nav...ystem-failures

    Maybe we need to go "old School" and carry O2 onboard instead of generating it
    Last edited by Gun Grape; 14 Jun 17, at 04:04.
    Its called Tourist Season. So why can't we shoot them?

  9. #1689
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,225
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Grape View Post
    Its been a problem with a couple of airframes. F-35, F-22, F-18 and the T-45.

    https://news.usni.org/2017/06/07/nav...ystem-failures

    Maybe we need to go "old School" and carry O2 onboard instead of generating it
    The old Hornets carry LOX onboard but have hypoxia incidents at similar rates to the Super Hornets using OBOGS. The issues with the F-22 were eventually traced to problems with the G-suit being too constricting rather than a lack of O2 being delivered or contamination of the air. Although not before installing an automatic backup system.

    Apparently there's no good way to measure the quality of air being delivered short of lots of bulky instrumentation that doesn't fit aboard a fighter, so tracing these issues down has been elusive across the services.
    Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 14 Jun 17, at 14:20.

  10. #1690
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,527
    Quote Originally Posted by jlvfr View Post
    Oxygen system ground the USAF's F-35s?

    Wasn't this a source of problems allready?
    To add further to the mystery so far only A and C models are affected even though B uses the same system.

  11. #1691
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    1,773
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post
    To add further to the mystery so far only A and C models are affected even though B uses the same system.
    Diferent pipping/cabling because of the VTOL engines?... yeah, weird, I know but this is getting into that territory...

  12. #1692
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,527
    Quote Originally Posted by jlvfr View Post
    Diferent pipping/cabling because of the VTOL engines?... yeah, weird, I know but this is getting into that territory...
    You could be right. Hypoxia incidents seem to be real hard to pin down.

  13. #1693
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,527
    http://www.defensenews.com/articles/...onal-customers

    With block buy in place f35a costs could drop below$80 million per plane by 2020.

  14. #1694
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    15,824
    F-35 Passes 100,000 Hour Mark with No Crashes
    The beleaguered fighter passed an aviation milestone with only three major accidents to its name, zero fatalities.

    By Kyle Mizokami
    Jul 25, 2017


    The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter fleet hit the 100,000 flight hours mark without a single crash, a significant milestone for a major aircraft program. Although the F-35 has had three major fires, including one in midair, no planes have been lost in collisions with the ground, and there have been zero deaths and only one injury. This is in marked contrast to other fighters, particularly those during the Cold War, that had much, much higher accident rates.

    According to a press release sent out by Lockheed Martin, the F-35 fleet "recently exceeded 100,000 flight hours." That's a milestone at which aircraft accidents and losses begin to be measured, but the F-35 really hasn't had that many.

    The F-35 fleet has had three "Class A" incidents, defined by the Department of Defense as accidents involving $2,000,000 or more in damage to the aircraft and loss of life or permanent disability to the aircrew. In 2014, an F-35A caught fire preparing for takeoff at Eglin Air Force Base. The pilot was able to shut the aircraft down and escape unharmed. In September 2016, another F-35A caught fire after tailwinds pushes hot air into the aircraft's power pack. In that incident, the pilot sustained burns to his neck, head, and face. In November 2016, a Marine Corps F-35B caught fire in midair but the pilot was able to land the aircraft.

    Among currently flying U.S. Military aircraft, the Air Force's F-15 Eagle has a lifetime Class A accident rate of 2.36 per 100,000 hours of flight, with a spike early in the Eagle's flying career and a relatively low accident rate 10-30 years after reaching operational status. The F-22 Raptor has a relatively high rate at 5.49 per 100,000 hours.

    Among the aircraft the F-35 is meant to replace, the new fighter's safety record is par for the course or an improvement. The Navy's F/A-18 Hornet averaged approximately 2.84 Class As per 100,000 hours between 1990 and 2013, while the F-16 has a lifetime Class A rate of 3.45 per 100,000 hours. In 2002, the Los Angeles Times reported that the lifetime Class A rate for the AV-8B Harrier was 11.44 per 100,000 hours.

    In the early years of supersonic flight, Class A incident rates were far, far worse than what they are today. During the 1960s, the Air Force's F-100 Super Sabre fighter had an average of 21 Class A mishaps per 100,000 hours, and out of 2,294 Super Sabres bought by the Air Force, 889 were lost to accidents. According to an FAA publication on high performance aircraft, "in 1958 alone there were 116 F-100 accidents, which killed 47 pilots."

    The most dangerous fighter of the post World War II era may have been the F-104G Starfighter. A variant of the F-104 flown by the West German Air Force, it racked up an appalling 139 accidents per 100,000 flying hours. The Luftwaffe lost 30 percent of its Starfighters to accidents.

    Compared to Cold War figures, the F-35 is a very safe aircraft. Compared to relatively newer planes it plans to replace, it is as safe as or safer. Almost all high performance fighter aircraft lose an aircraft or two during the developmental phase. What's remarkable about the F-35 is that no confirmed cases of planes have been lost to fires, crashes, or any other cause—period. (The 2014 fire at Eglin Air Force Base caused an estimated $50 million in damage, and there are conflicting reports as to whether the plane was written off as a total loss or not.)

    Three Class A incidents in 100,000 hours of flight actually isn't a bad number at all, especially for an aircraft still in development—most aircraft experience a spike in accidents early in their careers, as design or quality control problems surface. Accident rates tend to drop as these problems are ironed out. If the F-35's low accident rate holds, it could be one of the safest fighters in U.S. military history.
    __________

    Well, some good news at least.
    Far better it is to dare mighty things, than to take rank with those poor, timid spirits who know neither victory nor defeat ~ Theodore Roosevelt

  15. #1695
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,225
    According to Spain's major newspaper El Pais, the Spanish are looking at a combined buy of F-35's for both the Air Force and Navy. The Navy wants 15 F-35Bs to replace the Harriers on Juan Carlos I. The Air Force wants 45-50 F-35As to replace their F-18 fleet to move to an EF2000/Eurofighter/F-35 mix. A combined purchase will give Spain more negotiating power than if each service were to try to negotiate independently, particularly since Spain declined to join the F-35 consortium when originally invited. A final decision is expected in 2018.

    https://elpais.com/elpais/2017/06/05...rno_rsoc=TW_CC
    Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 26 Jul 17, at 17:47.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 11 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 11 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Sig P250, Part 2
    By GraniteForge in forum Small Arms and Personal Weapons
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 26 Nov 08,, 00:04
  2. What part do you disagree with?
    By Roosveltrepub in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 22 Apr 08,, 16:52
  3. Who wants to be a part?
    By joey2 in forum International Politics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 22 Nov 06,, 00:31
  4. I did my part
    By bren in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08 Nov 06,, 10:49

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •