Forum: F-35 Lightning II

From the USAF & USN Nov 2nd "HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE -- SUBCOMMITTEE ON TACTICAL AIR AND LAND FORCES"

F-35A

Quote:

The Commander, Air Combat Command (COMACC) remains the Air Force's decision authority for declaring the F-35A's Initial Operational Capability (IOC). His decision will be based on achieving sufficient levels of readiness in both capability and capacity, and will not be driven by a specific date. Last June, COMACC detailed the specific capability and capacity criteria required for F-35A IOC. These included validation and acceptance of the F-35 Operational Requirements Document (ORD)-compliant Block 3 mission system software through the Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) process. This will demonstrate the Air Force's ability to employ the F-35A in Offensive Counter Air and Suppression / Destruction of Enemy Air Defense missions in Anti-Access / Area Denied environments. In addition, Air Force pilots and maintainers must be validated as trained and ready to conduct operations, with all operations and logistical support elements ready and in place. In June 2010, based on this criteria, COMACC estimated the Air Force would be able to declare the F-35A IOC in 2016.

The Air Force's position on IOC remains unchanged. We will declare IOC for our F-35As based on achieving the required ORD-compliant capability and capacity criteria, and not on a specific date. We are currently analyzing the impacts to program delivery timelines due to the most recent program restructure; the results of this analysis will be available later this year. Upon completion, the Air Force will reevaluate the IOC estimate, but we currently expect up to a two year delay.

The decision to declare IOC after IOT&E is, IMHO, the biggest departure from the plan that the USAF has made. However, it is the last sentence that has me wondering. Since the SDD program is still on track to complete SDD in 2015 and ITO&E takes about a year (hence the June 2010 estimate of a 2016 IOC), what can the USAF be thinking about when it mentioned an expected 2 year delay (to 2018)? Did you notice that unlike the Marine and USN requirements, the USAF did not specify a number of IOC aircraft nor did it specify the ability to deploy yet it is the only service thinking of a two year delay.

F-35B

Quote:

The Initial Operational Capability (IOC) is determined by the service, based on both the program’s performance and how the service defines IOC. For the Marine Corps F-35B, IOC is defined as a squadron of ten aircraft able to execute the full range of TACAIR directed mission sets and to deploy on F-35B-compatible ships and austere expeditionary sites. The Marine Corps plans to achieve IOC with a multi-mission capable Block 2B aircraft as described in the JSF Operational Requirements Document (ORD) CN-3.

As usual, the Marines are charging ahead (pre ITO&E) with an IOC date based on 10 planes at Blk2B.

F-35C

Quote:

For the Navy F-35C, IOC is defined as a squadron of ten ORD compliant Block 3 aircraft that are ready to deploy and have completed Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E).

The USN F-35C plan is for 10 planes at Blk3 and post ITO&E (like the USAF).

F-16.net Sponsor

I did a little more digging and have come up with what the TBR did to the schedule. It's biggest affect on the schedule was the decoupling of the F-35A/C from the F-35B's development. What this added to the schedule was a lot of repetitive test test flights their associated test points. Here is a graph from a June 2011 presentation that shows the schedule before and after the TBR.

Notice that the extra time & testing (due to decouple) needed extended SDD from mid 2015 to early 2016. However, I think they can easily bring this back into 2015 due to the track record that the program has been maintaining in relation to being ahead of schedule (in test flights and points) this year (see second graph below).

Further, given that the F-35B has come back significantly since it's "probation" and if it maintains this record, I can see them "re-coupling" the SDD program in a year or two.

@Spudman....... No, I don't think they will recouple the F-35B back in. By keeping it seperate they can create the illusion of faster progress when a single flight can knock of three test points for all three fleets.

alloycowboy wrote:

@Spudman....... No, I don't think they will recouple the F-35B back in. By keeping it seperate they can create the illusion of faster progress when a single flight can knock of three test points for all three fleets.

Can you explain what you mean? That was not clear to me.

Spudman wrote:

The decision to declare IOC after IOT&E is, IMHO, the biggest departure from the plan that the USAF has made. However, it is the last sentence that has me wondering. Since the SDD program is still on track to complete SDD in 2015 and ITO&E takes about a year (hence the June 2010 estimate of a 2016 IOC), what can the USAF be thinking about when it mentioned an expected 2 year delay (to 2018)?

I wonder if the USAF is looking ahead at the budget and assuming that Congress or DOD leadership will instruct them to delay acquisition - under the guise of ensuring fleet aircraft are fully production ready - in order to save short term money? That might be a safe bet for them.

What must be compared is the increased cost of LRIP vs FRP F-35s and the cost of SLEP's F-16 & their increased need for support.

SpudmanWP wrote:

What must be compared is the increased cost of LRIP vs FRP F-35s and the cost of SLEP's F-16 & their increased need for support.

SWP,

With other govt. opinions being published to hold up training, how could transitioning the entire LRIP 2 planes and organizations into the SDD test point program. No doubt these a/c are not finely instrumented but with the immense computing frame availability (mission computer) and the AESA broadband data links, one imagines that a focused test program for given test points could be achieved quickly.

SDD purist will 'Howl" at the idea of tampering with their sacrosanct program but the reality of budgets and timelines that are the "Hanging Axe" in Congress (McCain, today!), and adjustments must be considered.

Where could SSD dates be advanced if LRIP1&2 are moved into SDD? This would certainly give the program the image of trying to comply with these unanticipated (this order of magnitude) requirements.

neptune wrote:

With other govt. opinions being published to hold up training, how could transitioning the entire LRIP 2 planes and organizations into the SDD test point program.

Well I guess we could gather up all the TPS graduates and form a Test Pilot Fighter Wing (TPFW) to operate these jets and try to meet established IOC timelines?

Forum: F-35 Lightning II

Latest News on F-35 IOC Service Plans