Forum: General F-35 Forum

My favourite quotes but you may have your own when you JUMP with the URL?

TOM BURBAGE Lockheed Martin's F-35 General Manager : 27 Nov 2011 - By Vago Muradian.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... c.facebook

"...Q. What is a ballpark target price you're shooting for? Is it an $80 million airplane?

A. It's somewhat subject to the quantities that are bought, but if you look at the program of record today and you come down over the course of the program, it would be down in the $70 million range if you buy it in today's dollars....

...Q. With regard to flight testing, is the aircraft's actual performance matching the computer models?

A. Our models today are very good in the large part of the flight envelope; there are still parts of the flight envelope that are non-linear, and the behavior of the airplane is not completely predictable in the transonic regime and stuff like that. We basically are seeing things that are pretty much aligning with our forward-looking projects and in the bulk of the envelope it's pretty much right on.

All three variants have had a good year flying, we're about 10 percent ahead on both flights and flight test points for all three models. We had a great at sea period on the USS Wasp, I think we showed that not only can the airplane can perform on the ship, but that the ship doesn't need any major modifications to handle the airplane. And that was a question mark.

Q. The issue of the software has been raised as an area of concern by senior officials. How do you respond to that?

A. I would say the software stability on this airplane has been nothing short of tremendous. We have about 80 percent to 85 percent of that code flying on the airplane today, another 10 percent will come on at the end of this year when what we call Block 2A goes into flight test. Most of the remaining development is in the area of sensor fusion and weapons. So I think we're very, very satisfied with the way the software has been performing to date...."

F-16.net Sponsor

I liked Tom Burbage 's comment on the F-35's range as this had been bone of contention among some Canadian Journalists and Political Bloggers.

Q. Let's talk about the need for the airplane. Critics say a short-range aircraft isn't needed.

A. I would challenge the short-range piece of it; the airplane has a very high fuel fraction, the amount of fuel it carries relative to its total weight. All three airplanes are considered long-range fighters; they maybe are shorter range compared to bombers or things that have lots of fuel in them, but the fuel quantity does drive the size of the airplane and we are somewhat constrained by that in a fighter-type airplane.

Q. And it's beyond the F-16 and other aircraft it will replace?

A. Considerably beyond. And in the stealthy mode, we carry the weapons internally, which lowers the drag, which also increases the very long-range performance that we're seeing. We're meeting our requirements for range today for all three variants.

Q. How did you decide what capabilities a 5th generation aircraft like the F-35 should incorporate?

A. By reading F-16.net! Cheers

Canadian newspapers will screw up the reports on this interview in 3, 2, 1

I love the fact that on shorter range flights it has lots of fuel to AFTERBURN! More than twice the fuel of the Viper. Sweet!

Forum: General F-35 Forum

Tom Burbage - LM F-35 GM Interview 27 Nov 2011