F-35A Readiness Training Operational Utility Evaluation PDF

[neptune]

[quote="spazsinbad...
“The out-of-cockpit visibility in the F-35A is less than other Air Force fighter aircraft The head rest is too large and will impede aft [rear] visibility and survivability during surface and air engagements. Aft visibility will get the pilot gunned [down] every time in dogfights....[/quote]

God Help Them!, when the tailhook works, then they will be down to complaining about "ONLY" the headrest!

Definitely, things "they are improving"

[spazsinbad]

It is the end of civilization as we knew it. Guess what. The tailhook don't work all the time on any aircraft. Perhaps this will be the catalyst for all tailhooks to be improved and scrutinied until their shanks fall off - or it is the end of civilisation as we know it. Pity the poor bugger who drops one in the drink. Oh Lordy Lordy!

[KamenRiderBlade]

Isn't that why you have 4 arrest wires in a row?

Of course the tail hook won't catch on the exact same wire everytime, the amount of precision you would need to do that would have to be mechanical.

On that note...

Is there any good auto landing software for CATOBAR operations these days for our pilots?

Or just good auto landing software in general that can compensate for every factor in real time?

[spazsinbad]

'kamenriderblade' I was just being silly. The new CVNs have only three wires [go back one page on this other thread mentioned below] (and yes current CVNs have four). Precision always counts but how to account for ship movement in 6 degrees of freedom and pilot yips at the last second. If it all went like clockwork then there would be no LSOs - no landing aids - you name it. Practice makes perfect only once in a lifetime. The Hook will skip over a target wire if conditions not perfect - that is a given - however how to predict that unhappy event is not certain. Like everything else. If you read the main article (on this page: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopi ... t-315.html Tailored to Trap ) you will see that pilots like to make their own landings but will appreciate an autolanding when they may well be not up to the task for whatever reason. Read through that thread (read other articles if nothing else) to see some of the issues.

There has been always 'good' autolanding devices for most USN aircraft beginning from around the 1960s but not including all as they gradually perfected the devices. Often the ride for those in the aircraft is not very comfortable either whilst the crew must check and double check that all is in order and not rely only on the 'automatic' part but cross check with whatever else they have.

What JPALS will bring is even more accuracy for auto landings. Search for the JPALS thread for explanations. When JPALS and F-35s connected both ashore and afloat the precision auto landing will be as perfected as it can be for the time being so that even UAVs will be able to use it such as the current X-47B.

However the sea itself is unpredictable to offer small or large deviances at the last. LSOs try to compensate for this if required depending on circumstances. Here is a good story about onesuch:

http://www.hrana.org/documents/PaddlesM ... ch2013.pdf
&
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ct17otlE58k
&
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRURB7FdsII

Paddles Monthly March 2013
"LSO on the Ranger behind Bug. March 9, 1987 on recovering Rand “Atlas” McNally, USMC
Three hundred miles north of Midway Island, the deck of the USS Ranger was completely unworkable. A storm in the North Pacific spun giant swells around the ship like aquatic cornrows. By the time CAG cancelled further launches to focus on recovery, night had fallen and the undulating movement of the Pacific Ocean had intensified. At 65 feet, the swells matched Ranger’s height above water and everyone on the flight deck had to fight to stay upright. All the planes that could be diverted, bingoed to Midway and Hawaii, leaving the Tomcats and “Atlas” McNally in an A-6. Atlas had sheared his right main mount from a wild pitch and roll on an earlier attempt to get on board, cutting any chance of diverting to the beach. From the LSO platform LCDR John “Bug” Roach had to use every ounce of skill he had garnered over the years to help guide Atlas back onboard...."
___________

From the same PDF above is this story on page 1: (I seem to recall posting info about 'modes/cases' in regard to this article? Here it is: http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... ode#247185 )

Couple-Up for Safety!!
I heard a story a few days ago that reminded me of that simple phrase “Couple-up for Safety!” A Hornet was returning to the ship for a standard night Case III recovery. Having been flying at high altitude for an extended period of time, the aircraft rapidly descended to the ship into the hot, humid air that is the Gulf of Oman. Not surprisingly, the pilot ended up IFR in the cockpit with little relief from defogging attempts. The first attempt at recovery was terminated early when the pilot relayed that he could not see the ship at the ball call. So here’s where our simple phrase came into play. With recommendation from Paddles, the pilot coupled up for an ACLS Mode 1. The coupled approach, closely monitored by Paddles, resulted in an uneventful arrestment, demonstrating one of the exact situations for which the system was designed. We are taught early by our senior Paddles and the schoolhouse that the Mode 1 is to be used when the pilot’s ability to land the aircraft safely is degraded; be it IFR in the cockpit, injury, 0-0 conditions, old guys & Marines (editor’s addition), or maybe even just returning to the ship after an 8 hour mission over Afghanistan. Depending on your airwing, you may not see many mode 1s at the ship. So how do you really know that it’s going to be working correctly for these situations?..."

[KamenRiderBlade]

Why are they dropping the number of wires to 3?

[spazsinbad]

Vaguely I recall reading it was due to the better equipment on offer ARC and then ARG I think (ARC=Aircraft Recovery Control System which improves existing gear ) and (ARG=Advanced Recovery Gear? which is the new gear with quite different technology in some places plus a lot more computerisation). I'll be looking around for an actual answer to the question why 3 instead for 4 wires. In part here is an answer as well as some pondering. HMAS Melbourne had 6 wires in the Sea Venom / Gannet era then only 5 in the A4G / S2E-G era. It was not practical to have the 6th wire which did not have enough pull out distance when used by heavier aircraft. I'll suspect that better technology and maintenance and better landing aids will give a hint to the original question. Here is what I found in one PDF:

Advanced Recovery Control (ARC)
https://www.navalengineers.org/SiteColl ... 0Paper.pdf (107Kb)

ABSTRACT
Aircraft Carriers and their respective air wings are the backbone of the Navy. They provide force projection in areas of the globe that will not permit the United States to maintain air bases. The ability to Launch and Recover Aircraft is a key function of the Aircraft Carrier. This must be accomplished in a safe and reliable manner. The Advanced Recovery Control (ARC) System was introduced to improve the arrestment process. ARC will aid in the arrestment process by reducing maintenance, reducing the number of critical safety items (CSIs) and eliminate current single points of failure associated with the legacy system. Even with these benefits, there has been a learning curve associated with implementing this system....

...The MK 7 MOD 3 Arresting Gear has operated in the fleet for decades and provides the reliability and safety that is demanded of Aircraft Carrier Operations. Even so, the MK 7 Arresting Gear had issues dealing with Critical Safety Items (CSIs) which are by definition critical system components that if they fail the resulting failure could be catastrophic. CSIs are components that require very meticulous inspection and are very costly to maintain in a design. Additionally the legacy process of controlling the arresting gear relies heavily on voice communication. The other concern is that as new aircraft are being designed to accommodate greater mission flexibility, their payloads, weight and energy levels during arrestment are increasing. The MK 15 Advanced Arresting Gear is the Navy’s Long Term solution to these issues. However the Navy needed an interim Arresting Gear enhancement that would allow the MK 7 to eliminate CSI’s, improve its performance and enhance its control capability. The Advanced Recovery Control System was designed to meet that need. ARC is currently installed on the CVN 76 and is gearing up for its first deployment. ARC is also installed on the CVN 74....


"...MK7 MOD 3 Arresting Gear The Mark 7 Arresting Gear System aboard a CVN 68 class aircraft carrier consists of four engines configured with a Cross Deck Pendants (CDP) for conventional fixed wing aircraft recovery and one barricade engine for emergency landings. For CVN 76 and CVN 77, the MK7 Arresting Gear System consists of two dedicated pendant engines and two additional engines that can be configured either for a CDP or a barricade. The Arresting Gear’s primary function is to safely land the aircraft it is set for in a controllable manner. This System uses hydraulics to control the run out of the arresting gear....

...During air operations on an aircraft carrier, the NAVY desires the capability to recover aircraft as quickly as possible. At times the rate of recovery can average between 35 and 45 seconds. Aircraft are in patterns and proceed to come in glide slopes for recovery one right after the other. In order for the deck to be “green”, signaling that recovery is possible, aircraft that have been recovered must taxi away from the landing area, and the purchase cable must be retracted....

...CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the ARC program allows for the improvement of the MK7 MOD 3 recovery and maintenance processes with technology infusion. This technology consists of embedded control, enhanced displays, and sensor suites. ARC is a success in that it improves arresting gear operations, reduces maintenance, improves performance and eliminates CSIs.

[spazsinbad]

ADVANCED ARRESTING GEAR ENGINE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM
N88-NTSP-A-50-0127/I - FEBRUARY 2002

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... i_2002.pdf (122Kb)

"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) will provide the U.S. Navy with the ability to recover all existing and projected carrier based tailhook-equipped air vehicles well into the twenty-first century. The AAG will be back fit on existing CVN 68 class aircraft carriers and forward fit on CVNX class carriers. The AAG is responsive to the CVNX MNS (M070-88-96).

The Advanced Arresting Gear Engine (AAGE) replacement program will be designed to improve arresting gear structural integrity margins of safety from current MK-7 levels to values needed for future Fleet operational requirements. In addition, the new AAGE will be designed to provide a total life cycle cost savings by reducing both operational and maintenance costs when compared to the MK-7 Arresting Gear. The AAGE will also provide new operational capabilities, including the ability to safely and efficiently recover both heavier and/or faster aircraft and lightweight unmanned air vehicles (goal) that may enter the Fleet in the coming years....

...The AAG system consists of four units, where a unit is defined as a single recovery wire and associated equipment. It is envisioned that the AAG deck configuration will utilize a “3 + 1” recovery wire configuration, where a maximum of three recovery wires are rigged on three of the units at any given time. The remaining unit may be utilized as a spare, enabling a recovery wire to be rigged in the event one of the other units becomes unavailable.

A primary goal of the AAGE is to allow recovery operations to be executed using significantly fewer sailors in the arresting gear crew. The AAGE system will have an embedded Health Monitoring (HM) system and an embedded performance monitoring system. Using Conditional Based Maintenance (CBM) and HM will allow for the monitoring and diagnosis of the Catapults and Arresting Gear. CBM/HM will instrument critical parameters and use the data obtained to determine the “health” of the systems. Using these techniques, maintenance requirements can be determined conditionally rather than the current event or time-driven method."

[spazsinbad]

Another story that goes over info we know already perhaps organised differently with some extra bits perhaps in excerpts below...

DoD report: F-35 training is premature (DOCUMENT) 15 Mar 2013 By LAUREN SAGE REINLIE / Daily News

http://www.nwfdailynews.com/military/to ... t-1.112288

"...Toth said training student pilots, even on the limited-capability aircraft, allows them to set a foundation for the future of the program and create a cadre of instructor pilots.

In addition to the pilot training, a large number of aircraft maintainers are receiving hands-on experience with the jet and learning what it takes to get it off the ground each day, he said.

“When the aircraft is fully functional and capable, we will already have the maintainers in place and we will have pilots that are already able to operate the aircraft,” he said.

Although full functionality is still several years off, Eglin is set to receive jets with additional capabilities this year.

By the end of the month, Lockheed Martin should deliver its first Block 2 to Eglin, said Kyra Hawn, a spokeswoman for the company. The jets will have additional weapons engagement capabilities.

Eglin should receive a second Block 2 jet shortly after and have a total of 24 by the end of the year, Toth said.

Eventually, the Block 1 aircraft also will be upgraded, although that was not initially in the plan.

Toth said Lockheed Martin has realized those planes also must be upgraded to be functional for the services.

Hawn said the malfunctions with the helmet-mounted display and the radar are being addressed, and were not designed to be fully functional with the early-version aircraft at Eglin now...."

Best to read the entire long article for context anyway.

[SpudmanWP]

I don't know if this a case of a mis-quote or one of the right hand not knowing what the left is doing....but the FY2013 budget has $147 million set aside for LRIP upgrades.

[spazsinbad]

Not being USAF nor a BOOM Refueller I am wondering about this photo - what is the pilot doing? Thanks. BTW the headrest houses the airbag as shown in second foto.

[SpudmanWP]

what is the pilot doing

My first reaction was "doing a bad salute"... but upon further review, I would say shielding his eyes from the sun.

Here is a good video of the ejection seat tests.

[spazsinbad]

Point taken about salute but the NAVY salutes that way so perhaps a NAVY Test Pilot is doing some BOOM refuelling? Yeah the videos are mentioned in the ejection seat thread but I'll repeat the info below again about the source of the screenshot (there are other ejection test videos on the other threads):

EDIT: And point taken about 'shielding eyes from sun'. Looking directly at the sun without special 'welding' strength goggles is stupid for sure. I did it once in an A4G (with dark & clear visors down) looking through gunsight glass at a Mirage IIIO 'booming' up into the sun (as they do). NEVER AGAIN!

F-35 VIDEO 4 – F-35 ESCAPE 13 May 2009
Video Story:
http://www.baesystems.com/video/BAES_02 ... 6471436000

Direct Video Download:
http://www.baesystems.com/cs/groups/pub ... dition.mp4 (11Mb)

[the32notes]

Why are they dropping the number of wires to 3?

I remember watching a NatGeo episode on the USS Ronald Regan

They stated that, the wires were reduced because they decided to conserve the use of wires.

You see as the wires get used, they get weaker, and eventually have to be replaced. Since there is only a limited supply of wires onboard, the wires must not be used to their maximum strength in order to extend longevity.

This is one of the reasons why there is a "bring back load" An aircraft cannot land unless it is at a certain weight.

In the closing days of the Gulf war, F-18s and F-14s had to jettison some of their bombs in order to meet the weight requirement.

But by reducing the number of wires installed, the wires can now be replaced more often. Thus increasing the bring back load of the planes.

According to Pilots, the size of the landing box or the area where the wires are located, is still the same, the wires are simply further apart. So it doesn’t bother them much



I hope this helps

[KamenRiderBlade]

That makes sense, but what happens to the bombs they jettison, I hope somebody goes and recovers them?

[spazsinbad]

'kamenriderblade' said: "That makes sense, but what happens to the bombs they jettison, I hope somebody goes and recovers them?" Nope. The bombs are not armed and often dropped in special areas of deep water if that is known at time (depending on a lot of other factors). I'll imagine that with the expensive addons to otherwise dumb bombs these days that this is no longer a common occurence as it may have been in the era of really dumb bombs.