Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 15 Aug 2016, 22:53
by lamoey
I see journalists are heading out to USS George Washington. Some early images from Combat Aircraft available:

http://www.combataircraft.net/2016/08/15/back-to-the-boat-dt-iii-starts-for-f-35c/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 16 Aug 2016, 00:56
by ngroot0
F-35C's that are visable in the pictures in the article:

CF-3 VX-23 SD-73
CF-5 VX-23 SD-75
169160 VFA-101 NJ-121
169162 VFA-101 NJ-123
169302 VFA-101 NJ-125

BuNo's need to be confirmed. These BuNo's were previously flying without modex (tail code NJ only) at NAS Fort Worth JRB. It would make sense they got these modexes now. The Weekly Update (https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a6 ... _11_16.pdf) says that five F-35C of VFA-101 would deploy on the USS George Washington. Perhaps the other two are NJ-122 (169161) and NJ-124 (169163). This is just a guess and BuNo's aren't certain yet.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 16 Aug 2016, 01:16
by spazsinbad
Thanks 'lamoey' best photo I reckon is this one: http://www.combataircraft.net/wp-conten ... 6484_o.jpg

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 16 Aug 2016, 02:20
by SpudmanWP
nm

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 16 Aug 2016, 05:42
by jessmo111
http://www.defensetech.org/2016/08/15/p ... /?mobile=1

Info starting to come out.

Also I wonder if Amy from AV got to go?
Did solomon get an invite? Lol.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 16 Aug 2016, 05:50
by jessmo111
BTW, I really can't wait to see how the Super Hornet community reacts when the F-35C kicks SH **** in every conceivable way.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 16 Aug 2016, 06:11
by spazsinbad
Thanks for the link 'jessmo111'. An excerpt about CarQual Details for the F-35C Instructor Pilots AFAIK.
PHOTOS: Navy F-35C Completes Final Carrier Tests
15 Aug 2016 Hope Hodge Seck

"ABOARD THE USS GEORGE WASHINGTON–The Navy is getting closer to declaring the carrier-variant F-35C ready for combat with a third and final round of carrier tests taking place this month off the coast of Norfolk, Virginia.

For the first time, operational pilots are getting a chance to fly the aircraft, with a dozen instructors from Fighter Squadron 101 out of Naval Air Station Oceana [NOPE they are from VFA-101 Eglin AFB but may have embarked from NAS Oceana] getting carrier-qualified this week with ten arrested landings and two touch-and-go maneuvers apiece.

The seven F-35Cs aboard the carrier George Washington got a lot of action Monday as test pilots and instructors conducted carrier qualifications...."

Source: http://www.defensetech.org/2016/08/15/p ... ier-tests/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 16 Aug 2016, 07:28
by spazsinbad

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 16 Aug 2016, 08:48
by spazsinbad

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 16 Aug 2016, 12:21
by endre
jessmo111 wrote:http://www.defensetech.org/2016/08/15/photos-navys-f-35-completes-final-carrier-tests/?mobile=1

Info starting to come out.

Also I wonder if Amy from AV got to go?
Did solomon get an invite? Lol.


Amy has left AV unfortunately. Lara Seligman is the new Aviation Week Pentagon reporter.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 17 Aug 2016, 00:27
by spazsinbad
Final flight tests underway for F-35C, the Navy's newest combat aircraft

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGc4Npg1oy0


Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 17 Aug 2016, 02:25
by spazsinbad
F-35C at Sea for U.S. Navy Development Test III
16 Aug 2016 USS George Washington (CVN 73)

"...Pilots and maintainers from VFA-101, also known as the Grim Reapers, based at Eglin AFB, Florida, and from the NAS Patuxent River Integrated Test Force team, are exceeding expectations during the test. Pilot carrier qualifications for VFA-101 were completed in two days, and the Pax River ITF has completed 125 test points and eliminated 101 test point requirements due to exceptional performance. [ https://washington73.wordpress.com/2016 ... lightning/ ]

Source: https://www.f35.com/news/detail/f-35c-a ... t-test-iii

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 17 Aug 2016, 04:06
by spazsinbad
F-35Cs Undergo Helmet, EW Tests Plus Aboard USS George Washington
16 Aug 2016 Colin Clark

"...The Navy, which will be the last of the three American services to declare their version of the Joint Strike Fighter ready for combat, filled two rooms below decks with gear to check more than 500 test points. The F-35Cs arrived the day before a C-2 Greyhound full of reporters flew out Monday to observe and interview. In addition to the five test pilots getting qualified, the first dozen operational pilots were aboard to get carrier qualified.

They’ll be testing the plane’s Electronic Warfare capabilities and its ability to land and take off in crosswinds and with asymmetric bomb loads. The pilots are checking out the third generation helmets to ensure the brightness of the symbology displayed does not interfere with their ability to see the carrier as they land at night — they are waiting for moonless nights before doing the tests. The seven aircraft aboard will be doing maximum weight and maximum power takeoffs.

During the George Washington‘s cruise, Navy Capt. James Christie told me the 70 maintainers aboard will work with Pratt and Whitney to do a complete engine swap of the enormous F135 engine. They’ll take it out and replace it. There’s been no reason, Christie told me, to do the engine replacement for the last 10 months because the “engines are very reliable.”

The ship will also test the performance of the Delta Flight Path software aboard the F-35C which allows the plane to routinely grab the Three Wire as it lands on the carrier. I did see at least two Two Wire landings [how many 'cross deck pendants on CVN-73?] while the new pilots [what will 'maus92' say? I say these 'new' pilots should be beached poimenantly! That's all folk.] were doing their qualifications. The software is very similar to the Magic Carpet software being installed on the Navy’s newer F-18s."

PHOTO: http://breakingdefense.com/wp-content/u ... 24x768.jpg

Source: http://breakingdefense.com/2016/08/f-35 ... ashington/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 17 Aug 2016, 04:08
by maus92
Interesting tidbit revealed by a pilot during an interview associated with DT-III:

The F-35 is a lot easier to fly and a lot more difficult to operate,” than the older F-18 Super Hornet, he said, because of the immense amount of data fusing required. Manufacturers and others hope that data load will be easier to manage with the eventual release of the newer, so-called block 3F software...."

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/20 ... re/130812/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 17 Aug 2016, 04:11
by spazsinbad
'maus92' doesn't get it - aircraft still under development so: "...Manufacturers and others hope that data load will be easier to manage with the eventual release of the newer, so-called block 3F software...." We hope so also but I guess not some people eh. Boy o boyo it is interesting to read the actual article - bits are excerpted below.... Thanks so much.... :mrgreen:
Navy Pilots Describe How the F-35’s Brains Will Change Air Warfare
Navy Pilots gave the F-35 rave reviews during a show-and-tell at sea, but questions remain about its troubled software.
16 Aug 2016 Patrick Tucker

"ABOARD THE USS GEORGE WASHINGTON – Navy pilots say piloting the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter on to the flight deck of U.S. aircraft carrier is almost like flying a plane that flies itself. The software aboard the new fighter could enable the military to train pilots faster and, in the event of a major conflict, possibly fly more sorties against the enemy. Pilots would spend less time throttling and figuring for flight conditions and more time coordinating with other aircraft, working with huge volumes of data, and managing complex missions against ever-more sophisticated adversaries....

...“The aircraft does a lot of stuff that, before, I would have to fight the aircraft,” said Marine Major Major Eric Northam with the VX-23 test squadron. The jet’s Delta Flight Path software, created by F-35 manufacturer Lockheed Martin has changed all that. “If I want to capture the barrier altitude that I’m climbing to … I dial in the altitude; it will climb up and capture it. If I want to capture the heading I can just use the pedals to dial in a new heading. I can keep my hands on the controls where I need to and then redirect the aircraft as required.”...

...“I can take off, type in an altitude, type in a heading, and just let the jet go out to fly,” said Lt. Graham Cleveland of the VF 101 “Grim Reaper” squadron, who said that pilots would probably keep the software engaged 99 percent of the time while flying, taking off, and landing. “Teaching the very basics will be easier … There’s still a man in the box. But it is safer, more efficient, easier to train to.”

The commander said the F-35’s software should allow pilots to learn how to takeoff and land from aircraft carriers sooner than was required in earlier fighter jets. “I think it will dramatically decrease the amount of flight hours needed to get to the boat,” he said.

“The F-35 is a lot easier to fly and a lot more difficult to operate,” than the older F-18 Super Hornet, he said, because of the immense amount of data fusing required. Manufacturers and others hope that data load will be easier to manage with the eventual release of the newer, so-called block 3F software.

In the meantime, the augmented piloting capability was on display aboard the George Washington. Cleveland said that Delta Flight Path would “significantly increase our ability to safely land aircraft….that could lead to more sorties,” he said.

A Stealth Aircraft the First Week of the War
In a major conflict, military officials expect the fighter jets flying initial combat missions would need to do more than just destroy air defenses in stealth mode. So the F-35 also features sophisticated artificial-intelligence enhanced electromagnetic warfare capabilities....

...ALIS consists of laptop that a pilot would take to the plane to take the bird’s temperature and a large number of servers to hold the program. Those servers are supposed to be on the aircraft carrier. Despite ample room below deck, ALIS was not aboard the George Washington, which relied on shoreside computers. “We are reaching back to ALIS support on the beach for our operations,” said Briggs. “The ship is not outfitted with the final production system. When we need ALIS information … we reach back through a satellite network, touching ALIS.”... [A lot of stuff about ALIS at source.]

...When asked if there was any concern about integrating ALIS onto existing carriers in accordance with the testing timeline (it’s supposed to be aboard the USS America for a second round of tests in October) Rear Admiral Roy Kelly, director of Joint Strike Fighter Fleet Integration for the Navy, answered “There is. There is.”"

Source: http://www.defenseone.com/technology/20 ... re/130812/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 17 Aug 2016, 04:36
by spazsinbad
Screenshot taken at beginning of this CVN-73 video shows the FOUR wire setup (with barricade sheaves between 3 & 4):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yG9uMzySyrc

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 17 Aug 2016, 06:53
by Jon
Here's all the aircraft. I uploaded a few samples so all the VFA-101 aircraft are covered. Appears to be two test birds, one Navy VFA-101 and three USMC VFA-101. I cropped some of the photos so the aircraft is larger in the frame.

CF-3 VX-23 SD-73

USNavy F-35C (CF-03) takes off from USS George Washington (CVN-73) during F-35C Development Test III on August 14th, 2016. [Lockheed Martin photo by Todd R. McQueen]


CF-5 VX-23 SD-75

USNavy F-35C (CF-05) assigned to the Salty Dogs of Air Test and Evaluation Squadron VX-23, prepares to land on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN 73) on August 15th, 2016. VX-23 is conducting its third and final developmental test (DT-III) phase aboard George Washington in the Atlantic Ocean. [USNavy photo by MCS. 3rd Cl. Wyatt L. Anthony]


169160 VFA-101 NJ-121 - USMC

USNavy F-35C #169160 assigned to the Grim Reapers of VFA-101, the Navys F-35C Fleet replacement squadron, launches off the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN 73) on August 14th, 2016. [USNavy photo by MCS. 2nd Cl. Kris R. Lindstrom]


169162 VFA-101 NJ-123 - USMC

USNavy F-35C #169162 assigned to VFA-101, the Navys F-35C Fleet replacement squadron, lands on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN 73) on August 14th, 2016 in the Atlantic Ocean. [USNavy photo by MCS. 2nd Cl. Kris R. Lindstrom]


169163 VFA-101 NJ-124 - USMC

USNavy F-35C #169163 assigned to the Grim Reapers of VFA-101, launches from the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN 73) on August 14th, 2016. VFA-101 aircraft and pilots are conducting initial qualifications aboard George Washington in the Atlantic Ocean. The F-35C is expected to be Fleet operational in 2018. [USNavy photo by MCS. 2nd Cl. Alex L. Smedegard]


169302 VFA-101 NJ-125 - USN

USNavy F-35C #169302 assigned to the Grim Reapers of VFA-101 launches from the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN 73) on August 15th, 2016. VFA-101 aircraft and pilots are conducting initial qualifications aboard George Washington in the Atlantic Ocean. The F-35C is expected to be Fleet operational in 2018. [USNavy photo by MCS. 3rd Cl. Bryan Mai]

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 17 Aug 2016, 08:53
by spazsinbad

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 17 Aug 2016, 09:50
by ngroot0
Jon wrote:169163 VFA-101 NJ-124 - USMC


I think 169163 is flying with NAVY on the back, at least in this picture: https://www.flickr.com/photos/36600796@ ... 5/sizes/k/
BuNo is hard to read though.
Edit: 'NAVY' is also readable in this picture: https://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedm ... 0/sizes/k/

NJ-126 was on the ship too, which is probably 169303 (not confirmed yet).

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 17 Aug 2016, 10:58
by neptune
It is truly satisfying to see these "gaggle"of F-35s finally on a flight deck. :)

Watch: F-35C Developmental Testing Aboard USS George Washington

Aviation Week’s

Pentagon Editor Lara Seligman

U.S. Navy aboard the USS George Washington Aug. 16 just off the coast of Norfolk, Virginia, for the final phase of developmental testing of the F-35C carrier variant....More

(nice flight deck ops)

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 17 Aug 2016, 13:16
by spazsinbad
AvWeak Video may be seen: https://www.facebook.com/avweek/videos/ ... 482947200/ (5.7Mb .MP4) [+ Slo Mo 3 Wire]

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 17 Aug 2016, 13:21
by sferrin
Solomon must be on suicide watch. :lmao:

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 17 Aug 2016, 22:50
by spazsinbad
F-35C Back at Sea for 3rd Round of Carrier Tests
17 Aug 2016 Chris Cavas

"...And this was only Day Two of nearly three weeks of expected flight operations aboard the George Washington....

...DT III will refine maximum power launches from all four of the carrier’s catapults and work to establish operating parameters with external and asymmetric weapons loading on the aircraft’s wings, along with certifying various systems for landing qualifications and interoperability. Logistics is also a feature of DT III, where an aircraft from VFA-101 will undergo an engine switchout.

VFA-101, with five aircraft, was on board to qualify 12 pilots in deck landings, said squadron commander Capt. James Christie. All the pilots will in turn become instructors, as VFA-101’s mission is to become the training squadron for other F-35C squadrons.

“We’re developing a syllabus,” Christie said, that will be used by pilots as they transition both from training aircraft and older F/A-18s into the 35C....

...As on all carriers, pilots perform the duties of landing signal officer (LSO), watching and grading every landing. One of VFA-101’s LSOs is Lt. Graham Cleveland, who is a veteran of all three F-35C at sea tests.

Both VX-23 and VFA-101 pilots were handling LSO duties aboard the George Washington. “It takes a village,” he said, as the test and evaluation and operational squadron LSOs mingled and shared opinions and expertise.

Like many of the pilots, Cleveland said the F-35C is a bit easier to fly than the F/A-18s – with a caveat.

“The 35 is a lot more easier to fly and a lot more difficult to operate,” he said. “Basic flying is easy but mission systems are more complex.”...

...VX-23’s task is detailed and rigorous – even at times tedious – as the squadron’s pilots conduct as many as 500 launch and recovery cycles to establish a wide range of operating parameters. The aircraft’s performance with a variety of weights and loads needs to be established, including how it handles when external weapons are loaded and carried in an uneven fashion....

...test pilots need to check how the plane handles in many configurations, including heavy weapons on one side but not the other, and different types of weapons loaded on each station.

One issue that rose during the aircraft’s development seems to have been solved. There no longer seem to be any significant problems with the tail hook, which in 2012 was revealed to have a number of reliability issues in catching the arresting wire. A redesign of the hook and its installation appears to have been successful. [no kidding]

Maj. Eric Northam of VX-23, the first Marine to fly the F-35C off a carrier, declared there were no problems with the hook. “We’ve had a very successful boarding rate,” he said. “One hundred percent so far.”

The carrier did not need special modifications to operate the F-35C, said commanding officer Capt. Timothy Kuehhas, although there were some software upgrades to some operating systems. About 100 crew members, he said, received handling and launch procedure training in the aircraft at the Navy’s carrier flight systems test site in Lakehurst, New Jersey...."

Source: http://www.defensenews.com/articles/f-3 ... rier-tests

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 17 Aug 2016, 22:58
by XanderCrews
sferrin wrote:Solomon must be on suicide watch. :lmao:



Presuming he doesn't think the whole think is a hoax designed all for him?

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 18 Aug 2016, 09:50
by spazsinbad
US Navy makes F-35C carrier qualification push
17 Aug 2016 Stephen Trimble

"...The F-35C also is being scrutinized for how its redesigned arresting hook performs the George Washington’s flight deck. In the first round of carrier testing aboard the USS Nimitz in November 2014, the F-35C’s resculpted tailhook performed flawlessly, with no unplanned missed landings in 122 attempts, according to a 2016 report by the Pentagon’s Office of Test Evaluation. Such testing includes some planned missed approaches to evaluate how the aircraft performs during a go-around.

But a follow-up deployment last October aboard the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower resulted in seven “bolters” in 62 attempted carrier landings. Those results may have been skewed, however, because one of the four arresting wires on the Eisenhower’s deck was out of service during the demonstration.

In dozens of attempted landings from 14 August to 17 August on the Washington, the F-35Cs had reported no unplanned missed landings, according to the F-35 joint programme office.

Carrier suitability also evaluates how the F-35C is maintained at sea. Operations require maintainers to perform checks of engines and auxiliary power units (APUs) below-deck inside the carrier’s hangar. The functional APU in the F-35C — Honeywell’s integrated power package (IPP) — vents hot exhaust upward from the top of the fuselage. The navy’s maintainers are monitoring whether the heat damages the hangar ceiling and how the emissions escape from within the hangar bay...."

Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... sh-428594/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 18 Aug 2016, 10:44
by spazsinbad
DVIDS PHOTOS PAGE 1 with more pages: https://www.dvidshub.net/search/?q=F-35 ... &sort=date


Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 19 Aug 2016, 06:16
by spazsinbad
Another DT-III & Magic Carpet story ('tearing up the FCLP runway') here: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=52249&p=350873&hilit=HOPE#p350873

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 19 Aug 2016, 12:05
by sferrin
"See? SEE!!! Like I said, clusterbombs!!! I TOLD you the F-35 is so crappy it would blow up runways!" - B.S.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 20 Aug 2016, 07:30
by Dragon029

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 20 Aug 2016, 08:20
by spazsinbad
Thanks for that - here is a funny bit...,

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 20 Aug 2016, 10:43
by popcorn
maus92 wrote:Interesting tidbit revealed by a pilot during an interview associated with DT-III:

The F-35 is a lot easier to fly and a lot more difficult to operate,” than the older F-18 Super Hornet, he said, because of the immense amount of data fusing required. Manufacturers and others hope that data load will be easier to manage with the eventual release of the newer, so-called block 3F software...."

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/20 ... re/130812/



Hmmm.. what a curious statement considering sensor fusion is intended to make life easier than harder, as attested to by countless F-35 pilots who are not shy to attach their names to their testimonies. Could be a case of an old dog having to learn new tricks and finding it more challenging? Having to unlearn stuff that has become second nature can be unsettling.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 20 Aug 2016, 10:57
by mk82
popcorn wrote:
maus92 wrote:Interesting tidbit revealed by a pilot during an interview associated with DT-III:

The F-35 is a lot easier to fly and a lot more difficult to operate,” than the older F-18 Super Hornet, he said, because of the immense amount of data fusing required. Manufacturers and others hope that data load will be easier to manage with the eventual release of the newer, so-called block 3F software...."

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/20 ... re/130812/



Hmmm.. what a curious statement considering sensor fusion is intended to make life easier than harder, as attested to by countless F-35 pilots who are not shy to attach their names to their testimonies. Could be a case of an old dog having to learn new tricks and finding it more challenging? Having to unlearn stuff that has become second nature can be a unsettling.


That is a very good thought popcorn. Lt Col " Chip" Berke (USMC) struggled initially when he transitioned to the F22 from 4th generation platforms. He had to unlearn 4th generation habits and way of thinking.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 20 Aug 2016, 11:04
by popcorn
Speaking in general, paradigm shifts can be brutal to those who resist.

“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
― Max Planck

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 20 Aug 2016, 14:41
by spazsinbad
LM F-35 Manager Update
18 Aug 2016 Jeff Babione

"...The pilots from VFA-101, the Grim Reapers, finished all 12 pilot carrier qualifications within the first two days and didn’t experience a single bolter. This kind of performance for fleet pilots is very important as they continue to prepare the F-35C for operational environments. Having confidence in the jet is critical for the U.S. Navy, and after completing 120 arrestments with 100 percent success, I believe their confidence is at an all-time high – mine certainly is!

The test team from the Pax River ITF is also completing significant work aboard the ship. During the first two flying days the team completed 125 test points. More importantly, they eliminated 101 test point requirements due to the exceptional performance of the jet and team. They are accomplishing significant testing daily and it will make DT-III another highly successful at-sea period."

Source: https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a6 ... _18_16.pdf (0.7Mb)

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 20 Aug 2016, 16:22
by yeswepromise
Gosh the CV sure is kicking butt.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 20 Aug 2016, 18:21
by smsgtmac
popcorn wrote:
maus92 wrote:Interesting tidbit revealed by a pilot during an interview associated with DT-III:

The F-35 is a lot easier to fly and a lot more difficult to operate,” than the older F-18 Super Hornet, he said, because of the immense amount of data fusing required. Manufacturers and others hope that data load will be easier to manage with the eventual release of the newer, so-called block 3F software...."

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/20 ... re/130812/



Hmmm.. what a curious statement considering sensor fusion is intended to make life easier than harder, as attested to by countless F-35 pilots who are not shy to attach their names to their testimonies. Could be a case of an old dog having to learn new tricks and finding it more challenging? Having to unlearn stuff that has become second nature can be unsettling.


Yes indeed "curious". I would say it is therefore more an interpretive dance representation of the discussion by the author unless we can find another, reliable non-derivative reference or two to verify against. Note the first part is in quotes, the second half is not.
I filed DefenseOne under "unreliable source: verify independently" the second I became aware that it was part of the Atlantic media group, the offshoot of the magazine 'The Atlantic'. DefenseOne is kind of an incubator for another generation of 'idjiit' journalism for spewing the same stupid sh*t James Fallows has been yakking up in public, especially at the Atlantic for about 4 decades.
I'd trust the boy 'futurist' (ever notice how few 'futurists' ever actually know how to build anything much less a future?) author of this piece no farther than I could throw him.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 20 Aug 2016, 19:38
by blindpilot
mk82 wrote:
popcorn wrote:
maus92 wrote:Interesting tidbit revealed by a pilot during an interview associated with DT-III:

The F-35 is a lot easier to fly and a lot more difficult to operate,” than the older F-18 Super Hornet, he said, because of the immense amount of data fusing required. Manufacturers and others hope that data load will be easier to manage with the eventual release of the newer, so-called block 3F software...."

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/20 ... re/130812/



Hmmm.. what a curious statement considering sensor fusion is intended to make life easier than harder, as attested to by countless F-35 pilots who are not shy to attach their names to their testimonies. Could be a case of an old dog having to learn new tricks and finding it more challenging? Having to unlearn stuff that has become second nature can be a unsettling.


That is a very good thought popcorn. Lt Col " Chip" Berke (USMC) struggled initially when he transitioned to the F22 from 4th generation platforms. He had to unlearn 4th generation habits and way of thinking.


That's exactly what I thought. Assuming the quote is valid (and it may not be), it sounded like the pilot was trying to "operate" something that is not "operated." It's operating quite well on its own. Let it come to you. I write these things off as part of the paradigm shift.

MHO
BP

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 02:01
by spazsinbad
AM I BORING YOU (as I finger poke your sucking chest wound) but hey Carrier Pilots are like that - ho hum de dum dumb. :mrgreen:
F-35C Pilot Certification Aboard USS George Washington, August 2016
20 Aug 2016 SldInfo.com

"2016-08-20 This video was shot by Todd Miller when he was onboard the USS George Washington on August 15, 2016. The video shows VX-23 “Salty Dogs” and VFA-101 “ Grim Reapers” pilots and crew working on carrier qualifications. The video shows 3 wires, touch and go and a great late wave off which was deck driven.

According to Miller: It was all business as planned.

Media probed for human-interest stories from the cadre of pilots on board, “What was it like, after all the simulator hours and practice landings at the airfield to actually land on the ship?

From pilots who had 50 traps with the F-35C to those who had just realized their first – they struggled to provide any other answer; “no drama, no surprise, performed as expected, very vanilla, pretty straightforward.” No news.

“Any issues moving 7 F-35Cs around the deck at once, or reliability issues?” No news.

VIDEOs: https://vimeo.com/179579085 & https://vimeo.com/179592423

Source: http://www.sldinfo.com/f-35c-pilot-cert ... gust-2016/

F-35C Certifications Aboard USS George Washington (Overview)
2- Aug 2016 Todd Miller

"...Media were hosted on the USS George Washington August 15 to observe the carrier qualifications at the onset of DT-III. All pilots embarking must perform a number of “cats” and “traps” prior to executing the specific tests involved with DT-III.

DT-III is focused on; validation of the aircraft’s flying capabilities with full inert internal and external stores (up to 4 GBU-12s and two AIM-9X on external hardpoints); handling tests with asymmetrical loads; testing for maximum weight launches at minimum power; evaluating all of these in a variety of wind and sea conditions.

As explained by Tom “Briggo” Briggs ITF (Integrated Test Force) Chief Test Engineer, there were additional minor tests to run through, such as ship borne evaluation of minor adjustments made to control laws (based on previous DT testing), and night launches to verify the Gen 3 helmet performed as desired.

Briggs made clear that the testing is to prepare the aircraft launch and recovery bulletins (ALB/ARB). These are the operating guides the Navy will utilize to determine the appropriate launch and recovery parameters for the aircraft given weights and conditions. These bulletins will ensure the aircraft can safely launch with the desired loads to complete assigned missions. Complete ALB/ARBs will enable the F-35Cs to be very combat capable as they reach IOC utilizing the Block 3F software.

DT-III is a significant milestone for the F-35C program and represents the progression towards US Navy IOC somewhere between August 2018 and Feb 2019."

Source: http://www.sldinfo.com/f-35c-certificat ... -overview/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 02:35
by spazsinbad
F-35C Aboard the USS George Washington: Video Highlights Hangar Entry
20 Aug 2016 SLDinfo George Miller

"...As Miller put it: “Though not officially part of DT-III, the Grim Reapers of VFA-101 put the state of the F-35C program in context – and made news of their own. VFA-101 represents a cadre of instructors and strike fighter tactics specialists who took this opportunity to carrier qualify so they can prepare the instructor syllabus for the F-35C.

12 VFA-101 pilots with 5 F-35Cs completed their carrier qualifications (CQs) in just over 1.5 days. That is, as Capt. James Christie of VFA-101 described, 10 landings and 2 touch and goes each – 120 cats, 120 traps and 24 touch and goes.

As U.S. Navy Commander Ryan “Flopper” Murphy, F-35 ITF Lead said: “the greatest satisfaction was to watch the fleet (VFA-101) start to utilize the aircraft. After all, that is the point of everything we are doing, all the years of work; to equip and empower the Fleet with the F-35C.” After observing VFA-101 for a few hours, it is clear the equipping and empowering are well underway.”

VIDEO: https://vimeo.com/179592990

Source: http://www.sldinfo.com/f-35c-aboard-the ... gar-entry/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 05:22
by spazsinbad

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 07:12
by blindpilot
From 5 + years ago it seems we ought to remember the wonderful contributions, Maus has made over the years ...

maus92 wrote:Mr. Palmer, an ardent critic of the JSF, refers to subscription articles on his blog that flesh out recent issues with F-35. ...However, here are some issues to follow over the course of the next few months, paraphrased :

- The tail hook on the carrier variant failed all of its tests and needs a redesign, possibly negatively impacting radar signature.
...

http://elpdefensenews.blogspot.com/2011 ... -f-35.html


A blast from the past! I think they even said, It may never be able to land on a carrier.... You have to listen to these Maus posts folks.. :D :D

BP

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 08:39
by citanon
spazsinbad wrote:


Good lord look at the computer adjustments to those flaps at 0:40.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 08:48
by spazsinbad
That is IDLC at work, HEAVING the aircraft UP or DOWN the glideslope almost instantaneously by pilot accounts. The throttle adjusts also. Also different pilots will have different methods if they are in 'manual' to use controls. IF it is a test pilot then there may be some difficult adjustments. IF a new F-35C deck landing instructor then this is the first time etc.

Deck Landing does not have to look - or be - a smooth process - there are a lot of variables and we know none here really - below is a demo of what IDLC will DO FOR YOU!!!!! At that 40 second mark we see a VX-23 test aircraft and we can imagine the test pilot is working hard in testing conditions, finding out what the aircraft can do with whatever adverse variables might be at that time - they test to find limits for ordinary pilots (set out in the ARB Aircraft Recovery Bulletin).


Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 13:54
by quicksilver
IDLC and Delta Flight Path are primary features of the way the aircraft lands. It is still a manual mode in that the pilot is making corrections based on visual reference to glide slope as presented by 'the ball.' However, as Spaz suggests, the jet responds to pilot corrections to glide slope by creating or dumping lift (IDLC), almost instantaneously, and automatically adjusts power to maintain the desired aoa while doing so. DFP integrates the BRC and ship speed so the jet 'knows' where and how fast the glideslope is moving. It is not yet a 'coupled' approach.

In short, the pilot basically flies the approach with his or her right hand and eyeballs-only and the jet does the rest.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 15:19
by XanderCrews
maus92 wrote:Interesting tidbit revealed by a pilot during an interview associated with DT-III:

The F-35 is a lot easier to fly and a lot more difficult to operate,” than the older F-18 Super Hornet, he said, because of the immense amount of data fusing required. Manufacturers and others hope that data load will be easier to manage with the eventual release of the newer, so-called block 3F software...."

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/20 ... re/130812/



Is it bitter in here or is it just me?

Funny how maus always ignores the majority of compliments to focus on the one criticism. House wives do that

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 15:49
by mk82
blindpilot wrote:From 5 + years ago it seems we ought to remember the wonderful contributions, Maus has made over the years ...

maus92 wrote:Mr. Palmer, an ardent critic of the JSF, refers to subscription articles on his blog that flesh out recent issues with F-35. ...However, here are some issues to follow over the course of the next few months, paraphrased :

- The tail hook on the carrier variant failed all of its tests and needs a redesign, possibly negatively impacting radar signature.
...

http://elpdefensenews.blogspot.com/2011 ... -f-35.html


A blast from the past! I think they even said, It may never be able to land on a carrier.... You have to listen to these Maus posts folks.. :D :D

BP


I follow Maus' post blindly and with vigor...hey, what are those new fangled aircraft landing on the USS George Washington (successfully too).....OH WAIT! :mrgreen:

Advise to crows.....fly away from Maus92 if you want to have a long and prosperous life :devil:

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 15:53
by mk82
XanderCrews wrote:
maus92 wrote:Interesting tidbit revealed by a pilot during an interview associated with DT-III:

The F-35 is a lot easier to fly and a lot more difficult to operate,” than the older F-18 Super Hornet, he said, because of the immense amount of data fusing required. Manufacturers and others hope that data load will be easier to manage with the eventual release of the newer, so-called block 3F software...."

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/20 ... re/130812/



Is it bitter in here or is it just me?

Funny how maus always ignores the majority of compliments to focus on the one criticism. House wives do that


Nah, it's actually bitter...like my expresso :mrgreen:

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 17:32
by XanderCrews
blindpilot wrote:From 5 + years ago it seems we ought to remember the wonderful contributions, Maus has made over the years ...

maus92 wrote:Mr. Palmer, an ardent critic of the JSF, refers to subscription articles on his blog that flesh out recent issues with F-35. ...However, here are some issues to follow over the course of the next few months, paraphrased :

- The tail hook on the carrier variant failed all of its tests and needs a redesign, possibly negatively impacting radar signature.
...

http://elpdefensenews.blogspot.com/2011 ... -f-35.html


A blast from the past! I think they even said, It may never be able to land on a carrier.... You have to listen to these Maus posts folks.. :D :D

BP


LOL how does redesigning the tip of a hook that retracts into the aircraft affect signature?!

Jesus lol. Why would maus give that any credibility whatsoever?!

"Possibly" LMAO a secret army of underground robots could also "possibly" exist.

That's rich. :D thanks for this post. Watching maus become more irrelevant by the day is one of the highlights of this forum

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 17:45
by spazsinbad
'XanderCrews' said: "LOL how does redesigning the tip of a hook that retracts into the aircraft affect signature?!..."

Overall there was a bit more to it such as strengthening the arrest system bulkhead and attachment point, as well as hook point redesign. Obviously DUN GOOD not that 'maus92' has noticed; but hey - all eyes are on the dying Shornet production.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 19:09
by spazsinbad
Some quotes relevant to the AHS Arresting Hook System of the F-35C ashore and afloat....
F-35 Landing System by Mike Seltzer

"Dropping the hook takes approx. 2 seconds and when complete the aft door closes.

The arresting hook is made up of the pivot, the shank, and the hook.

The hook can move laterally 20 degrees in each direction without touching the airframe.

The pivot axis of the hook permits upswing of 5 deg above the waterline through the pivot axis.

When fully deployed the down arrow is extinguished and the RDY caption is illuminated. If the hook has been deployed but is not in its fully extended position - the down arrows is illuminated.

The up arrow on the button illuminates when the hook is raised but not stowed.

Max airspeed for hook extension is 300 KCAS.

[ASHORE I GUESS]
Do not engage more than 10 feet off center.

Max cable engagement speed is 150 KGS at 50,000 lbs.

Maximum MLG tire speed is 226 KGS and Maximum NLG tire speed is 217 KGS."

Source: https://quizlet.com/146184972/landing-s ... ash-cards/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 19:47
by neptune
spazsinbad wrote:.. Also different pilots will have different methods if they are in 'manual' to use controls. IF it is a test pilot then there may be some difficult adjustments. IF a new F-35C deck landing instructor then this is the first time etc... At that 40 second mark we see a VX-23 test aircraft and we can imagine the test pilot is working hard in testing conditions, finding out what the aircraft can do with whatever adverse variables might be at that time - they test to find limits for ordinary pilots (set out in the ARB Aircraft Recovery Bulletin)..


Not "ever" having made a trap; is the "wiggly controls" by the Salty Dogs the "test points" vs. the calm approach of the Reapers?

....or did I miss something....again?
:)

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 20:34
by spazsinbad
At the 40 second mark of the video a VX-23 F-35C has noticeably wiggly control surface movements. Personally I see it neither here nor there. IF a test pilot is flying - almost certain - then said pilot is testing the aircraft and approach in probably difficult conditions - especially as we know asymmetric store testing is underway (remember some stores are hidden from our view). Then there is cross wind and YADA YADA YADA.... One can find fault with anything to do with the F-35 but just chill and all will be well - especially when it ends well. Did it?

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 21:10
by quicksilver
First, there are plenty of things in those "flash cards" that make it clear that this is some industrious somebody somewhere who does NOT fly the jet. 'Like, what' you might ask? Combat radius. (Not because of the numbers...but because a pilot would never be quizzed on a number like that. That's fanboy stuff).

Second, most of that control surface motion is the jet doing its thing on behalf of the pilot -- largely without his or her input. In short, that is the sum total of the CLAW w IDLC and DFP. Test pilots will intentionally work test points at the far reaches of the launch and recovery envelope but lotsa control surface action isnt necessarily an indicator of pilot workload -- test pilot or otherwise.

Some will recall the early days of F-14 ops at the ship -- lotsa differential tailplane (and very large tailplanes) moving all over the place on approach behind the ship. Pilot was working hard but the jet was trying to help.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 21:31
by spazsinbad
Yes agree those flash cards are odd and agree about control surface movement. Just so 'maus92' does not get too excited here are some 'California Cowboy' control movement Hornet or whatever videos:








Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 21 Aug 2016, 22:51
by spazsinbad
blindpilot wrote:From 5 + years ago it seems we ought to remember the wonderful contributions, Maus has made over the years ...

maus92 wrote:Mr. Palmer, an ardent critic of the JSF, refers to subscription articles on his blog that flesh out recent issues with F-35. ...However, here are some issues to follow over the course of the next few months, paraphrased :

- The tail hook on the carrier variant failed all of its tests and needs a redesign, possibly negatively impacting radar signature.
...

http://elpdefensenews.blogspot.com/2011 ... -f-35.html


A blast from the past! I think they even said, It may never be able to land on a carrier.... You have to listen to these Maus posts folks.. :D :D

BP

I am not invited to the secret ELP blog so I guess these old news reports from said ELP are similar?

http://www.f-16.net/f-35-news-article4483.html
&
http://www.f-16.net/f-35-news-article4494.html

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Aug 2016, 00:35
by citanon
spazsinbad wrote:At the 40 second mark of the video a VX-23 F-35C has noticeably wiggly control surface movements. Personally I see it neither here nor there. IF a test pilot is flying - almost certain - then said pilot is testing the aircraft and approach in probably difficult conditions - especially as we know asymmetric store testing is underway (remember some stores are hidden from our view). Then there is cross wind and YADA YADA YADA.... One can find fault with anything to do with the F-35 but just chill and all will be well - especially when it ends well. Did it?


I was just impressed by, what I assumed was a computer, making all those fast adjustments.

I assume that's still the computer working the flaps even if the test pilot was asking for edge of envelop stuff, cuz if that was a human.... :shock:

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Aug 2016, 01:06
by zerion
F-35 Follow-On Plan Takes Shape

ABOARD THE USS GEORGE WASHINGTON—The seven Lockheed Martin F-35s onboard set a dizzying pace, catapulting off the ship, circling around and coming back in for landings every few minutes. After catching the arresting gear wire with a redesigned tailhook and lurching to a sudden stop, each jet maneuvers around the flight deck and back into position for a new launch. Fresh off the flight line, U.S. Navy pilots rave about the F-35’s advanced sensors, easy handling and ability to land ...

Subscribers only

http://aviationweek.com/defense/f-35-fo ... akes-shape

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Aug 2016, 01:22
by spazsinbad
citanon wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:At the 40 second mark of the video a VX-23 F-35C has noticeably wiggly control surface movements. Personally I see it neither here nor there. IF a test pilot is flying - almost certain - then said pilot is testing the aircraft and approach in probably difficult conditions - especially as we know asymmetric store testing is underway (remember some stores are hidden from our view). Then there is cross wind and YADA YADA YADA.... One can find fault with anything to do with the F-35 but just chill and all will be well - especially when it ends well. Did it?


I was just impressed by, what I assumed was a computer, making all those fast adjustments.

I assume that's still the computer working the flaps even if the test pilot was asking for edge of envelop stuff, cuz if that was a human.... :shock:

I could have made it clear my post was in response to the 'neptune' post immediately above. Yes the computer works very fast indeed to ensure it stays on the commanded glideslope (if that is what is being asked of it) and to remain at Opt AoA. The F-35C pilot will concentrate more on line up. Notice how they might arrest on the centre line lined up fore and aft with the angle deck but end up slightly to the left every time.

The carrier angle deck is moving from left to right during any carrier approach due to the angle deck with the ship steaming ahead on BRC Base Recovery Course, with the WOD being more or less down the angle deck centre line (otherwise an acceptable crosswind may be evident - test pilots find out what is OK or not). There is a scary late line up coming out of some gloop video - I imagine will give the LSOs conniptions - however in the instance seen in this video they may have been pleased to get the aircraft aboard in the situation. Late Line Ups are frowned upon because of often bad outcomes.

Check the glooper at 30 seconds and then the WIGGLES at 45 seconds. :mrgreen:


Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Aug 2016, 01:27
by popcorn
Were DFP and Magic Carpet the primary reasons why Ford-class CVNs makr do with only 3 arrestor cables?

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Aug 2016, 01:41
by spazsinbad
The graphic at top of page 2 of this thread shows details of a four/three wire setup. It comes from a now old LSO brief about LSO matters which is no longer available. It shows the three wire started with CVN 76 - whenever that was - dunno.

viewtopic.php?f=57&t=52238&p=350748&hilit=sheaves#p350748

http://www.uscarriers.net/cvn76history.htm [USS Ronald Reagan]

At moment I do not have access to a lot of old files such as the LSO brief. One other page I have now (that came with the graphic page) may suggest that IFLOLS and increased accuracy of installation (and maintenance) has enabled a lot of better approaches - beginning with CVN 76. The reason may not be that either. So again - dunno. When exactly was the change decided for CVN 76 from four to three wires? Dunno.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Aug 2016, 02:34
by popcorn
it would be cool to know the statistics over the years of recorded arrestments for wires 1 thru 4 for the CV/CVN fleet.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Aug 2016, 04:31
by spazsinbad
From my reading of the old LSO monthly news letters (no longer available online) an huge amount of such statistics must be recorded. There was a glitch when one system of recording was changed for another but I guess it was all sorted. The USN LSO School would be the place to enquire. They may give you some stats. A real pity there is no longer access to:

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=15821&p=201204&hilit=four+wire+three+LSO%2A#p201204

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Aug 2016, 05:07
by spazsinbad
More PHOTOs than youse can stick a poke at plus the three earlier videos all on one page at SLDinfo: AND... more photos or the same ones (knowing SLDinfo would be the same - they like repeating themselves) in the next article below here.

http://www.sldinfo.com/a-multi-media-lo ... t-15-2016/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Aug 2016, 05:20
by spazsinbad
The Future of Naval Aviation Aboard the USS George Washington
21 Aug 2016 Todd Miller

"...12 VFA-101 pilots with 5 F-35Cs completed their carrier qualifications (CQs) in just over 1.5 days. That is, as Capt. James Christie of VFA-101 described, 10 landings and 2 touch and goes each – 120 cats, 120 traps and 24 touch and goes.

As U.S. Navy Commander Ryan “Flopper” Murphy, F-35 ITF Lead said: “the greatest satisfaction was to watch the fleet (VFA-101) start to utilize the aircraft. After all, that is the point of everything we are doing, all the years of work; to equip and empower the Fleet with the F-35C.”

After observing VFA-101 for a few hours, it is clear the equipping and empowering are well underway. Simultaneously the 5 VX-23 pilots performed their CQs. Suffice it to say, the F-35Cs on board were very busy, and from an observer’s perspective, landing and launches were very frequent. There were instances of hot refueling, with pilot changes during refuel and the aircraft cycling back for more CQs.

As VX-23 F-35C pilot Ted “Dutch” Dyckman explained, everybody completed their CQs faster than with the Hornet. The additional fuel on the F-35C, the ease of landing due to Delta Flight Path mode, along with the aircrafts reliability all played a part in the accelerated CQs.

The innovative “Delta Flight Path” mode that is engaged on approach alters the control laws, setting auto throttles and maintaining the optimal 3-degree glide slope to landing. This approach makes the pilots job landing on the carrier much easier, and they were hitting the desired 3 wire almost 100% of the time.

Any wave-offs were driven by deck activities – not derived from within the aircraft. Delta Flight Path utilizes the flaps to add or decrease lift during approach so as to maintain the glide slope. Observers can see tremendous amounts of flap adjustments on aircraft approach to the deck – these are all controlled by the computer to provide the pilot what they want – glideslope to the deck.

The Super Hornet and Growler control laws are being modified to feature the same Delta Flight Path in an initiative called “Magic Carpet.” http://www.sldinfo.com/navair-magic-car ... -18-fleet/

Once Delta Flight Path is fully integrated on the F-35C, F/A-18E/F & EA-18G the efficiencies created will make a profound, operational impact on naval aviation. Numerous pilots identified the benefits provided by Delta Flight Path; safer, less stressful landings on board; pre-embark training cut by as high as 50%; more time available to focus on tactics and missions; reduced wear and tear on aircraft; fuel savings; fewer “tankers” required in the air during recoveries and more.

USMC Major Elroy Northam, a pilot with VX-23 extoled the value of the F-35 in the battlespace as a stealth platform with an advanced sensor suite that will push its way to the forefront of the battlespace, gather all kinds of information as to what is out there, quickly identify “red or blue,” and push it out throughout the force including to legacy aircraft. The information will provide an unparalleled situational awareness (SA), and the guy with the best SA usually wins.

Recently appointed to the new position, Director of Joint Strike Fighter Fleet Integration, Rear Admiral Roy “Trigger” Kelley was on the USS George Washington for DT-III. Kelley will direct the F-35C program towards IOC.

Given 70% of the world is covered by water, the US Navy-Marine Corps team can expect to be on the frontlines of any potential battle.

Kelley is excited about the capability the F-35C will bring to the Fleet; first day access into contested areas that host sophisticated air defense systems; the ability to utilize stealth and sensors to define the battlespace combined with advanced command and control capabilities that will empower the entire fleet.

The F-35C and associated technologies (Delta Flight Path) will revolutionize Fleet capabilities, particularly when seen in context of the evolving US Navy “kill web” approach. The information gathering and sharing network consisting of the F-35C, P-8A, MQ-4C, Aegis and others will be a foundation for the maritime services operating in the extended battlespace.

Once DT-III is finished the ITF will look forward to DT-III with the F-35B in October, and then close the loop on additional verification of structural load testing on the aircraft. It is expected that their work in this capacity will wrap up the summer of 2017.

For Briggs, (recognized as the 2015 Test and Evaluation Lead Tester: http://www.jsf.mil/news/docs/20160420_Honored.pdf 390Kb) it is hard to put into perspective an effort that has spanned over a decade and a half. One can feel the professional sense of pride he takes in what is being accomplished by the team including the ITF, Lockheed Martin, the USS George Washington, USMC, US Navy and others.

170 personnel from Pax were on the carrier to support the testing, and many more back on land that have been working tirelessly for many years to make it all happen. DT-III is a significant milestone, and it is clear the US Navy is now tracking very quickly and methodically to a very capable IOC."

PHOTO: [late wave off] http://www.sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploa ... 60x640.jpg

Source: http://www.sldinfo.com/the-future-of-na ... ashington/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Aug 2016, 13:55
by sferrin
^------ "OMG the F-35 sux so bad it missed the carrier completely." - Solomon.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Aug 2016, 19:32
by Jon
sferrin wrote:^------ "OMG the F-35 sux so bad it missed the carrier completely." - Solomon.


LOL, even forgot to lower the hook! Duh.

I often read the captions on those and lately they've been correct, stating the touch and go pass (note: not all touch and goes actually touch the deck). But sometimes you'll see the caption... F-35 landing on the carrier for an image like this.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Aug 2016, 20:24
by quicksilver
...and many times (as may be the case with this SDD/VX-23 jet) they have some kind of test point connected with the maneuver or condition -- e.g. a heavyweight wave-off IC-AR (in close, to at-the-ramp), or excessive rotation during the waveoff, or any number of things.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Aug 2016, 21:18
by citanon
spazsinbad wrote:Check the glooper at 30 seconds and then the WIGGLES at 45 seconds. :mrgreen:




Mother of God I wouldn't even want to be on the flight deck for that much less be the pilot.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 23 Aug 2016, 00:03
by popcorn
Good thing the hook missed the wire.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 23 Aug 2016, 00:06
by sferrin

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 23 Aug 2016, 02:07
by Jon
Confirmed the 7th aircraft not in any released photograph till now is USMC F-35C #169303 (NJ-126).

My guess is that it was the designated spare.


USNavy F-35C #169303 (NJ-126) from VFA-101 is departing USS George Washington (CVN-73) as part of DT-III testing on ?August? ?16?th, ?2016. [Lockheed Martin photo by Todd R. McQueen]

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 23 Aug 2016, 02:09
by Jon
Juicy photo of five F-35s on the flight deck at once:

G3 Image not found


Nice shot of USN F-35C CF-5:

USNavy F-35C (CF-05) of VX-23 takes off from USS George Washington (CVN-73) during F-35C Development Test III on ?August? ?15th?, ?2016. [Lockheed Martin photo by Todd R. McQueen]

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 23 Aug 2016, 04:03
by spazsinbad
F-35C Development Test III
16 Aug ‎2016 LM Flickr

“Four F-35Cs from VFA-101 depart USS George Washington (CVN-73). Lockheed Martin photo by Todd R. McQueen. Learn more: lmt.co/2byldPY "

PHOTO: https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8353/284 ... b8_o_d.jpg (3.3Mb)

Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedm ... 446446264/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 23 Aug 2016, 04:35
by Jon
Yes, I also uploaded that photo tonight to this site. Caption makes me think the VFA-101 aircraft have left USS George Washington leaving the two VX-23 aircraft and possibly the one VFA-101 aircraft not photographed here to continue DT-III testing. Time will tell.


G3 Image not found

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 23 Aug 2016, 05:08
by neptune
spazsinbad wrote:..“Four F-35Cs from VFA-101 depart USS George Washington (CVN-73). Lockheed Martin photo by Todd R. McQueen. ..
[/quote]

...slight observation, three Marines and one Navy F-35C
:)

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 23 Aug 2016, 13:06
by sferrin
It's a shame they don't appear to have taken any photos of all seven aircraft on deck at once. :(

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 23 Aug 2016, 15:23
by markithere
Does anyone know how the night vision fared in the test?

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 23 Aug 2016, 22:27
by spazsinbad
Via E-mail (not from 'Engines himself' but from another forum) I have received this info about this video:
"0:40: Nice shots of folding and deck handling around the cats - note how big this aircraft really is. Note that all of these aircraft are fitted with three 'bumps' (two above the wings, one below) which I am guessing are some sort of radar reflector device to enhance their RF return for ATC radars.

1:24: More good deck taxying shots - note that the aircraft are fitted with external pylons, probably to complete the test points for recoveries in this configuration. The pylons on the folding outboard wing are for AIM-9X only, and yes, they can be loaded with the wings vertical if you want.

2:48: Good overhead taxying shots - note that the F-35C has its IPP exhaust (power pack) located on the topside, between the verticals - nice for deck work - sadly, wasn't an option for the F-35B.

3:10: Nice bolters - I did see that the outboard ailerons (interestingly, these are hydraulically powered, while the inboard flaperons are electrically powered) appear to automatically droop as the aircraft leaves the deck and climbs away. Looks like yet another example of that clever flight control system stuff. Look for this feature on all of the bolters and launches in this clip.

3:25: Close up of pilot at launch, and it looks to me as if he has BOTH hands off the controls and on the cockpit arch. Looking at other launch sequences appears to confirm this. I understand that 'legacy' practice has been to leave the left hand rested behind the throttle to prevent any rearward motion of the control under launch, but given that we have a pure 'fly by computer' system here, with the thrust probably being automatically controlled during launch, it looks as if the USN has gone for a 'both hands off' launch. Sequence at 4:26 shows this even more clearly

5:33: (and thereabouts) nice launch sequences, still (to my eye) at relatively low weights, as you'd expect at this stage. I'd look for addition of external stores to confirm heavy (I believe the antipodean term is 'max grongly') launches. However, don't forget the 5,600 pounds of stuff the F-35C can take in its weapons bays.

6:50: Nice launch sequence, note that the USN are retaining the aft end checkers (I understand they are looking at engine exhaust petal position as well as tail settings - not sure why, as both of these are moving about of their own volition during F-35C launch). As a side note, the requirement called for fully automatic cat launches (as well as STOs, ski jump and conventional launches).

7:06: This one has me stumped. The EOTS system (in the faceted window below the nose) is clearly doing some sort of scan or regular movement. That's a surprise, as I would have expected it to be locked for launch. However, this is a fifth generation piece of kit, and I understand that the moving parts are far less bulky than older versions. Interesting, though. Looking at the video again, this could be a short clip spliced in out of sequence.

7:46: Engine running refuel on deck: good to see at this stage.

10:16: Looks like the canopy electrical opening is controlled from within the panel on the port side of the nose for the pilot ladder. There is a manual backup using a wrench from inside the nose bay.

12:09: Good sequence post launch showing that the aircraft can be easily move around on the deck, including spot turns.

Overall, looks like a normal, steady, deliberate USN approach to a full deck clearance. It's always impressive to me how you see large aircraft doing bolters down a deck with personnel standing VERY close by - one of the defining images that proves (to me, anyway) that naval aviation is not the same as land based stuff."


Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 23 Aug 2016, 23:31
by SpudmanWP
3:10: Nice bolters - I did see that the outboard ailerons (interestingly, these are hydraulically powered, while the inboard flaperons are electrically powered) appear to automatically droop as the aircraft leaves the deck and climbs away. Looks like yet another example of that clever flight control system stuff. Look for this feature on all of the bolters and launches in this clip.


All the F-35's actuators except the F-35C's Ailerons are Electro-Hydrostatic actuators (EHAs).

Image

I am still trying to source the outer Aileron supplier and it's design.

-----EDIT-------

This looks like the company for the Ailerons. Still trying to nail down a pic.

http://www.woodward.com/PrimaryFlightControls.aspx

Woodward's primary flight control actuators are used to power flight-critical control surfaces, and are incorporated on the advanced F/A-18E/F/G and F-35 aircraft. These actuator designs include:

Triple-redundant electronic control
Woodward primary flight control servovalves
4,000 and 5,000 psi hydraulics
Light-weight materials
On-board position loop closure, built in test (BIT), failure monitoring, and IEEE 1394B serial bus (F-35C only)

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2016, 02:44
by spazsinbad
Thanks 'SWP'. Some EHA stuff on two pages in this thread: viewtopic.php?t=19215

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2016, 15:05
by gabriele
Photos: https://www.facebook.com/USSGW/photos/? ... 4692187398

including first images with external, asymmetric loads.

Image

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2016, 17:26
by spazsinbad
Thanks. The photo above needs to be rotated 0.75 degree to the right in order to keep the horizon level thusly:

https://scontent-mxp1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t3 ... 9607_o.jpg

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2016, 18:37
by spazsinbad
http://www.navy.mil/gallery_search_results.asp GO THERE and search on DT-III for some good stuff.
http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/ ... 85-325.JPG
"160816-N-VH385-325 ATLANTIC OCEAN (Aug. 16, 2016) An F-35C Lightning II carrier variant, assigned to the Salty Dogs of Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 23, perfroms an arrested landing on flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN 73). VX-23 is conducting its third and final developmental test (DT-III) phase aboard George Washington in the Atlantic Ocean. The F-35C is expected to be Fleet operational in 2018. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Wyatt L. Anthony/Released)"
http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/ ... 85-325.JPG (1.3Mb)

Six F-35Cs on deck: http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/ ... 01-171.JPG [SMALL]
"160816-N-MY901-171 ATLANTIC OCEAN (Aug. 16, 2016) USS George Washington (CVN 73) transits the Atlantic Ocean conducting carrier qualifications with F-35C Lighting II carrier variants, assigned to both the Salty Dogs of Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 23 and the Grim Reapers of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 101. VX-23 is conducting its third and final developmental test (DT-III) phase of the F-35C. VFA-101 is conducting its first carrier qualifications with the aircraft. The F-35C is expected to be Fleet operational in 2018. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Apprentice Krystofer Belknap/Released)" http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/ ... 01-171.JPG [0.88Mb]

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2016, 21:33
by jessmo111
I Have a few questions.

1. Are the tests slightly unrealistic without normal deck traffic like s full deployment?

2. How does F-35C, Super hornet and vanilla hornet compare? Im not sure vanilla Hornets could have a asymmetric load like in the pic
.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2016, 21:39
by SpudmanWP
jessmo111 wrote:1. Are the tests slightly unrealistic without normal deck traffic like s full deployment?.


That's the difference between DT and OT.

DT = Does it work?

OT = How does it work in an operation setting & tempo?

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2016, 21:40
by spazsinbad
jessmo111 wrote:I Have a few questions.

1. Are the tests slightly unrealistic without normal deck traffic like s full deployment?

2. How does F-35C, Super hornet and vanilla hornet compare? Im not sure vanilla Hornets could have a asymmetric load like in the pic.

Possibly Q.1 explained in other threads about similar F-35B/C ship testing. These are tests where one crawls, walks then runs at full speed. Testing is being done by VX-23 TEST Pilots under difficult conditions to find the shipboard F-35C operating limits. Do this not compute for you? Do you understand the calculated risks being taken, step by step until the limit is found for a certain condition be it asymmetric load, max load, minimum catapult end speed, crosswind, maximum wind over the deck, sea state and we can go on and on.

BTW lots of these tests have been undertaken ashore with catapults and arrests however the wind ashore is not going to be similar to wind on the ship NOR is the sea state replicated - except for some arrest situations the ship moving can be replicated by a steeper glideslope or some other canny flying - within limits. Nothing beats the flat deck test however.

Q.2 All aircraft have limits for asymmetric loadouts for catapulting and arresting. NATOPS will have these limits.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2016, 22:03
by ChippyHo
Just out of curiosity how come VFA-101 is using the "NJ" tail code as opposed to the more standard (for VF101) "AD" code?

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2016, 22:47
by Jon
ChippyHo wrote:Just out of curiosity how come VFA-101 is using the "NJ" tail code as opposed to the more standard (for VF101) "AD" code?


I'm no expert, the tail codes follow the Air Wing. But Squadron 101 isn't assigned to a ship/air wing so I believe it follows the Replacement Carrier Air Group assignment . When it was AD it was Replacement Carrier Air Group 4 , so my guess is because it is NJ, it must be assigned to Replacement Carrier Air Group 12 now. Squadron 101 uses aircraft at both Eglin and Oceana, so possibly also part of this difference.

Am I wrong on any of this, do they call them Replacement Carrier Air Groups still?

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2016, 23:45
by spazsinbad
Wicked Pedia I know however this part is probably copied from an official source:
"...Reactivation as F-35C Fleet Replacement Squadron
On 1 May 2012, the squadron was reactivated and redesignated as Strike Fighter Squadron 101 (VFA-101), with a homeport change from NAS Oceana, Virginia to Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. VFA-101 again serves as an FRS [Fleet Replacement Squadron], this time for the F-35C Lightning II, the aircraft carrier-capable variant of the F-35 that will serve in the U.S. Navy and selected carrier-deployable squadrons of the U.S. Marine Corps. The squadron will administratively fall under Commander, Naval Air Forces and Commander Strike Fighter Wing, U.S. Pacific Fleet...." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VFA-101

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2016, 01:03
by jessmo111
spazsinbad wrote:
jessmo111 wrote:I Have a few questions.

1. Are the tests slightly unrealistic without normal deck traffic like s full deployment?

2. How does F-35C, Super hornet and vanilla hornet compare? Im not sure vanilla Hornets could have a asymmetric load like in the pic.

Possibly Q.1 explained in other threads about similar F-35B/C ship testing. These are tests where one crawls, walks then runs at full speed. Testing is being done by VX-23 TEST Pilots under difficult conditions to find the shipboard F-35C operating limits. Do this not compute for you? Do you understand the calculated risks being taken, step by step until the limit is found for a certain condition be it asymmetric load, max load, minimum catapult end speed, crosswind, maximum wind over the deck, sea state and we can go on and on.

BTW lots of these tests have been undertaken ashore with catapults and arrests however the wind ashore is not going to be similar to wind on the ship NOR is the sea state replicated - except for some arrest situations the ship moving can be replicated by a steeper glideslope or some other canny flying - within limits. Nothing beats the flat deck test however.

Q.2 All aircraft have limits for asymmetric loadouts for catapulting and arresting. NATOPS will have these limits.


Spaz I copy. I forgot that they are doing super dangerous stuff. Stuff thats even beyond the normal
Intentional crashing of a plane into a ship at 140knots crazy.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2016, 01:15
by spazsinbad
Furthermore why would unnecessary aircraft be on deck, with extra personnel in such testing conditions? Yes sometimes there are press/visitors but when deemed safe. Then there are extra camera people recording tests but they know the risks. IF no one needed then they are not there. Have you ever stood beside a runway with miljets landing? Arresting?

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2016, 01:19
by ChippyHo
Spaz - thanks for the wicker pedia response ,,,, ya i was too lazy to look it up for myself!
Another question - has there been any talk as to who (whom?) the first Sq to stand up will be?
I know who i'd like to see - but G-d forbid the Navy honors tradition !!!!

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2016, 01:24
by spazsinbad
The first F-35C squadron has been identified AFAIK but I do not recall it (not being USN and all). Unit thread/section would have info.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2016, 01:30
by yeswepromise
Warhawks me thinks

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2016, 01:34
by spazsinbad
US Navy Grows Its Largest Master Jet Base
14 May 2015 Jonathan Derden

"...After spending a year getting settled in at their new West Coast digs, the Grim Reapers [VFA-101] will begin the process of converting VFA-97, the Warhawks over to the F-35C. As it stands right now, VFA-97 will be the first fleet squadron to reach initial operational capability in the F-35C, and will race to the IOC finish line estimated for the latter part of 2018...."

Source: https://fightersweep.com/2269/us-navy-g ... -jet-base/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2016, 08:58
by spazsinbad
F-35C Development Test III
21 Aug 2016 LM Flickr

"An F-35C Lightning II comes in for a landing while carrying external stores on USS George Washington (CVN-73) during F-35C Development Test III. Lockheed Martin photo by Todd R. McQueen. Learn more: lmt.co/2byldPY "

PHOTO: https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8471/291 ... 79_o_d.jpg (2Mb) cropped below attached

Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedm ... 446446264/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2016, 11:35
by Dragon029
Testing of F135 core transport via V-22:

Image

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2016, 11:57
by spazsinbad
That looks like an old WASP test photo?

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2016, 14:27
by Dragon029
Yep, I should've noticed the thick landing line; someone threw it in with a bunch of DT-III photos.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 00:22
by lamoey
During recent developmental testing on the USS George Washington in the Atlantic Ocean, the F-35C took off with one GBU-31, two AIM-120s and four GBU-12s along with its 25mm gun mounted in a pod beneath the aircraft, Lt. Cmdr. Daniel Kitts, Officer in Charge of Detachment, told Scout Warrior in a special F-35C interview from aboard the carrier.


Much more at the jump, but no picture of the above though.

http://www.businessinsider.com/f-35c-completed-testing-with-full-weapon-load-2016-8

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 06:41
by spazsinbad
https://www.dvidshub.net/image/2818807/ ... washington [CROPPED PIC BELOW]
"160823-N-RG522-334 ATLANTIC OCEAN (Aug. 23, 2016) An F-35C Lightning II carrier variant, assigned to the Salty Dogs of Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 23, approaches the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN 73). VX-23 is conducting its third and final developmental test (DT-III) phase aboard George Washington in the Atlantic Ocean. The F-35C is expected to be Fleet operational in 2018. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Jonathan Price)" https://www.dvidshub.net/download/image/2818807

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 09:48
by neptune
spazsinbad wrote:
https://www.dvidshub.net/image/2818807/ ... washington [CROPPED PIC BELOW]
"160823-N-RG522-334 ATLANTIC OCEAN (Aug. 23, 2016) An F-35C Lightning II carrier variant, assigned to the Salty Dogs of Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 23, approaches the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN 73). VX-23 is conducting its third and final developmental test (DT-III) phase aboard George Washington in the Atlantic Ocean. The F-35C is expected to be Fleet operational in 2018. (U.S. Navy photog[*]f by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Jonathan Price)" https://www.dvidshub.net/download/image/2818807


....no gun???, maybe later???? :D

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 13:03
by Dragon029

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 14:10
by gideonic

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 16:53
by XanderCrews
spazsinbad wrote:
https://www.dvidshub.net/image/2818807/ ... washington [CROPPED PIC BELOW]
"160823-N-RG522-334 ATLANTIC OCEAN (Aug. 23, 2016) An F-35C Lightning II carrier variant, assigned to the Salty Dogs of Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 23, approaches the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN 73). VX-23 is conducting its third and final developmental test (DT-III) phase aboard George Washington in the Atlantic Ocean. The F-35C is expected to be Fleet operational in 2018. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Jonathan Price)" https://www.dvidshub.net/download/image/2818807


Wow, look at those straight pylons. Hope that isn't throwing the super bugh guys

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 17:56
by neptune

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 17:57
by spazsinbad
Happy to be on speed (Optimum Angle of Attack) or what.... zoom zoom zoomie.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedmartin/29182351665/
"An F-35C Lightning II comes in for a landing on USS George Washington (CVN-73) while carrying external stores during F-35C Development Test III. Lockheed Martin photo by Michael D. Jackson. 21 Aug 2016"
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8533/291 ... b8_o_d.jpg

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 18:39
by XanderCrews
Gun pod looks happy to be there

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 19:56
by mrigdon
I noticed that the gun pod can't fire while the plane is landing. DOT&E needs to get on that.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 20:31
by sferrin
Are they testing ALL loadouts, or is there more to come on subsequent events? Was hoping to see a 2000lb JDAM on each of the 4 pylons, or maybe a 5000lb store on the inboards. (In theory the could stick a GBU-28 on each inboard pylon.)

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 20:58
by SpudmanWP
sferrin wrote:Are they testing ALL loadouts, or is there more to come on subsequent events? Was hoping to see a 2000lb JDAM on each of the 4 pylons, or maybe a 5000lb store on the inboards. (In theory the could stick a GBU-28 on each inboard pylon.)


Basically, the flying version of this :)

Image

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 21:23
by sferrin
That's exactly the picture I had in mind when I wrote the post. :D Wouldn't mind seeing a couple JASSMs under the wings either. :drool:

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 22:31
by XanderCrews
mrigdon wrote:I noticed that the gun pod can't fire while the plane is landing. DOT&E needs to get on that.



Haha!! Lost it. :D

Look forward to the defense aerospace piece on that fact as well

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 22:43
by castlebravo
mrigdon wrote:I noticed that the gun pod can't fire while the plane is landing. DOT&E needs to get on that.


Well, it can, but the landing might get a bit interesting. They say any landing you can walk away from is a good landing, but I think having to run from the crew chief might disqualify that.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2016, 23:36
by archeman
XanderCrews wrote:Gun pod looks happy to be there



Indeed :)

Are those cooling air ducts up high?

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 27 Aug 2016, 03:08
by SpudmanWP
"Purge air inlet" to be precise.

Image

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 27 Aug 2016, 03:37
by smsgtmac
XanderCrews wrote:Gun pod looks happy to be there

LOL. Yep, and our noggins' went down this same path almost exactly a year ago too. :D
viewtopic.php?p=298799&sid=6d83f3aaf447a336092fd346a35cc96e#p298799
Happy-F-35B-loaded.jpg

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 27 Aug 2016, 03:46
by spazsinbad
:mrgreen: This time it was "Happy to be on speed (Optimum Angle of Attack) or what.... zoom zoom zoomie." but. :devil:

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 27 Aug 2016, 19:43
by spazsinbad
First Fleet F35-C Carrier Qualifications, Final Round of Testing Conducted at Sea
26 Aug 2016 Donna Cipolloni, Naval Air Station Patuxent River Public Affairs; Story Number: NNS160826-12

"ATLANTIC OCEAN (NNS) -- The jet blast from seven F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter aircraft only added to the already intense summer heat and humidity on the flight deck of USS George Washington (CVN 73), Aug. 15, where the third and final round of at-sea developmental testing, or DT-III, was underway about 100 miles offshore from Virginia.

During the 20-day testing period, which is set to conclude Sept. 1, objectives included external symmetric and asymmetric weapons loadings; launches and recoveries at maximum weight; approach handling qualities; landing systems certification; and engine logistics.

In addition to phase three of shipboard developmental testing, jet after jet thundered on and off the deck as 12 instructors and pilots from Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 101, out of Eglin AFB in Florida, completed the Navy's first fleet carrier qualifications, with each pilot knocking out two touch-and-goes and 10 arrested landings....

...Cmdr. Ted "Dutch" Dyckman, Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 23 test pilot, landing signal officer, and squadron operations officer at Pax River, started out flying F/A-18 Hornets, moved to F/A-18 Super Hornets, and now flies the F-35C. This was his third ship trip and 50th trap -- and he has a definite favorite.

"I prefer the F-35," he said. "It's easy to fly, autopilot is nice, cockpit has good visibility, and mission systems make it easy to do your task."

One of the most difficult and hazardous tasks in naval aviation is landing on the deck of an aircraft carrier, something now made simpler by Delta Flight Path. Developed by Lockheed Martin after a lot of crosstalk and technology sharing with NAVAIR personnel, the semi-automated landing mode significantly helps lower a pilot's workload task.

"The control laws allow aircraft to fly a commanded glide slope," Dyckman said. "Before, you had to manually fly that path through the air. Now, at the push of a button, the airplane will tip over and fly that path. If I have a good approach behind ship, I can push one button. If there are deviations, I can make a correction. Other than that, I may not touch the stick at all during the approach, from the start until touchdown. Coming to the ship is as easy as landing on an airfield now and that enables us to spend less time training guys to land on the ship."

Other testing involved improved nighttime visibility for the aircraft's third generation helmet, which displays symbology right on the pilot's visor.

"I don't have to look down for a piece of info on one display, then to another display and correlate it all in my head; everything appears in the helmet," Dyckman said. "When I look out, even if I'm looking away from where I'm going, I can see my target information, airspeed, altitude, threats. With this airplane, I basically have a display with my aircraft in the center and it presents information for situational awareness."...

...DT-III was an incremental buildup on five years of work from the Pax River ITF team, beginning with the first aircraft's initial onshore catapult and arresting gear testing and ending with the hundreds of operational cats and traps that recently took place aboard Washington. Having completed the gross weights and load up testing necessary to provide the fleet with a full launch and recovery bulletin, it was the final phase of testing.

"This is the last time we're coming to a carrier for F-35 testing and support for Navy IOC (initial operational capability)," explained Cmdr. J. Ryan Murphy, director of Test and Evaluation/F-35 Naval Variants. "It was satisfying to watch [VFA-101] start to utilize the aircraft. After all, that's the point of all the years of work -- to equip and empower the fleet with the F-35C."..."

Source: http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=96397

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 27 Aug 2016, 19:57
by spazsinbad
What is it Like to fly the Navy’s F-35C?
26 Aug 2016 U.S. Navy

"Lt. Nicholas “Fila” Rezendes is a U.S. Navy fighter pilot assigned to Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 101 located at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. On August 14, 2016, he participated in carrier qualifications for the F-35C Lightning II carrier variant aboard USS George Washington (CVN 73)....

...As much as I’ll always love the legacy F/A-18C, I have to admit that I would probably feel a bit disappointed if I went back to using the smaller, all-green displays in the Hornet.

Every carrier aviator faces the same challenges prior to going to the ship; each one of us gets nervous every time. Now, factor in that we’re conducting carrier qualifications with a new platform. You can see that we’re operating in a high-pressure and unforgiving environment that requires 100 percent focus, from the pilots to the maintainers.

The best part of participating in the F-35C’s carrier qualification is witnessing first hand such a major, significant evolution in carrier aviation. The Lightning II is outfitted with a landing mode that greatly enhances the pilot’s ability to safely land aboard an aircraft carrier – a feature that has been developed alongside a similar program for the F/A-18 Super Hornet. The precise landing capabilities granted by these programs come as close as possible to simplifying the most demanding aspects of shipboard recovery.

Leading up to the carrier qualifications, I was particularly excited to see how this jet handled behind the aircraft carrier. It really exceeded my expectations. Having only previously conducted arrested landings in Hornets [& T-45C Goshawk], the comparison between the two was night and day.... [care to comment 'maus92'?]

Source: http://navylive.dodlive.mil/2016/08/26/ ... vys-f-35c/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 30 Aug 2016, 09:22
by spazsinbad
F-35C Completes DT-III Ahead of Schedule
29 Aug 2016 CVN-73

"The F-35 Patuxent River Integrated Test Force (ITF) completed the third and final shipboard developmental test phase (DT-III) for the F-35C Lightning II aboard USS George Washington (CVN 73) Aug. 25 - one week earlier than scheduled.

The highly diverse cadre of technicians, maintainers, engineers, logisticians, support staff, and test pilots assigned to the Salty Dogs of Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 23 showcased their trademark test efficiency and effectiveness by completing 100 percent of the required DT-III test points during 41 flights logging 39.7 flight hours and featuring 121 catapults, 70 touch and go landings, 1 bolter, and 121 arrestments. The team also completed their previous two shipboard detachments early - DT-I aboard USS Nimitz (CVN 68) in 2014 ended three days early and DT-II aboard USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69) in 2015 ended six days early. The Salty Dogs returned to Naval Air Station Patuxent River on Aug. 26."

Source: https://www.f35.com/news/detail/f-35c-c ... f-schedule

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 30 Aug 2016, 09:45
by spazsinbad
LM GM Weekly Update
26 Aug 2016 Jeff Babione

F-35C DT-III
As the Edwards test team continues to knock it out of the park, the F-35C is wearing out the three wire on USS George Washington (CVN 73) for DT-III. Now finishing up their second week of action out at sea, the team is literally blowing through test points, surpassing minimum wind over deck and high wind over deck points up to 45 knots.

Those are very difficult points to meet and the team is doing an outstanding job of completing these crucial test points. The aircraft and team continue their impressive streak of 114 arrestments and zero bolters. If you add the 120 arrestments the pilots from VFA-101 completed last week during pilot carrier qualifications, the F-35C has accomplished an astonishing 234 arrestments without a single miss during this deployment....”

Source: https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a6 ... _26_16.pdf (0.74Mb)

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 30 Aug 2016, 11:37
by popcorn
Tearing up concrete runways and now wearing out the No, 3 wire... who knew the JSF would be so destructive? :devil:

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 30 Aug 2016, 13:32
by sferrin
spazsinbad wrote:
LM GM Weekly Update
26 Aug 2016 Jeff Babione

F-35C DT-III
As the Edwards test team continues to knock it out of the park, the F-35C is wearing out the three wire on USS George Washington (CVN 73) for DT-III. Now finishing up their second week of action out at sea, the team is literally blowing through test points, surpassing minimum wind over deck and high wind over deck points up to 45 knots.

Those are very difficult points to meet and the team is doing an outstanding job of completing these crucial test points. The aircraft and team continue their impressive streak of 114 arrestments and zero bolters. If you add the 120 arrestments the pilots from VFA-101 completed last week during pilot carrier qualifications, the F-35C has accomplished an astonishing 234 arrestments without a single miss during this deployment....”

Source: https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a6 ... _26_16.pdf (0.74Mb)


<shakes head> No, you don't understand. The tailhook will never work. - Basement Dweller.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 30 Aug 2016, 17:48
by zerion
sferrin wrote:<shakes head> No, you don't understand. The tailhook will never work. - Basement Dweller.


Basement Dweller "F-35 is bad because 3 wire will have to be replaced more."

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 30 Aug 2016, 18:27
by XanderCrews
zerion wrote:
sferrin wrote:<shakes head> No, you don't understand. The tailhook will never work. - Basement Dweller.


Basement Dweller "F-35 is bad because 3 wire will have to be replaced more."



"It will cost more to replace three wires than one-- that is more expensive"

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 30 Aug 2016, 18:53
by SpudmanWP
All wires are replaced based on wear patterns.

If one goes sooner that means that he rest last longer.

It all costs the same in the end.

Actually, there is a small savings in cost due to fuel saved & airframe hours saved from not having any bolters :roll:

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 30 Aug 2016, 22:46
by Jon
XanderCrews wrote:
zerion wrote:
sferrin wrote:<shakes head> No, you don't understand. The tailhook will never work. - Basement Dweller.


Basement Dweller "F-35 is bad because 3 wire will have to be replaced more."



"It will cost more to replace three wires than one-- that is more expensive"


Hopefully your reply above is tongue and cheek.

3 wire is the count numerical sequence not that three wires need to be replaced. 3 wire is always the goal for landing for many years prior to F-35 testing. A wire needs to be replaced every 100 landings. Cost won't change.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 30 Aug 2016, 22:59
by spazsinbad
Now that there are 3 wire and older 4 wire CVNs the target wire changes accordingly. I have seen several different references to when a wire is changed - according to number of arrests - and of course it is changed if it is damaged.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2016, 03:37
by Jon
spazsinbad wrote:Now that there are 3 wire and older 4 wire CVNs the target wire changes accordingly. I have seen several different references to when a wire is changed - according to number of arrests - and of course it is changed if it is damaged.


From the time of being a child reading books on naval aviation, it was always the 3 wire that was sought. The "Okay 3 wire" and even though the four wire has been removed, it's still the 3 wire that is primary. What was it for Australia?

Back on topic, can some one post here when the DT-III operations end. Also it would appear that photo that showed the four VFA-101 aircraft were truly departing CVN-73 leaving only the two remaining F-35Cs from Pax. Any photos I've seen of DT-III testing have been of the VX-23 aircraft.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2016, 04:32
by spazsinbad
'Jon' I am an old fella with a childhood also. I made a model of the last conventional powered aircraft carrier with tiny tiny tiny A-4s on it - little did I know then. However HMAS Melbourne had FIVE WIRES in the A4G-S2E/G era whilst in earlier times she had SIX wires (the last 6th wire removed because an A4G would go over the front of the angle deck if used). With the full five wires set out target wire was No.4 which was just on the aft end of the aft lift which had a slight lip meeting the flight deck so hook skips were common for a No.5 wire arrest. Mostly however there were not five but four wires set so the target wire became usually No.3 but it depended on the configuration of the remaining wires. The minimum number of wires was three for safe operations. Meanwhile... have a look at page two. The graphic repeated below shows the target spot/wire for four wire and three wire CVNs. I have placed megatonnage of info about carrier landings from the ancient past to impossible future (FORD Class looks suspect for some new fangled gizmos at moment). You may find that interesting reading in your dotage? :mrgreen: Childhood information often becomes superseded by reality.

ADDITION: Perhaps what is not clear: the target wire needs a hook skip wire forward or just plain 'slightly too high at touch down [HTDP Hook Touch Down Point]' so that the aircraft has an opportunity to arrest if the target wire is missed for whatever reason. The ship/deck moves as well - often at the most inopportune time - so there is that. Happy Landings.

download/file.php?id=23403&t=1

Image

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2016, 04:39
by spazsinbad
'Jon' said: "...Back on topic, can some one post here when the DT-III operations end. Also it would appear that photo that showed the four VFA-101 aircraft were truly departing CVN-73 leaving only the two remaining F-35Cs from Pax. Any photos I've seen of DT-III testing have been of the VX-23 aircraft."

Have not the news items about the end of DT-III been clear? I'll have to read them again to get the precise end date - it would be implied if not stated. When VX-23 aircraft depart then DT-III is over. Yes you are correct the VFA-101 pilots day qualified and then left within a few days. They had no other purpose there - not instrumented aircraft - otherwise.

TOP of this thread page is the end date: 25th August 2016 from the mouth of the nuclear horse:
F-35C Completes DT-III Ahead of Schedule
29 Aug 2016 CVN-73

"The F-35 Patuxent River Integrated Test Force (ITF) completed the third and final shipboard developmental test phase (DT-III) for the F-35C Lightning II aboard USS George Washington (CVN 73) Aug. 25 - one week earlier than scheduled...."

Source: https://www.f35.com/news/detail/f-35c-c ... f-schedule

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 01 Sep 2016, 03:16
by Jon
(the last 6th wire removed because an A4G would go over the front of the angle deck if used).


Hopefully that was tested and known before a mishap.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 01 Sep 2016, 04:05
by spazsinbad
The sixth wire - in the Sea Venom/Gannet era - was a well known issue. It was nicknamed the 'JC!' wire :devil: because that is what Gannet pilots particularly said when they first arrested with that wire. Being higher up over the nosewheel - compared to the Sea Venom F.A.W. Mk.53 - the Gannet pilot view over the front end of the angle deck was mortifying.

The wires were tested with 'the beast' (a large crane for aircraft crashes on deck) or a very heavy deck tractor, pulling out the wire to their extremity. I will guess geometry measurements would show the hopelessness for an A4G on a six wire.

The AFT end is top of this graphic of the wire arrangements for FIVE during the A4G era - reason - easier to read the text on the graphic. Barricade sheaves are between No.4 & No.5 wires - over the rear end of aft elevator. 30 Oct 1973 REV.

The tandem seat TA4G did not touch the deck. It was determined by test pilots on runways at NAS Nowra (using the mirror there) that there was insufficient bolter distance on deck to allow the nose to be raised before leaving the front of the angle deck. This aspect was particularly dangerous for night ops where one needs to be 'up & away' nose above the horizon and climbing, as soon as, when flying not far off the water on instruments, on those blacker than black nights at sea. The single seat A4G bolter performance was excellent - not that I ever bolted. :mrgreen: 45 years ago I proved it well - nite.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 08 Sep 2016, 22:21
by spazsinbad
LM F-35 GM Weekly Update
01 Sep 2016 Jeff Babione

"Two F-35Cs from the ITF at Pax River recently completed ship trials while operating from USS George Washington (CVN 73) off the Atlantic Coast. The ITF flew nearly 40 hours and checked off 613 unique test points that further validated the carrier suitability of the F-35C. The jets accrued 121 catapult launches and arrested landings, 70 touch-and-goes and 125 wave-offs, with only one bolter or missed arrestment. The team once again understood their mission and went out in one of the harshest working environments anywhere, and flawlessly executed the final F-35C ship trial for SDD. The launch of CF-3 and CF-5 for their return flight to Pax River signified the completion of five years’ worth of carrier suitability testing.

David Skeels is an F-35 engineer who worked with the F-35C every step of the way. Five years ago he was at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey, taking measurements of the runway trying to figure out why the previous hook design skipped over the cable in initial testing. Reflecting upon those days, the jet’s performance during this deployment exceeded his expectations.

“It’s quite gratifying to be part of a team coming from those tough early days to becoming the eye-watering jet it is for the Navy today,” David said. “After three SDD ship trials and carrier qualifying fleet pilots, we’ve come a long way from measuring runways and ship decks.”..."

Source: https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a6 ... 9_1_16.pdf (0.7Mb)

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 09 Sep 2016, 04:02
by neptune
spazsinbad wrote:[....

"Two F-35Cs from the ITF at Pax River recently completed ship trials while operating from USS George Washington (CVN 73) off the Atlantic Coast. The ITF flew nearly 40 hours and checked off 613 unique test points that further validated the carrier suitability of the F-35C. .... The team once again understood their mission and went out in one of the harshest working environments anywhere, and flawlessly executed the final F-35C ship trial for SDD. ....


....hope to hear (later) some validation (benefits) of their JPALS testing..... :)

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 09 Sep 2016, 08:15
by spazsinbad
What are the benefits of JPALS? Search the forum using JPALS as the search term. Meanwhile the 'JPALS' being tested is only the interim version which also includes an UDB radio for link to aircraft from ship. The final version of JPALS is a few years away that will not have this temporary measure. The final JPALS version is/will be very accurate for auto landings.
"...The F-35 is currently integrating the UHF Data Broadcast (UDB) radio with the JPALS ship system as an interim solution during development of an auto-land capability into the JPALS ship system. This capability will allow the Navy to recover aircraft in all-weather conditions by removing human error from the carrier landing process...." 28 May 2015
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=291823&hilit=JPALS+radio#p291823

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 09 Sep 2016, 16:22
by spazsinbad



Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 09 Sep 2016, 20:59
by sferrin
How does one have 121 catapult launches but only 41 flights? :?:

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 09 Sep 2016, 21:51
by spazsinbad
Many/several catapults & arrests/touch & goes in one sortie/flight as you call it. My question to you is: "what is a flight"?

I listened to the last two videos above and heard no reference to 'flights'. The Babione PDF newsletter says "...ITF flew nearly 40 hours..." is this to what you refer? Again it is possible to gain many arrests/T&Gs & catapults in one hour of sortie time.

The attached .GIF is from my RAN FAA logbook Aug/Sep 1971 when I first qualified as a Navy Pilot (wings confirmed) after my first arrest and catapult. One can see by that time I had 900 hours flying time, having earlier gained my wings with the RAAF after Basic / Advanced Flying Training at the end of 1968; then training with the RAN FAA but no chance to deck land. First I had to learn to fly the A4G which occurred in the first half of 1970, then wait until posted to VF-805 then wait for MELBOURNE to become available for CarQuals (the rest of the squadron had already qualified earlier but were requalifying after time ashore).

Anyway you can see that flying from NAS Nowra a sortie included several arrests and catapults and touch and goes in one sortie. A deck landing can be an arrest or touch and go with hook up (confirmed by LSOs). To be clear, earlier on 10th August I had four touch and goes - hook up - aboard HMS Eagle visiting our east coast on her farewell tour. Without a catapult these deck landings did not qualify my wings until the first catapult (usually preceded by an arrest but later I found with other pilots not necessarily). Anyway that is why the monthly deck landing totals for August add up to 33.

MADDLS = FCLP =Mirror Assisted Dummy Deck Landings - in our case only on the main runways at NAS Nowra - at night - with the deck marked out with removable limpet lights that would not damage the aircraft if hit but might go flying by/near the LSOs but rarely happened if at all.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 10 Sep 2016, 01:38
by sferrin
Pause the second video at 0:59 and look what it says on the banner. (The other video said 121 catapults and 121 arrests.)

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 10 Sep 2016, 02:08
by yeswepromise
That last cat shot in vid 1 was pretty cool.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 10 Sep 2016, 02:30
by madrat
With landing so precise, is this a precursor to shock dampening built into the deck?

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 10 Sep 2016, 02:48
by popcorn
It's still going to be a controlled crash and all that implies for aircraft design and construction.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 10 Sep 2016, 03:01
by spazsinbad
OK thanks I missed that text - see below. So in this context 'flights' means SORTIES or equivalent. USN nasal radiators use terminology I am not so familiar with but I get up to speed sometimes. It still grates that they refer to their carriers as 'boats' but I understand why they do this. I liked to look out the 'windows' of our ships (when they were port holes). :D

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2016, 22:32
by spazsinbad
Pic sent via e-mail & I do not know the CVN but it is a 3 wire setup. Looks like the barricade sheave is very close to No.3.
OR
The No.3A wire is set instead of the No.3 wire? Perhaps the barricade can be installed on any wire on a 3 wire set up? I'll find out. See OLD article below - now four engines under deck with only 3 wires + 3A wire above; but ONLY three wires.

Image

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2016, 23:06
by spazsinbad
OK two wire! Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) ramps up new technology.
01 Jul 2002 Dan Ball [Roger]

"In 1995 Newport News Shipbuilding engineers began designing the ninth Nimitz-class nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, Ronald Reagan (CVN 76)....

...There are several changes on the flight deck of Ronald Reagan. A new design layout extending the port side angle of the landing area has moved the foul line clear of jet blast deflector two. The carrier can simultaneously launch an aircraft from catapult two and trap on the landing angle. Another visible change is a three-wire arresting gear design instead of the traditional four-wire system. The number two wire, located in the same spot as number three on other carriers, will be the "hit wire."

The new system uses polycore cables designed to withstand more traps than steel cables and extra-large pulleys to reduce maintenance and man-hours, and provides the capability to land potentially larger and heavier aircraft. The former setup of four arresting gear engines and one barricade engine is now four arresting gear engines [1,2,3 &3A] with two of them interchangeable as barricade engines. The removal of one engine greatly frees up the space to flight line maintenance crews. The four jet blast deflectors are also new, incorporating a one-panel design with a side-panel cooling loop to keep exhaust gasses from harming flight deck personnel...."

Source: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/OK+two+wi ... an+(CVN+76)+ramps+up+new+technology.-a090332253

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2016, 00:11
by popcorn
Are "barriers" and "barricades" synonymous nowadays?

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2016, 01:11
by spazsinbad
Not on aircraft carriers - not sure of the nomenclature ashore for 'end of runway RUNOFF barriers' which can be more than just a net that pops up (like a barricade on an aircraft carrier) but on command from the tower - already set to go. There is a good 'blogspot' about the diff: http://thanlont.blogspot.com.au/search?q=barricade

Back to the question from the 'corn of pop' :mrgreen: : "Are "barriers" and "barricades" synonymous nowadays?"

Ashore it seems BARRIER is the most used for ashore arresting systems and even that term in nobbled by incorrectness. So search this forum with 'barrier + runway' to find that usage (I don't quibble - just for aircraft carriers as seen below). &:
viewtopic.php?f=57&t=15767&p=213010&hilit=barrier+runway#p213010
Barriers and Barricades, One More Time
04 Oct 2010 Tommy H. Thomason

"...The original barrier was introduced at the very beginning of carrier operations to stop an airplane when its tail hook had missed all the arresting wires. First one steel cable and then two were strung across the deck about three feet high at each barrier station. They were attached to stanchions which could be folded down to place the cables on the deck so airplanes could taxi past the barriers. An operator was stationed at each barrier to raise and lower it....

...After a few incidents in the fleet with jets not being stopped by the Davis barrier [explained at SOURCE], a really big canvas net hung from scaled-up barrier stanchions was introduced as the last-chance layer of protection for the men and aircraft forward of the landing area. This was the barricade.

With the advent of the angled deck, barriers were no longer required. However, the barricade was still necessary if a jet had a landing gear or tail hook problem and couldn't land ashore. It is only rigged when required and the deck crews periodically practice erecting it on short notice and in only a few minutes."

Source: http://thanlont.blogspot.com.au/2010/10 ... -time.html

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2016, 01:17
by spazsinbad
An inside view of the Super Hornet 'head bob' at start of catapult - look familiar? Think F-35C. Then a view at start of second video of what must be an 'auto throttle' [no throttle movement] Super Hornet approach I guess.




Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 20 Sep 2016, 11:18
by spazsinbad
Another 6 page PDF of entire article attached....
Glad to be Back!
Oct 2016 James DeBoer AirForces Monthly

"After a ten-year gap, the ‘Grim Reapers’ of VFA-101 recently returned to the aircraft carrier. Its mission, as James DeBoer witnessed, was to complete the third phase of F-35C development testing....

...To conduct the daytime CQs, the squadron took five aircraft, 12 pilots and more than 80 maintainers including enlisted sailors and contractors. The squadron was joined by two F-35Cs from the experimental test squadron, VX-23, which, along with the Integrated Test Force (ITF), were working on the final Developmental Test (DT) period known as DT-III. To qualify for daytime carrier landings, each pilot at VFA-101 needed ten traps and two touch-and-goes, the same number needed for Hornet carrier qualifications. This could be reduced though, due to newer technologies such as the Delta Flight Path incorporated in the F-35C. This piece of kit helps improve safety during landing on a carrier deck. The first three aircraft took off from Eglin AFB on the morning of August 14 for the 90-minute flight to the ship. Each of the pilots conducted a touch-and-go before catching the wire. Once on board, the pilots were quickly positioned for another catapult launch, they would then repeat the landing sequence nine more times. Two more F-35Cs from the squadron followed the same day.

“We’re out here developing a syllabus,” said Capt James ‘Cruiser’ Christie, the Commanding Officer of VFA-101. “The carrier qualifications went really well for us. One of our big ‘takeaways’ was that Delta Flight Path is clearly going to be the new standard for precision landing modes (PLM). The PLMs are a remarkable change to how we fly around the ship. This technology will make the average fleet pilots approaches to the ship safer as well as improve their boarding rate”.

The squadron logged 154 approaches to the ship with a 100% boarding rate, with not a single ‘bolter’ or ‘wave-off’, which is when the pilot goes around again.

Additionally, the pilots did not catch a single 1-Wire, the wire furthest aft and considered on the low side of the glide slope. “It’s a pretty big statement to say we had a 100% boarding rate, with no bolters. This all means the [jet’s] hook was touching down where we wanted it to almost all of the time. Over 80% of our landings caught the 3-Wire so that statistic is pretty remarkable” said Capt Christie....

...The squadron helped with DT-III while out at sea. One of its test points was the removal of the engine from an F-35C in the hangar bay while under way.

Capt Christie said: “When the test point came out, we realised there were resources in the fleet that could perform this and that there would be a benefit to all parties involved. An agreement between the head of test and the ship’s Air Boss to have VFA- 101, led to the test being conducted. We had the VX-23 Integrated Test Force out with us to make sure we were capturing what the test guys wanted us to do and for them to properly document all the test points. Our team at VFA-101 is extremely experienced at changing engines on shore, so we were up to the job. I think we exceeded all expectations on how quickly and efficiently we were able to accomplish the task. Many observers were thinking it would take about 72 hours and the team did it in under 20 maintenance hours. That’s a great success”....

...The LSO
Lt Graham Cleveland was serving as a landing signal officer (LSO) with VFA-101 during the carrier qualifications. Lt Cleveland has been part of all three DTs [Delirium Tremens] as an LSO.

He said: “So far, the data looks good. In this round of testing, there have so far been no bolters, when an aircraft unintentionally misses the wire, and no landing wave-offs attributed to aircraft performance or safety issues”.

Lt Cleveland added that all the new technology that helps pilots safely operate around the ship reduces the pilot workload, so the Navy may be able to cut FCLPs from the current 16 to 18 practices to as little as four to six. When it comes to carrier qualification requirements, Lt Cleveland envisages the possibility of reducing the number of needed traps from ten to six. All these reductions would result in huge savings to the Navy: “That’s going to save money, that’s going to save fuel, that’s going to save aircraft life, basically.”...

...The former F/A-18C pilot
Lt Nicholas ‘Fila’ Rezendes flew his F-35C call sign ‘DASH-3’ on to the ship directly from Eglin AFB. With a background in F/A-18Cs, Lt Rezendes is enjoying his F-35 assignment. “Before going to the USS George Washington, we did a two-week period of FCLPs, but they don’t usually compare very well to the ship. We also did some simulator work at Eglin, which, along with the FCLP, helped prepare us very well for the day we actually landed. “Once we got to there we quickly realised that the precision landing capabilities of the F-35 almost made landing administrative-like in nature. It makes the task of landing on a carrier less demanding, and helps the pilot focus on other things, such as being more tactical in the air.”

When asked about his first landing, Lt Rezendes recalled: “Taking off from Eglin we had about a 90-minute flight, so I had plenty of time to think about landing on the ship. I was thinking about general safety. Even though I may have done it a couple of hundred times, landing on a carrier always makes people feel nervous. Most of us were dumbstruck with the first few passes because of how easy it was compared with our experiences in the Hornet.”...

...Pilot’s Landing Workload Reduced
Capt Mark ‘Gerbs’ Weisgerber was one of the 12 instructors chosen to conduct the first round of carrier qualifications. He has flown every model of the Hornet and now serves as the vice commander of the 33rd Fighter Wing, Air Education and Training Command at Eglin AFB. The Wing serves as the home to the F-35 Lightning II Integrated Training Center (ITC), providing flying and maintenance training for the Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force as well as eight international partners.

Asked about his first day on the ship, Capt Weisgerber said: “After the five guys arrived with the jets on the first day and took care of their work, I hot-seated into one of the airplanes. I had enough time to get seven of the ten arrested landings in before the sun set and we shut down for the day”.

He added: “I have about 875 arrested landings in the legacy Hornet and Super Hornet, but I was really pleasantly surprised by how much the pilot workload was reduced compared with the Hornet. Historically, senior pilots like myself, get better and better as you do more because you can anticipate the conditions behind the ship. Pilots that can anticipate get better grades than the pilots that react, but with the new flight Delta Flight Path control mode, you really don’t have to anticipate.”

Delta Flight Path gives the aircraft the ability to stay on glide slope automatically and minimise the number of corrections the pilot must make and was used on all of the carrier qualifications landings conducted by VFA-101.

Capt Weisgerber continued: “That easiness translates to a better boarding rate, which means not having to practice as often, which is important because we spent a lot of training dollars preparing for landing on the ship. We probably won’t need as much emergency fuel operating over blue water, so hats off to the engineers who designed this thing.”

“Historically we carrier aviators pride ourselves on how well we land behind the boat. ‘Greenie boards’ on the ship display the pilot’s landing grades, for everyone to see. It is a matter of pride [to get a good grade] to be up there at top and if you are not you want to improve, which in turn makes people safer. Now, with the pilot workload minimised when landing, you can still take pride in great grades, but everyone is going to have them, so we will have to find something else to hang our hats on to boost our reputation around the ship.” When asked about the first catapult shot and landing on a carrier, he said: “With the training we got back on land at Eglin, each of us receiving five or six turns practising at the FCLP [Field Carrier Landing Practice fields at Choctaw, near NAS Pensacola, [Florida] and the other one near NAS Meridian, [Mississippi], we all felt up to the task”.

Field carrier landing practices are a series of touch-and-goes, which are observed by a landing signal officer who grades and critiques each landing. “I first experienced the catapult shot on board a C-2 Greyhound. It’s a little different than the Hornet in that it’s a bit more of a violent ride down the catapult,” Capt Weisgerber explained.

VFA-101 currently has 23 F-35Cs assigned to it and recently started training several pilots who will soon stand up a second fleet replacement squadron, VFA-125, on the west coast at NAS Lemoore, California. Although slated for only 15 aircraft, VFA-101 continues to receive aircraft off the production line until the other squadrons, such as VX-9 and VFA-125, become operational with the C model. The aircraft are currently waiting to receive the Block 3F software now in developmental testing, which will provide the air-to-air and air-to-ground mission capabilities. VFA-101 has started training personnel for the first fleet squadron, VFA-97 which should reach IOC by 2018." [Now we know VFA-147 1st]

Source: Oct 2016 AirForces Monthly Magazine No. 343

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 20 Sep 2016, 13:12
by hornetfinn
It seems like F-35 is really designed to minimize the effort required to do all kinds of tasks like landing, maintenance and using all kinds of avionics systems and equipment. Adding all up seems to lead to substantial increases in efficiency, performance and safety. Add all these up for decades over all airframes and the importance of all this in obvious.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 20 Sep 2016, 13:30
by popcorn
I believe they applied a lot of lessons learned from the Raptor experience.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2016, 19:21
by spazsinbad
Standing in the rain....
https://www.facebook.com/NAVAIR/photos/ ... =3&theater “The Patuxent River Integrated Test Force (ITF), assigned to VX-23, prepare to launch an F-35C Lightning II from the flight deck of USS George Washington (CVN 73) during a rainstorm August 18. The Patuxent River ITF has been conducting the final phase of carrier suitability and integration testing of the F-35C carrier variant since August 14.” https://scontent-syd1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t3 ... 0171_o.jpg (130Kb)

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2016, 20:37
by blindpilot
spazsinbad wrote:Standing in the rain....
...


That has to be photo shopped! Gilmore told me a couple years ago that the plane would melt in the rain ...
[/sarc off]

Is anybody working on a spreadsheet of all the things critics/Gilmore et al have been shown to be wrong on with this deployment, other than the obvious, "tail hook seems to work"... :D

BP

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2016, 21:49
by vanshilar
Now, with the pilot workload minimised when landing, you can still take pride in great grades, but everyone is going to have them, so we will have to find something else to hang our hats on to boost our reputation around the ship.


My proposal is to put a dime at where one of the main landing gear should touch down on the deck, then see if the pilot can hit it. Then the pilot gets to say that he can "land on a dime".

Okay, okay, there's probably concerns about FOD and stuff. Maybe just a painted dime then.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2016, 21:55
by spazsinbad
Probably impossible to actually land on a painted dime on the moving deck of a CVN. Remember there are SIX Degrees of Movement of the deck as well as pilot YIPS - no matter how small. JPALS plans to put the hook point through a small box. I'll get the diagrams....

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 23 Sep 2016, 02:09
by count_to_10
Rest assured, if carrier landings ever do get to the point of "landing on a dime", it won't be the pilot that is actually doing the landing.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 23 Sep 2016, 02:22
by popcorn
JPALS and Magic Carpet talking trash, Organics excluded. :devil:

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2016, 13:24
by spazsinbad
From 'popcorn' question on previous page about 'barricades'.... This is a barricade:
Aircraft Carrier Flight and Hangar Deck Fire Protection: History and Current Status
Jan 2005 Robert L. Darwin + others

“...In a situation where a pilot is injured, there is damage to the aircraft, or the aircraft is low on fuel so it may not have enough fuel to go around again should he fail to catch the crossdeck pendants, a barricade consisting of nylon webbing is stretched across a couple of steel pylons (Figure 18). This is erected for a “must-catch” situation. Some manual evolution is involved in this but during drills they usually try to get it up in a couple minutes. Figure 19 illustrates how it works. The airplane comes in and is trapped by the nylon webbing. Usually a little damage occurs to the airplane, but most of the aircraft is salvaged and the pilot is saved....”

Source: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a432176.pdf (6.9 Mb)

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2016, 06:19
by 35_aoa
There hasn't (to my knowledge at least) been a barricade arrestment in quite a few years. Not sure when the collective shift in mindset changed, but at least with the F/A-18, the airframe is a write off in 99% of cases whether you take the barricade or just eject alongside (well, I suppose that option has a 100% write off rate to be fair). I have seen some pretty sketchy scenarios…….one example is when a friend of mine hit the cat 4 shuttle cover (known as "fast eddie") with his left main gear when he touched down well left of centerline and subsequently boltered. In the process, it broke the gear assembly and caused what is known in the Hornet community as a "planing link failure". No tankers available (this being pre-deployment CQ using bingo ops), and since he now couldn't raise the gear, he no longer had a bingo option given his fuel state. Some talk was made of the barricade, but ultimately the ship's CO and CAG said "no way jose". Luckily for him, he flew an underline low all the way, settle at the ramp, no grade 1 and stopped. Think he had about a foot of hook to ramp clearance as he crossed the round-down, but paddles kept him coming and it all ended well with one very broken jet craned out of the LA and down into the hangar deck. By the time they decided to try to bring him back aboard, he really only had fuel for that one look/try given night/instrument conditions. Again, not sure when the shift happened, but aside from barricade drills for the deck folks, it really isn't a "thing" these days for what thats worth. Maybe things will change with the F-35C.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2016, 06:58
by spazsinbad
A few years ago now USN LSOs had a newsletter available online where they talked about barricades - 1st Hornet 1997.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2016, 07:39
by 35_aoa
spazsinbad wrote:A few years ago now USN LSOs had a newsletter available online where they talked about barricades past - I'll dig it out in about an hour or so....


There are a couple good videos on file at the LSO school, which have also made their way onto youtube. Good stuff. Personally, that would be my choice……..vs a controlled ejection

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2016, 07:46
by spazsinbad
I gotta have me dinna again so here is a taste:
FA-18 Hornet Barricade aboard USS Nimitz 1997:
“US Marine Hornet flown to a successful barricade arrestment aboard the USS Nimitz on or about October 24th, 1997 due to nose landing gear hung in the "up" position. Captain Scott Slater was the Marine aviator flying the jet. This was the first attempted barricade arrestment of an F/A-18 in Naval history. Capt Slater's fuel state [300lbs] at time of landing was excessively low. Credit for the successful landing goes to both pilot and the ship's crew for endless hours of training & execution of duties in a high pressure situation. This is incident had a pleasant ending; others do not.”
_________________________

“Mr.Slater (the pilot) kindly answered my questions about that barricade arrestment. First, his right engine rpm's started winding down during the first pass, so what we heard was 'fluctuations on [...] right engine'. And he had 300 pounds indicated in tank 3 and all others showed 0...”
______________

[Slater] “My low fuel state was a result of several things. 1. Dumped fuel prior to discovering my problem in order to reduce total a/c wt. I had bombs/rockets so as ordnance goes up, fuel must go down to arrive at max gross landing weight. 2. Wingman helping me had to trap prior to stripping all wires and rigging barricade 3. Barricade was tangled, so it took some time to get it ready. Meanwhile, I'm running out of fuel.”

HORNET BARRICADE VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD_mUwzpUs4



LSO 'Bug' Roach gets an A-6 back on deck into the barricade on a bad moving deck night x 2 videos below - short then long.




Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2016, 09:03
by spazsinbad
'35_aoa' is correctez-vous about no barricades since 1998. Attached is a page from an LSO newsletter about potential....
CVW-2’s Near-Barricade
Mar 2011 LCDR “Jitters” Kircher, Paddles Monthly

"Our special thanks to CVW-2 Staff LSO LCDR “Jitters” Kircher for putting together the following submission for this month’s edition of Paddles Monthly.

As time goes on and the money gets tighter, those who control the purse strings are understandably looking for savings. Recently, the LSO School Staff was approached about the possibility of eliminating the requirement for the barricade on forthcoming CVNs, with the possibility of the capability disappearing entirely. The primary driver behind the push to eliminate the barricade stems from the fact that one has not even been attempted since 1998. However, as CVW-2’s LSO Cadre found out, the next actual barricade situation may be lurking right around the corner...."

Source: http://www.hrana.org/documents/PaddlesM ... ch2011.pdf (no longer available here - see PDF attached below)

Graphic from: MILITARY SPECIFICATION AIRPLANE STRENGTH & RIGIDITY, GROUND LOADS FOR NAVY ACQUIRED AIRPLANES 1993 http://www.abbottaerospace.com/download ... planes.pdf

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2016, 02:06
by spazsinbad
USAF talkin' BARRIERS... QUOTES about USAF F-35s in Europe in another thread.
Q&A: US Air Force Gen. Tod Wolters
28 Sep 2016 Valerie Insinna

"...We’ve been able—through cooperation—to ensure the airfield itself is compatible. Taxiways, barriers on both ends, appropriate air traffic-control facilities...."

Source: http://www.defensenews.com/articles/q-a ... od-wolters

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 30 Sep 2016, 16:45
by spazsinbad
On previous page is a diagram showing the JPALS 3ftX3ft box target for hook point to fly through to arrest successfully. Article at URL has a diagram for ordinary manual aircraft ops: https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-p-1A_s94c6g/ ... ometry.jpg
How Hard is It to Land on an Aircraft Carrier?
29 Sep 2016 Tommy H. Thomason

"...How big is the opening [for successful arrest]? About 20 feet by 20 feet. The target height for the end of the tail hook at the target angle of descent is about 14 feet above the ramp. Being only four feet or so higher means missing the last wire and having to take off again, a bolter.

The width of the opening is constrained by the imperative to keep either wingtip safely distant from the "foul line" that other airplanes and equipment are kept behind. In other words, the naval aviator can touch down as much as 10 feet on either side of the center line as long as the sideward drift, if any, is toward the center line and not away from it.

However, simple passing through the imaginary opening about 20 feet high and 20 feet wide is not sufficient. At that instant the airplane must also be traveling at the target airspeed and with the target rate of descent so as to put the tailhook on the deck between the second and third wires. Being too fast or at too shallow a rate of descent means touching down beyond the last of the four wires and boltering; too high a rate of descent, while insuring that the hook touches the deck before the last wire, risks exceeding the strength of the landing gear....

...It helps that the target rate of descent, while high—about eight knots or nine miles per hour—is not much more than one third of the demonstrated capability of the landing gear. Landing gear strength is one of several differentiators between airplanes designed for carrier operations versus those that fly from airfields. The stronger landing gear means that the naval aviator does not have to, in fact should not, flare to decrease the rate of descent as part of the landing because not flaring increases touchdown accuracy.

It doesn't help that a lot of time is not allowed to get lined up with the opening and stabilized at the target airspeed and rate of descent. There is often a compelling reason to get all the airplanes aboard in as short a time as possible (for one thing, the carrier has to be headed into the wind for landings and that may very well not be the direction that the battle group needs to go). As a result, the time allotted for the final approach is on 15 to 18 seconds in daytime....

...the [opening] that the naval aviator must pass through is moving. Even the biggest carriers are affected by stormy or ocean-swell conditions: depending on the sea state, a carrier can move in six different ways—pitch, roll, yaw, heave, sway, and surge—in various combinations. Although the ship movement isn’t quite random, it is not really predictable either. The current big-deck carriers, at least, don’t move quite as much as the smaller ones did.

The rate of change of a big-deck carrier from one extreme to another is also usually relatively slow. Nevertheless, under certain sea conditions, the ramp can move about 20 feet, the height of the imaginary opening, or more in only 10 seconds.

There is also the added degree of difficulty of having to fly "under the bridge" at night [an analogy explained in the article so go there or be square] from time to time, with only a few lights as guidance as to the location of the opening. As a result, the final approach is then lengthened to about 25 seconds....

...Although the naval aviator is alone in the cockpit, he or she is assisted by the advice and counsel of a Landing Signal Officer (LSO) standing on the deck who monitors the approach and can often detect an unacceptable trend developing with it or with carrier motion before the aviator does. The LSO's command to abandon the attempt, a wave off, must be complied with...."

Source: http://thanlont.blogspot.com.au/2016/09 ... craft.html

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 04:28
by spazsinbad
3 page PDF of article attached below...
Back to the Boat
Oct 2016 James Deboer, Combat Aircraft Magazine

"The US Navy’s F-35C Lightning II began its third and final developmental test (DT) carrier embark, known as DT-III, on August 14 aboard USS George Washington (CVN-73) of the coast of Virginia. Combat Aircraft was afforded a look at the testing on the second day of the three-week phase....

...August’s DT-III takes it all a step further, with more than 600 test points being conducted and the bulk of the flights focusing on launch and recovery with external stores such as GBU-12 laser-guided bombs and AIM-9X Sidewinders. This will include approach handling qualities with symmetric and asymmetric external stores, so-called delta flight path testing, joint precision approach and landing system trials, crosswind and maximum-weight launches, and military-/maximum power launches.

Leading DT-III is LCDR Daniel ‘Tonto’ Kitts, who is part of the Integrated Test Force (ITF) with VX-23 ‘Salty Dogs’ at NAS Patuxent River, Maryland. Kitts told Combat Aircraft: ‘This third trip to the boat is about creating a complete set of launch and recovery bulletins for fleet use, so that when the [F-35C achieves] IOC [initial operating capability] the fleet has everything that they need to launch the aircraft in all its IOC configurations on the ship. We are getting up to the heaviest gross weights with external stores and will also clear out the full crosswind envelope for launching and recovering. We can launch with up to a 15kt crosswind and we can recover with up to a 10kt crosswind.

‘The objective test points are ones that we have to get done. They number about 315, and the other threshold test points we will look to do as long as we have the time and the asset support. This trip is about verifying the testing we have already done shore-based.’"

Source: Combat Aircraft Magazine October 2016 Volume 17 Number 10

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 08:57
by 35_aoa
FWIW, CVN 76/77/78 3 wire boat hook to ramp clearance is (IIRC) more like 10 feet. It is different enough that our brand new CAG paddles on cruise (who were both 4 wire boat guys) spent some time learning the "new" sight picture. For a month or two, they were calling low all the way for what were on-on passes. Then the airwing paddles collectively got into the debate of whether or not an "OK 1 wire" was a thing. Technically speaking, it is, based on the reduced hook to ramp clearance, but it took several months to convince CAG paddles of this. Old habits and sight pictures die hard I suppose…...

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 10:26
by spazsinbad
Thanks '35_aoa' good to know. FWIW the A-4 NATOPS hook to ramp clearance minimum was 6.5 feet. The hook to ramp aboard HMAS Melbourne was 6 feet for the A4G. The link to the .ppt? file (made into a PDF & kept by me) has been lost. Info from it is in the text/graphics below:
4 wire CVN Hook Touch Down Point [for target wire]
• IFLOLS – 230’ Nominal [distance forward from ramp]

3 wire Hook Touch Down Point [for target wire]
• IFLOLS – 212’ Nominal [distance forward from ramp]

The reduced HTDP distance on a 3 wire CVN would account for the lower hook to ramp clearance I gather. There is a diagram that shows the deck distances between wires on the different CVNs - I'll get another example not to scale....

Then there are many variables between three/four wire CVNs such as exactly where IFLOLS sited in 3 dimensional space on CVN. Hook to ramp clearance is different for each aircraft variant also. ONLY THE SHADOW [LSO] KNOWS.... :mrgreen:

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 08:37
by spazsinbad
6 page PDF about DT-III attached.... Usual stuff already reported perhaps in a slightly different way - you know the drill.
Bright Future?
Oct 2016 David C Isby; Air International

"David C Isby spoke with Commander Naval Air Forces, Vice Admiral Mike Shoemaker about the current and future status of US naval aviation...

..."...Technology developed for the F-35C will make the Super Hornet more effective, Shoemaker cited the BAE Systems developed Delta Flight Path system that provides glide slope inputs directly to the F-35’s all-digital flight control and avionics systems on final approach. When used in conjunction with a carrier’s Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) during recent testing, Delta Flight Path enabled 80% of all F-35C landings to hook the number three arresting wire, the indicator of a precise touchdown. According to the air boss when used at Choctaw Field near Naval Air Station Pensacola, Florida, the system made simulated carrier landings so precise that the F-35Cs, “were landing in the same spot on the runway every time, tearing it up where the hook touches down.”

The system also reduced the number of missed approaches, bolters (failure to engage an arresting wire) and fouled decks (when the need to get a landed aircraft out of the way delays aircraft waiting to land) to close to zero.

Upgrading Super Hornets by retrofitting Magic Carpet, a Super Hornet-compatible version of the Delta Flight Path system, is a priority. Shoemaker has pressed for an interim version to enter service with operational squadrons starting in autumn 2016, with IOC being achieved in 2019: “I think it is going to give us the ability to look at the way we work up and expand the number of sorties. I think it will change the way we operate around the ship.”

Hooray – Stingray!
Today, the risk of landing delays requires an F/A-18 with a pod-mounted refuelling drogue and extra fuel tanks, the so-called buddy tanker, to be airborne when other aircraft assigned to the air wing are landing aboard the carrier. Shoemaker said under current doctrine a carrier air wing configures six to eight tankers aboard the ship. Tanker missions consume a substantial percentage of F/A-18 flight hours, but the air boss believes that once Magic Carpet is operational the buddy tanker requirement will no longer be required: “That will give us flexibility in our strike fighter numbers, increase the number of Growler, which I know we’re going to do, and probably the number of E-2D Advanced Hawkeyes, as well.”

The change envisaged will also affect the US Navy’s future MQ-25 Stingray carrier-based unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). Until an MQ-25 lands on a carrier flight deck, the only UAV to have done so is the stealthy Northrop Grumman X-47 demonstrator. Air refuelling is the primary role planned for the MQ-25 Stingray to meet a current doctrine for air refuelling aircraft at locations distant from the carrier, but outside the range of enemy weapons. Competing Stingray designs – from Boeing, General Atomics, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman – will have to meet the challenge of reconciling the tanker mission with the secondary continuous intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and communications relay mission. Neither air refuelling nor the ISR roles require a stealthy design.

Vice Admiral Shoemaker said: “If you send the MQ-25 out by itself, you need to know where you’re sending it so that it doesn’t get shot down. Industry is defining where the sweet spot lies to enable the air vehicle to do both missions.” A contract for MQ-25 development is planned to be issued in 2018....""
&
Dogs & Reapers Share the Deck

"...Validation
DT III focused on validation of the aircraft’s flying capabilities with full inert internal and external stores, handling tests with asymmetrical loads, testing for maximum weight launches at minimum power and evaluating all tests in a variety of wind and sea conditions. Additionally, some night flying took place to verify the performance of the Generation III helmet...." [GO HERE FOR THAT: viewtopic.php?f=62&t=16223&p=353741&hilit=Green#p353741 ]

Source: October 2016 Air International Magazine Vol.91 No.4

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 07 Oct 2016, 07:40
by spazsinbad
2nd verse same as the first - almost - 6 page PDF attached of youse know wot?
Grim Reapers Back on Deck
Nov 2016 Gert Kromhout, Combat Aircraft

"...Taking a complex new fighter to sea is fraught with potential pitfalls. Even some of the rudimentary elements of the operation can throw up problems. Changing the F-35’s F135 engine at sea was one such issue, mainly because the engine in its carriage container does not fit inside the C-2 Greyhound carrier on-board delivery (COD) aircraft. This was part of the assessment that went into selection of the CMV-22 Osprey as the future COD platform.

A fifth F-35C arrived on the carrier on August 15 for an embarked engine change with a spare unit that was loaded before the carrier sailed from Norfolk. ‘There was nothing wrong with the engine, but we wanted to evaluate how a fleet squadron changes an engine’, says CAPT Christie. ‘We remove one engine and put another in, and then we launch it from the ship. It would give us a better understanding of how we have to do that on board. It is not really a test but more an evaluation of how it works’. In all, the ‘Grim Reapers’ brought along 70 maintenance personnel, some of them civilians from contractors such as Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney.

Moving ahead
Looking ahead, VFA-101 has established a detachment at NAS Lemoore in California and VFA-125 ‘Rough Raiders’ will be formed here as an FRS in January 2017. VFA-147 ‘Argonauts’, currently equipped with the F/A-18E Super Hornet, will become the first operational squadron in 2018. The VX-9 ‘Vampires’ detachment at Edwards AFB, California, has started to receive jets and in the near future the US Navy will assign F-35Cs to the Naval Aviation Warfighting Development Center (NAWDC) at NAS Fallon, Nevada, to develop tactics and bring the F-35C into the TOPGUN program...."

Source: November 2016 Combat Aircraft Magazine Vol.17 No.11

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 07 Oct 2016, 16:19
by yeswepromise
Cool, we should be seeing some -125 CVs soon.
VX-9 is expanding too. exciting

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 18 Oct 2016, 19:55
by spazsinbad
Oh NO! Not another PDF about DT-III & F-35C VFA-101 CarQuals. YessireeBob from NAN Naval Aviation News FALL 2016:

http://navalaviationnews.navylive.dodli ... _Issue.pdf (7Mb)

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 19 Oct 2016, 02:26
by yeswepromise
Spaz, this is off topic. (sorry), but has there been anything published yet on the STOVL DT3? I believe that was supposed to happen in October.... and its a ways through Oct aalready.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 19 Oct 2016, 05:30
by spazsinbad
The thread here would be appropriate but no I search every day for news about F-35B DT-III without success:

viewtopic.php?f=57&t=52375&p=353644#p353644

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 19 Oct 2016, 19:48
by spazsinbad

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 28 Oct 2016, 22:33
by spazsinbad
On previous page discussion about last Hornet barricade in 1998 that date appears to be contradicted in another LSO newsletter: However I must add that over the years PDFs available there were many minor 'errors' in the text - so....?

The night Hornet barricade story by "OYSTER" is dramatic - an understatement....

http://tailhookdaily.typepad.com/tailho ... om-oy.html
READY TO WAVE A BARRICADE????
April 2012 Paddles Monthly Newsletter

"...This Month, CAPT “Flats” Jensen shares his experiences of actually waving a barricade as CVW-2 LSO in 1999 as well as almost barricading an aircraft last year aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln as the ship’s Air Boss. Every LSO should carefully take note of CAPT Jensen’s advice as you might be next.

Though we have IFLOLS and LRLS in place with EMALS, AAG, JPALS and unmanned carrier-based air vehicles just over the horizon, we remain responsible with the tools we have today. In a high threat environment that does not afford attrition (budgetary or operational), we cannot afford to ditch a multi-million dollar aircraft nor rely on multiple tankers for a 500+NM divert option: we have a proven capability in our barricade. It is our job to ensure this emergency recovery capability remains viable; we must continue to train. Bug Roach would likely have multiple thoughts on this subject -- I can only imagine the theme of his words.

To preserve our corporate knowledge in our inherently dangerous business, I offer a review of two barricade scenarios in 1999 (F/A-18C night event) on CONSTELLATION (CV 64) and 2011 (F/A-18E near-barricade) on ABRAHAM LINCOLN (CVN 72). 1999 was our profession’s last fully executed event. “Oyster” Osterle[/Carl Oesteri. Paddles] captured its success in his last radio call after rolling out in the straps: “VICTORY!”

I was CVW-2 Paddles (backup) on the ‘99 event and almost repeated as an Air Boss in 2011...."

Source: http://www.hrana.org/documents/PaddlesM ... il2012.pdf (1Mb NO LONGER AVAILABLE)

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 29 Oct 2016, 06:10
by h-bomb
spazsinbad wrote:Thanks '35_aoa' good to know. FWIW the A-4 NATOPS hook to ramp clearance minimum was 6.5 feet. The hook to ramp aboard HMAS Melbourne was 6 feet for the A4G. The link to the .ppt? file (made into a PDF & kept by me) has been lost. Info from it is in the text/graphics below:
4 wire CVN Hook Touch Down Point [for target wire]
• IFLOLS – 230’ Nominal [distance forward from ramp]

3 wire Hook Touch Down Point [for target wire]
• IFLOLS – 212’ Nominal [distance forward from ramp]

The reduced HTDP distance on a 3 wire CVN would account for the lower hook to ramp clearance I gather. There is a diagram that shows the deck distances between wires on the different CVNs - I'll get another example not to scale....

Then there are many variables between three/four wire CVNs such as exactly where IFLOLS sited in 3 dimensional space on CVN. Hook to ramp clearance is different for each aircraft variant also. ONLY THE SHADOW [LSO] KNOWS.... :mrgreen:


Thanks for the graphic, did not realize how much real estate the 3 wire wire setup freed. The landing run is now about 22 feet ( 7 meters for metric speakers) longer.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 29 Oct 2016, 06:25
by spazsinbad
Some unknown unknowns would be the placement of IFLOLS compared to 3 or 4 wire CVNs. I do not know if IFLOLS is in exact same spot or different. There was info about better calibration of IFLOLS that can make a difference also however, I have forgotten those details (not me chief, I'm no longer involved in NavAv/researching it except how it's applied today).

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 01 Dec 2016, 08:47
by spazsinbad
Navy F-35C Now Armed With Max Weapons Load
25 Aug 2016 Kris Osborn

"During recent developmental testing on the USS George Washington in the Atlantic Ocean, the F-35C took off with one GBU-31, two AIM-120s and four GBU-12s along with its 25mm gun mounted in a pod beneath the aircraft....

...The ongoing DT-III testing also, for the first time, is evaluating new high-tech adjustments to the aircraft’s Helmet Mounted Display, or HMD. The sensors in the pilot’s Generation 3 HMD have been improved with new firmware to better enable pilots to target enemies and perform missions at night, Kitts added.

“This gives us more fidelity in the lower range of brightness and a degree of low-light conditions. We are developing the ability to perform targeting operations at night when it is as dark as possible, such as when there is no moon,” Kitts said. “Previously when we got to the lowest setting in brightness, the display would turn off.” [I would too - it is scary :mrgreen: ]

The assessment of the F-35C, designed to bring the aircraft into operational service by 2018, also included efforts to refine a precision-landing technology called Joint Precision Approach & Landing Systems, or JPALs.

“JPALS better allows navigational alignment prior to approach,” Kitts explained...."

Source: http://hrana.org/news/2016/08/navy-f-35 ... pons-load/

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 01 Dec 2016, 19:45
by sferrin
Fairly certain an F-35B can carry more than, "one GBU-31, two AIM-120s and four GBU-12s along with its 25mm gun mounted in a pod". Weight wise that could all hang from one inboard pylon with more to spare.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 01 Dec 2016, 19:53
by spazsinbad
It is confusioning I must admit and thought to mitigate effects however this is the F-35C thread. There is an F-35B thread with similar - or same text (author OSBORN) likes the 'titles' of MAXIMUM for MAXIMUM EFFECT! or whatever.

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=52450&p=357383&hilit=Osborn#p357383

There will be a limit for flat deck LHA USMC F-35B maximum weight take offs under prevailing conditions - what they are is beyond my NOFORN / PUBLIC INFO security clearance. However we know from several quotes severally quoted on the forum that CVF with ski jump can 'MAX LOAD (described) F-35B can ski jump in 800 feet however the other conditions WOD/WX never described. So be it.

The F-35C can be catapulted with maximum weight under any conditions I imagine. This effect of the powerful USN catapults has been explained a few years back in this forum.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 02 Dec 2016, 04:13
by sferrin
spazsinbad wrote:The F-35C can be catapulted with maximum weight under any conditions I imagine. This effect of the powerful USN catapults has been explained a few years back in this forum.


Yep. Even as far back as the RA-5C and A-3D they were hitting ~80,000lbs.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 27 Dec 2016, 22:06
by spazsinbad
Now an oldie but a goldie & even CHAINS!


Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 14 Jan 2017, 06:32
by spazsinbad
Better late than whatever - 6 page PDF about F-35C DT-III - only a short excerpt below.
Back to the Boat
December 2016 Aerospace Testing International

“...The work at Lakehurst earlier this year involved a detachment that undertook intensive trials of different external weapons configurations, including GBU-12s and AIM-9Xs on (outer under-wing) stations 1 and 11. After a briefing at 07.00, a take-off at 09.30 allowed for a mission lasting around five hours, in the course of which as many as eight to 10 arrestments could be made.

While embarked on the carrier, VX-23 completed all of its required DT-III test points during 41 flights logging 39.7 flight hours and featuring 121 catapult launches, 70 touch-and-go landings, one bolter and 121 arrested landings. Among standout test flights were validation of flying capabilities with a full load of inert internal and external stores, including up to four 500 lb GBU-12 laser-guided bombs and two AIM-9X Sidewinder air-to-air missiles on the external hard-points. Meanwhile, different asymmetric loads were evaluated in handling tests. Maximum-weight launches were tested at minimum power and in a variety of wind and sea conditions.

The testing saw the F-35C carry out its heaviest catapult launch to date, with a 5,000 lb load [does not seem heavy - perhaps 'external load'?] that included a single 1,000 lb GBU-31 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM), four 500 lb GBU-12 LGBs, two AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missiles and a 25mm gun pod. No less important were more minor tests, including evaluation of adjustments made to control laws as a result of the previous two developmental test phases.

The ultimate proof of DT-III will be found in the aircraft launch and recovery bulletins (ALB/ARB). These will provide the guidelines within which the F-35C will be operated once in front-line service. Essentially, they provide a manual for launch and recovery parameters in all permitted aircraft weights and configurations....

...Maximum crosswind speed (15kts) for F-35C launch as tested during DT-III (maximum crosswind for recovery was 10kts)...

Source: Aerospace Testing International Magazine December 2016

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 08:26
by spazsinbad
At btm of previous page of this thread is interest in placement of IFLOLS on CVNs. viewtopic.php?f=57&t=52238&p=355117&hilit=unknowns#p355117

I'll attempt to get a better graphic however the one below is a screenshot from a TAILHOOK 17 video briefing about FORD. The figures are difficult to decipher whilst my quick squizz says the IFLOLS has been moved (the figures highlighted in graphic) while other parameters are the same from recent NIMITZ 3 wire class to FORD 3 wire class. Click on graphic to enable ZOOM feature. ALSO the graphic is NOT TO SCALE. Go here for the viddy:

https://livestream.com/wab/tailhook2017 ... /162551304

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 08:51
by 35_aoa
What I'm getting from this graphic is that the Ford doesn't have a "3A" wire. That little guy stopped me on a couple nights on where I was sure I was going around on my Bush cruise. Oh well. Looking forward to being a guinnea pig on her in the near future. EMALS....hope they got that one right.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 09:08
by spazsinbad
You'll get a lot of info about EMALS from the video that it is good to go. Testing of EMALS & AAG has been more extensive than any previous arrest/cat systems. CO was impressed by how EMALS overcomes failures during deliberate failure tests.

There are only three arrest engines on FORD (four on the 3/3A wire NIMITZ variants). I'd have to watch video again but about halfway I think the CO explains I think that one engine was removed for extended testing at Lakehurst and I think he says that engine will be added at some later time - perhaps with a 3A sheave as is the case with 3A systems - just WAG.

The graphic here shows the 3A setup for FORD: http://thefordclass.com/build/design.html

Then there is the AAG cutaway diagram: https://i1.wp.com/news.usni.org/wp-cont ... 03/aag.jpg

First FORD arrest rusty deck photo: http://image.digitalinsightresearch.in/ ... t_edit.jpg

VERY OLD 2002 info about what AAG might be here - includes four engines etc. (however remember CO in VIDEO above).
"...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...." viewtopic.php?f=22&t=23118&p=247567&hilit=AAG%2A#p247567 & viewtopic.php?f=22&t=16571&p=210670&hilit=AAG%2A#p210670

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 12:43
by spazsinbad
You can drag video slider to MINUTE 20 to see 'Brick' Wilson tell tall tales & true of the legendary F-35C at HOOK17:

https://livestream.com/wab/tailhook2017 ... /162471073 [F-35C bombed up in JPG is going faster than Mach 1]

From MINUTE 31:20sec there is a clip showing what the F-35C pilot sees through the HMDS (now with 'optical tracking' whatever that means) and other stuff.

Overall the F-35C test pilot segment of the video is 18 minutes long from minute 20 into the video itself - slide slider to it.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 14:00
by SpudmanWP
That 32:20 stuff was all CGI.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 14:11
by SpudmanWP
Tailhook Items of note:
-- 21:50 - 6 x 2k JDAMS + (int) AMRAAMS + 9x going mach 1+
-- 23:44 - some of the items changed to mitigate cat oscillation
-- 25:30 - HMDS improvements to include an new "optical tracker" to get added to the inertial and magnetic trackers. A new OLED HMDS display is in the works to "eliminate" 'green glow'.
-- 30:00 - F-35Cs participating in LFE (TopGun, Northern Edge, Red Flag ["releasable" 24:1 kill ratio "We Killed Everything" @ 3i])
-- 27:30 - Some kind of issue on the B/C with IFR, no details given.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 14:16
by spazsinbad
SpudmanWP wrote:That 32:20 stuff was all CGI.

Fair enuf - I needed to look agin but did not get around to it.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 14:51
by ricnunes
spazsinbad wrote:You can drag video slider to MINUTE 20 to see 'Brick' Wilson tell tall tales & true of the legendary F-35C at HOOK17:

https://livestream.com/wab/tailhook2017 ... /162471073 [F-35C bombed up in JPG is going faster than Mach 1]

From MINUTE 31:20sec there is a clip showing what the F-35C pilot sees through the HMDS (now with 'optical tracking' whatever that means) and other stuff.

Overall the F-35C test pilot segment of the video is 18 minutes long from minute 20 into the video itself - slide slider to it.


First of all thanks very much for the video/livestream link that you shared! :D

Yes, it's really impressive that the F-35C while carrying 4 x GBU-32 (externally), 2 x AIM-9X (also external) plus internal weapons load still can be supersonic (surpass Mach 1)!
And the F-35 critics still say that the F-35 is "slow", go figure... :roll:

Also impressive is the information at minute 30:29 --> It seems that the kill ratio in Red Flag was actually to 24:1 (in favour of the F-35, of course) :wink:

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 14:54
by ricnunes
SpudmanWP wrote:Tailhook Items of note:
-- 21:50 - 6 x 2k JDAMS + (int) AMRAAMS + 9x going mach 1+
-- 23:44 - some of the items changed to mitigate cat oscillation
-- 25:30 - HMDS improvements to include an new "optical tracker" to get added to the inertial and magnetic trackers. A new OLED HMDS display is in the works to "eliminate" 'green glow'.
-- 30:00 - F-35Cs participating in LFE (TopGun, Northern Edge, Red Flag ["releasable" 24:1 kill ratio "We Killed Everything" @ 3i])
-- 27:30 - Some kind of issue on the B/C with IFR, no details given.


Ooops, you beat my post :wink:

But note that the external JDAMs on that F-35C were GBU-32's and therefore 1K bombs and not GBU-31/2K.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 15:22
by sferrin
And that's on a C. :shock:

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 16:11
by SpudmanWP
More Tailhook
Panel 1 - Supercarriers (https://livestream.com/wab/tailhook2017 ... /162442258)
-- 1:16:00 - F-35C integration - The F-35 makes EVERYONE better and more lethal.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 16:20
by sferrin
spazsinbad wrote:There are only three arrest engines on FORD (four on the 3/3A wire NIMITZ variants).


Is there any other kind? :-? :?:

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 17:11
by SpudmanWP
Another Tailhook video
OpNAV panel https://livestream.com/wab/tailhook2017 ... /162483994

-- 07:00 - Bill Swan (APW TacAir USMC) - F-35B info
-- 12:30 - F_35C USN Status
---- 3 F-35Cs already loaded with Block 3F
---- Aug 2018 goal for F-35C IOC
---- Previously mentioned "fixed" to cat oscillations well received
---- OLED HMDS looks to be on track
---- Aim-9X outer wing panel fix is looking good too
---- F-35 generates nearly a terabyte of downloaded date per flight.
---- F-35C has been flying TopGun for two years.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 17:37
by mixelflick
Is the C going to be able to perform high AOA maneuvers like we saw from the F-35A at the Paris airshow? I already know about the poor acceleration issues. Hoping with a more powerful engine they can take some of that back, but the C seems to be the least agile of all the variants.

OTOH, it should be able to turn tighter given its greater wing area?

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 17:41
by SpudmanWP
There should be no reason for it not to be able to do the same AOA as seen on the F-35A.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 18:34
by sprstdlyscottsmn
mixelflick wrote: the C seems to be the least agile of all the variants.

OTOH, it should be able to turn tighter given its greater wing area?

I disagree with this statement. It may have the worst climb and acceleration but it will be the best turner and have the best low speed handling. When the Sust G spec took a hit the C took the smallest hit and was still listed as the highest of the three. Previous analyses of mine show that it should have the best ITR at operational altitudes as well due to the big wing. It will be just fine.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2017, 21:08
by spazsinbad
sferrin wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:There are only three arrest engines on FORD (four on the 3/3A wire NIMITZ variants).


Is there any other kind? :-? :?:

Is that a question given the information in this thread and elsewhere? Please clarify the question re 'kind'.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2017, 00:08
by scx
ricnunes wrote:But note that the external JDAMs on that F-35C were GBU-32's and therefore 1K bombs and not GBU-31/2K.


I think he said GBU-32's by mistake, and i think those are GBU-31's by the visual size..i'm not 100% sure.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2017, 00:11
by sferrin
spazsinbad wrote:
sferrin wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:There are only three arrest engines on FORD (four on the 3/3A wire NIMITZ variants).


Is there any other kind? :-? :?:

Is that a question given the information in this thread and elsewhere? Please clarify the question re 'kind'.


Your comment implies that not all Nimitz class carriers have four wires.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2017, 00:36
by rheonomic
mixelflick wrote:Is the C going to be able to perform high AOA maneuvers like we saw from the F-35A at the Paris airshow? I already know about the poor acceleration issues. Hoping with a more powerful engine they can take some of that back, but the C seems to be the least agile of all the variants.

OTOH, it should be able to turn tighter given its greater wing area?


F-35C High AOA testing

sprstdlyscottsmn is right; the CV F-35 has no problem with low-speed handling and turns.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2017, 01:14
by spazsinbad
sferrin wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:There are only three arrest engines on FORD (four [ENGINES] on the 3/3A wire NIMITZ variants).


Is there any other kind? :-? :?:

Is that a question given the information in this thread and elsewhere? Please clarify the question re 'kind'.

sferrin wrote:Your comment implies that not all Nimitz class carriers have four wires.

That is correct 'not all Nimitz class carriers have four wires' the video mentions this while the last two NIMITZ CVNs had only three wires, with 3A being a barricade installation OR a backup No.3 wire (this unused sheave is adjacent to No.3 sheave) as per several diagrams / articles on this and other threads. Here is a recent diagram:

viewtopic.php?f=57&t=52238&p=352734&hilit=sheave%2A#p352734

download/file.php?id=23403 GRAPHIC on page 10 of this thread from CVN-76 only 3 wires.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2017, 03:19
by wrightwing
All 3 models are >50 deg AoA aircraft.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2017, 12:55
by sferrin
spazsinbad wrote:That is correct 'not all Nimitz class carriers have four wires' the video mentions this while the last two NIMITZ CVNs had only three wires, with 3A being a barricade installation OR a backup No.3 wire (this unused sheave is adjacent to No.3 sheave) as per several diagrams / articles on this and other threads. Here is a recent diagram:

viewtopic.php?f=57&t=52238&p=352734&hilit=sheave%2A#p352734

download/file.php?id=23403 GRAPHIC on page 10 of this thread from CVN-76 only 3 wires.


Interesting. I did not know that.

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2018, 17:45
by spazsinbad
F-35C Carrier Suitability Testing Explanation from CMDR Tony Wilson FIRST F-35C deck lander TEST PILOT PDF 44 pages.
F-35 Carrier Suitability Testing
17 May 2018 Tony Wilson

"Carrier Suitability is a multidiscipline specialization of aircraft test and evaluation. The discipline combines theories from aircraft loads, flying qualities, and performance in a system of systems approach to assess the suitability of an aircraft to operate from ships and austere sites. Additionally, navigation and guidance, sensor integration, data link interoperability, pilot-vehicle interface, supportability, and maintainability are evaluated to ensure the aircraft is capable to operate as a system within a system. This paper will provide an introduction to carrier suitability flight test of the F-35C, a carrier-based, multi-role, 5th Generation stealth fighter to be used by the U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps. Topics will include a discussion of the shore-based testing prerequisites and results, an overview of the challenges experienced with the original tailhook and its redesign, and the use of autopilot functionality in shore-based testing. This will be followed by an examination of the necessity to test in the shipboard environment, a discussion of shipboard testing, shipboard catapult and arrested landing methods of test and results. Throughout, an investigation on how advanced approach mode control laws used for shipboard landings were implemented, the results from three ship trials, and the implications to future operations will be analyzed."

Photo: “F-35C conducting a roll only arrestment during the structural survey”


Source: F-35 Carrier Suitability Testing PDF

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2018, 00:03
by spazsinbad
Conclusions from the previous page paper by CMDR Wilson:
F-35 Carrier Suitability Testing
17 May 2018 Tony Wilson

"...VI. Conclusions
Designing an aircraft that will operate from the decks of seagoing vessels is not easy. The design space is filled with a myriad of constraints and intricacies such as sizing for deck space considerations, wing fold capabilities to reduce that size factor, and the proper sizing of control surfaces for the tasks of launching and recovering. The F-35C couples those baseline constraints with the additional requirements of low observability and commonality with two other variants which affected such things as arresting hook geometry that had second order effects on arresting gear dynamics (perturbations of kink waves). These engineering challenges were faced by the multidiscipline specialization team of carrier suitability that combines theories from aircraft loads, flying qualities, and performance in a system of systems approach to assess the suitability of an aircraft to operate from ships and austere sites. In addition to flight sciences, carrier suitability includes many other nuances and facets such as navigation and guidance, sensor integration, data link interoperability, pilot-vehicle interface, supportability, maintainability, and night evaluations, that were all beyond the scope of this paper.

Aircraft that are launched from and perform arrested landings to the deck of a ship require enhanced structure to withstand the loads to which they are subjected. As such, a majority of the carrier suitability process was spent on conducting specialized loads testing in the form of shore-based catapults and arrested landings. During the structural survey, the F-35C faced and overcame many challenges such as the AHS. The original tailhook is proof that while designs may work on paper, they do not always go right the first time. The AHS redesign process was validation of the engineering problem solving process.

Additionally, strides towards the improvement of the carrier suitability discipline were also made by challenging the current assumptions and philosophies. The F-35C was approached with a “blank canvas” mentality that paved the way for the use of automation in the pursuit of CVS testing that increased efficiency. The advanced approach modes and IDLC provided the pilot with an unprecedented ability to control the aircraft. This technology, specifically DFP, and FTAs provided tools that allowed challenging test points to be achieved with a high level of repeatability without relying on a test pilot’s skill to finesse aircraft performance.

Undeniably, the CLAW, which provides the basis for the advance approach modes and FTAs, demonstrated many benefits to both the F-35C and the entire F-35 program. Delta Flight Path is a game changer. It was an instrumental tool in allowing the test team to complete the structural survey efficiently, effectively, and safely. DFP, which has only been attainable with the implementation of fly-by-wire controlled aircraft and advances in computing power, will be the basis for changes in how the discipline of CVS flight test is approached in the future. Not only has DFP been beneficial to flight test, but it has also provided the fleet aviator with an unprecedented ability to control the aircraft during shipboard approaches which will increase operational capabilities and make Naval Aviation safer."

Source: F-35 Carrier Suitability Testing PDF

Re: Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

Unread postPosted: 12 Jul 2018, 16:00
by spazsinbad
10 page PDF of article below attached.
A Flight Deck REVOLUTION

"...INTO SERVICE...
...Four squadron F-35Cs then embarked the USS George Washington on August 14, directly from Eglin, to begin the first fleet pilot CQs. Of the 15 pilots on squadron strength, a total of 12 deployed to the carrier. LT Graham Cleveland, lead LSO at the ‘Grim Reapers’, said: “It’s awesome to see that everybody performs so well. We are on the boat less than 24 hours and almost everybody is qualified without a single ‘bolter’ [when the tailhook misses all of the arresting wires]. We’ve not heard any screaming calls from the LSOs and not a single pilot has caught the one-wire, which is less safe than a two- or the preferred three-wire. We also haven’t seen any waveoffs due to unsafe approaches.”

New F-35 technology had a large part to play. The Delta Flight Path (DFP) has been developed by the US Navy in close co-operation with Lockheed Martin. It partly automates the precise flying phase in the final seconds before touchdown. Without DFP, an average pilot makes 200 to 300 minor corrections with the throttle, stick and rudder in the last 18 seconds before touchdown. DFP, along with the Magic Carpet software developed simultaneously for the F/A-18 Hornet, dramatically decreases these corrections to just 20 for an average pilot. It is expected that this number could even drop below ten inputs!

“With DFP we have reduced FCLPs to between four and six days”, said LT Cleveland. “I expect the navy to reduce day requirements to six traps”....

...Some of the specific navy testing that CDR Anderson [CDR Ernest ‘Big Ern’ Anderson, executive officer (XO) of VX-9 Det Edwards] mentions includes aircraft carrier testing. “We CQ’d our first pilot from VX-9 last September and three more are currently working with VFA-101 and 125 to get qualified,” Anderson explains. “There are already multiple boat detachments going on but we will run OT-I – our first formal operational test period on the boat – in summer 2018. For this we will embark on the carrier and execute specific test points to assess suitability for mission readiness.”

Typically, US Navy pilots must complete ten daylight ‘traps’ and six at night aboard the carrier in order to achieve an initial qualification. Night launches and recoveries have been successfully demonstrated by the NAS Patuxent River Integrated Test Force, initially during DT-II in November 2014. Anderson continues: “Coming back to an airfield at night is very different to coming back to the ship. The night-vision camera [in the helmet] is already very capable in the tactical environment but flying around the carrier at night is a unique situation. So there are some things we’d like to see improved before we move forward with it. It really comes down to how dim you can get the symbology in the helmet. US Navy guys are notorious. At night we turn everything in the cockpit down in brightness in order to open up the aperture in our eyes for better night vision. This is so you can see the landing area and see the [Fresnel] lens.

“Delta Flight Path makes the F-35C considerably easier to land aboard the carrier,” says Anderson. “The data we saw from VFA-101’s last detachment was eye-watering in terms of how accurate they were at landing without bolters, or high or low passes.”

CDR Tony Wilson, a development test pilot with VX-23 said: “Delta Flight Path is an innovative leap in aircraft flight controls – this command enables the F-35 to capture and maintain a glide slope, greatly reducing pilot workload, increasing safety margins during carrier approaches and reducing touchdown dispersion.” CDR Anderson adds: “The jet knows the ship’s speed and the wind speed over the deck. The pilot still flies the line-up, but the jet is assisting you with the glideslope corrections.” Testing revealed an extraordinary reduction in the level of pilot inputs in the final approach phase to the carrier. It has huge implications for the future of carrier aviation.

“Pilots have felt confident to go to the ship in half the amount of ‘looks’ that it would have previously taken,” says Anderson. “Even for first-time pilots going to the boat, it will undoubtedly reduce their time to prepare.”..."

Source: F-35 Lightning II The Fighter Evolution Magazine July 2018