F-35 Program Docs

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3896
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post05 Mar 2019, 20:01

Right, that's what I remembered. But still, we see no purple dots past 0.95M for any variant even though we know it has been done. The remarkable part to me is the collection of dots around 0.3M at 40,000ft.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 22273
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post09 Mar 2019, 05:30

LM F-35 Fast Facts 05 Mar 2019 : 180,000+ flight hours - 770+ Trained Pilots - 7,100+ Maintainers Trained

https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a6 ... h_2019.pdf (1.1Mb)
Attachments
f-35_fast_facts-_march_2019.pdf
(1.1 MiB) Downloaded 64 times
F-35fastFactsMar2019prodProfile.gif
Last edited by spazsinbad on 09 Mar 2019, 10:53, edited 1 time in total.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1403
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post09 Mar 2019, 10:25

Note the change in production profile for Mar vs Feb.
Online

marsavian

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 824
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post16 Mar 2019, 00:59

Inspector General U.S. Department of Defense
Report No. DODIG‑2019‑062
MARCH 13, 2019

Audit of Management of Government‑Owned Property
Supporting the F‑35 Program

https://media.defense.gov/2019/Mar/15/2 ... 19-062.PDF
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 22273
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post16 Mar 2019, 03:07

At least there is a remedy for this situation being implemented to the satisfaction of all (when it is finished - one hopes).
DoD inspector general slams F-35 program office for allowing Lockheed to manage government property
15 Mar 2019 Valerie Insinna

"WASHINGTON — The F-35 Joint Program Office has not adequately tracked government property leant or leased to Lockheed Martin and its subcontractors, an oversight that a new investigation by the Defense Department’s inspector general said could impact readiness. Building the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter requires the use of government property such as materiel, special tooling like molds used to form the jet’s structure and unique test equipment.

Over the lifespan of the program, the F-35 JPO has not followed the mandated procedures used to manage government-furnished property, or GFP, and instead depended on Lockheed and its subcontractors to keep track of such equipment, stated a DoD IG report released Friday. [see link in 'marsavian' post immediately above here]

“As a result, the DoD does not know the actual value of the F‑35 property and does not have an independent record to verify the contractor‑valued government property of $2.1 billion for the F‑35 program,” the report said. “Without accurate records, the F‑35 Program officials have no visibility over the property and have no metrics to hold the prime contractor accountable for how it manages government property.

“The lack of asset visibility restricts the DoD’s ability to conduct the necessary checks and balances that ensure the prime contractor is managing and spending F‑35 Program funds in the government’s best interest and could impact the DoD’s ability to meet its operational readiness goals for the F‑35 aircraft.”...

...The IG, in its report, said it was satisfied with the corrective actions proposed by the JPO, but that it would review their implementation at a later date. Creating a record of government property will not be as simple as copying over Lockheed Martin’s record.

Lockheed estimates there are 3.45 million pieces of government property used for the F-35 program, and that equipment is worth an estimated $2.1 billion. However, its records are not written to the same standard that the Defense Department mandates. For instance, federal regulations require that government records keep track of the contract number associated with a given piece of GFE, while Lockheed did not include that information. Other data recorded by the company — such as the name of a part or its quantity — were incomplete by Pentagon standards."

Source: https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/03 ... -property/
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2059
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post17 Mar 2019, 19:21

The horror -- the squeal of the gummint bean counting bureaucrats...

However, its records are not written to the same standard that the Defense Department mandates.


LM prolly saving the gummint $$ by not dotting every i to the nth degree. Expect costs to rise once the bureaucratic bean counters get their fangs into the program.
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Previous

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests