F-35 program updates

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 718
Joined: 01 Jul 2007, 18:22

by SnakeHandler » 20 Mar 2010, 01:56

So when do we see it short takeoff, supersonic dash and vertical land?


Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 185
Joined: 13 Dec 2006, 17:17

by Ztex » 20 Mar 2010, 04:15

spazsinbad wrote:. 'I could be todally rong but I'm a dancing fool...' (Frank Zappa).


Yowza, yowza, yowza!


Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 8407
Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
Location: California

by SpudmanWP » 20 Mar 2010, 06:03

lb wrote:The new estimate is an average cost of $114 to $135 million:


It's the same estimate, just in "Then Year" dollars (ie with inflation included).

I really wish you people would do a little research instead of jumping on every 'doom and gloom' article that comes out.


Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 640
Joined: 09 Dec 2007, 14:06
Location: Oslo, Norway

by energo » 23 Mar 2010, 22:45

SpudmanWP wrote:
lb wrote:The new estimate is an average cost of $114 to $135 million:


It's the same estimate, just in "Then Year" dollars (ie with inflation included).


Then Year 2012-2014 according to Defensenews.


B. Bolsøy
Oslo


Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 274
Joined: 05 Jan 2007, 22:36
Location: Aust.

by beepa » 24 Mar 2010, 06:52

Thanks for the updates and all your hard work energo!!...It's people like yourself and the rest of the F16.net crew that keep me coming back, although lately it's been a gauntlet of trolls to pass before I can see the forest.


Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 379
Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 15:59

by bumtish » 26 Mar 2010, 22:10

energo wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:
lb wrote:The new estimate is an average cost of $114 to $135 million:


It's the same estimate, just in "Then Year" dollars (ie with inflation included).


Then Year 2012-2014 according to Defensenews.


B. Bolsøy
Oslo


The only then year dollar year being (publically)operated with within the JSF program is TY2034 dollars, being the last planned year of vehicle procurement.

Defensenews also got it wrong as the deliveries in 2010-2014 are not at APUC, but at the specific cost for these years.

Check lb' post at bottom of the previous page.

Then year dollars are not inflation adjusted. :wink:


Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 241
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 04:30
Location: USA

by lb » 03 Jun 2010, 23:01

Actually the new estimate is $155 million TY or $112 million in 2002 dollars PAUC. For average procurement cost the new estimate is $133 million or $92 million in 2002 dollars. Here is Dr Carter's June 1st letter to Congress and a CBO study that was just released and is not getting much attention as of yet.
Attachments
dod-f-35-nunnmccurdy-certificationJune2010.pdf
(287.09 KiB) Downloaded 2226 times
05-27-FighterInventories-CBO.pdf
(1.55 MiB) Downloaded 2332 times


F-16.net Editor
F-16.net Editor
 
Posts: 3083
Joined: 23 Aug 2003, 12:02

by Asif » 06 Jun 2010, 20:26

F-35C CF-01 makes first taxi tests May 28, 2010


Lockheed Martin test pilot Jeff Knowles takes the first F-35C, called CF-1, on its first taxi test at Lockheed Martins' Fort Worth facility on May 28th, 2010. [Photo by Carl Richards]
Asif Shamim
F-16.net Editorial staff & Patch Gallery Administration


Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 640
Joined: 09 Dec 2007, 14:06
Location: Oslo, Norway

by energo » 25 Mar 2011, 00:47

F-35 Weekly Updates on the Canadian F-35 program website: http://f-35.ca/2011/f-35-weekly-update
Last edited by energo on 02 Apr 2011, 13:32, edited 1 time in total.


Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 8407
Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
Location: California

by SpudmanWP » 25 Mar 2011, 04:16

Cool find... I've added that site to my daily list. :)
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."


User avatar
Elite 2K
Elite 2K
 
Posts: 2895
Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
Location: Houston

by neptune » 25 Mar 2011, 18:40

energo wrote:Source: http://f-35.ca/2011/f-35-weekly-update- ... h-24-2011/

Thursday, March 24th, 2011
F-35 Weekly Update – March 24, 2011
A Message from Larry Lawson

.... AF-3 resumed flight ops for a functional check of the newly installed Mission Systems software and hardware, and returned Code One.
.....


Kudos to the team for Code One. It's a "Big Deal" to get this mod. effort working for LO, a path forward for all F-35s. :D


User avatar
Elite 2K
Elite 2K
 
Posts: 2895
Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
Location: Houston

by neptune » 25 Mar 2011, 18:50

energo wrote:Source: http://f-35.ca/2011/f-35-weekly-update- ... h-24-2011/

Thursday, March 24th, 2011
F-35 Weekly Update – March 24, 2011
....This week, the Fort Worth team is hosting a series of high level visitors including the acting Deputy Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Mr. Dave van Buren; the USAF Commander of the Air Education and Training Center, Gen. Ed Rice; and Lt. Gen. Terry Robling..


It'd be nice to see if a "Bee" (VL :) or not) could join the Admirals and Generals at The Navy League’s Sea-Air-Space Exposition in Arlington, Va.; 12 April; if the SDD schedule permits. :idea:


Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 8407
Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
Location: California

by SpudmanWP » 28 Mar 2011, 18:55

F-35 ahead of schedule, even after generator failure.

http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/f-35- ... a=1&c=1171

Author: Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D.
Date: Monday, March 28, 2011

Flight tests of the tri-service F-35 Joint Strike Fighter are running well ahead of the plan for 2011, with 181 flights completed as of March 25 against a plan of 133. In addition, the productivity of each flight test is increasing, with an average of 7.7 unique test points achieved per flight. The combination of additional test flights above plan and greater-than-expected productivity per flight has enabled the overall test program to complete 1,310 test points -- far above the number of 899 planned for this stage in the testing cycle. All three variants of the F-35 are being tested, with the average aircraft performing six flights per month.

The test program might have been dealt a serious setback on March 9 when a conventional takeoff variant was forced to make an emergency landing due to a dual generator failure. Generators provide the electricity that starts the fighter's engine and powers flight controls. However, the cause of the failure was quickly traced to faulty maintenance procedures which have now been corrected, and the test fleet has returned to service. These kinds of anomalies are commonplace in tests of new aircraft.

Lockheed Martin officials are confident they can resolve problems identified in testing with several parts of the short-takeoff/vertical-landing (STOVL) version of the F-35 being developed for the Marine Corps. Among the fixes required are a strengthening of the doors above the mid-fuselage lift-fan, reinforcement of a bulkhead, and resolution of excessive heat deposition at one point near the engine exhaust. Defense secretary Robert Gates recently put the Marine variant on a two-year probationary period to make the necessary fixes, while stating the Air Force and Navy variants were progressing well.

The conventional-takeoff Air Force version will be the most heavily produced F-35, comprising over 70 percent of the domestic production run and almost all of the export sales. The Air Force plans to buy 1,763 conventional-takeoff F-35s, while the Navy and Marine Corps collectively will buy 680 of their two variants. Overseas allies are expected to buy thousands of the planes over the next three decades as they replace aging Cold War fighters and seek a low-cost solution to their requirement for a versatile and survivable tactical aircraft.


User avatar
F-16.net Editor
F-16.net Editor
 
Posts: 1984
Joined: 06 Nov 2003, 18:21

by Jon » 16 Jul 2011, 06:35

Hi guys

Need an update on squadrons that are for sure getting the F-35.

58th FS....


Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 563
Joined: 08 Feb 2011, 20:25

by luke_sandoz » 22 Sep 2011, 17:22

Interesting . . .

http://f-35.ca has a 'special" Canuckistan version of the F-35 with the gun blister on the right side.

Looks like LM hired a PR firm to handle the negative press in Canada and they have goofed the image.


PreviousNext

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: hornetfinn, moreno74 and 27 guests