New coating & look for F-35s coming later this year

[sferrin]

Has to be the most boring paint job on any U.S. aircraft! Makes the F-15E look glamorous!

Dunno how much the paint job figures into the VLO of the F-35... but if I were an F-35 pilot, I'd rather be invisibile, than glamorous...

Hey, don't knock it. Nobody would ever see THIS in the sky :

[wrightwing]

Has to be the most boring paint job on any U.S. aircraft! Makes the F-15E look glamorous!

Dunno how much the paint job figures into the VLO of the F-35... but if I were an F-35 pilot, I'd rather be invisibile, than glamorous...

Hey, don't knock it. Nobody would ever see THIS in the sky :

su-35-S-2.jpg

Heck, at 50nm, that design allows you to simply disappear into background.

[doge]

I'm wondering where to post, so I'll post here.

Now, The interval time until LO coating maintenance needs is 19 hours!! wow (Looong)
How does it compare to other stealth aircraft? Looks like a pretty long time to me!! 19h!! (Extremely durable.)
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... id-461721/

Lockheed declares F-35 stealth coating ‘rock solid’
23 October, 2019 SOURCE: FlightGlobal.com BY: Greg Waldron
Lockheed Martin has defended both the stealth coatings of the F-35A and its efforts to boost the supply of spare parts, as it eyes the conclusion of three fighter campaigns in 2020 and lower operating costs.
While 2019 has been a relatively trouble-free year in the programme’s long history, reports have emerged regarding concerns about the durability of its low-observable coatings at high speeds, as well as continued issues with spare parts availability.
Speaking at the Seoul International Aerospace & Defence Exhibition (ADEX) in October, Steve Sheehy, F-35 director sustainment strategies and campaigns, acknowledged that there was an issue that required the replacement of rain erosion tape on the fighter’s leading edges, but that the coating itself is “rock solid”.

“It’s a generational jump from previous stealth aircraft,” he says.
Lockheed’s F-35 factory in Fort Worth, Texas, has a doormat made from the jet’s low-observable skin. “Every year they pick it up and check it, and it still holds that LO quality,” Sheehy says.
Steve Over, director international business, adds: “It’s seen tens and tens of thousands of steps. People jump on it, stomp on it... it’s just one thing we use to prove the durability of the coating system.”

More importantly, they contend, the coating is easily applied in the field and requires no environmental control facility as with previous versions of stealth aircraft. Lockheed says the interval between maintenance events for the F-35’s low-observable coating is now 19h – better than the targeted 9h.

On the issue of spares, which has proven a challenge as F-35 numbers have grown, Sheehy says that standard practice formerly involved issuing contracts for individual jets before contracts for spare parts.
“[This meant] spares are constantly chasing the aircraft, driving a problem with supply. We’ve fixed that, putting over $2 billion of our own money to fund all these spare parts. So, in 2020 when an aircraft arrives, the spares will already be in place. That will fix that problem. The spares will be populated for those airframes.”
Over adds that 2021 will be an important year for the F-35, with competitions in Canada, Finland and Switzerland likely to be decided. There are also considerable longer-term opportunities.
“There are a lot of potential markets,” says Over. “We’re in conversations with countries in Europe who are thinking about recapitalising old fleets. None of them have matured to the point that [countries such as] Finland, Switzerland and Canada have, but there is definitely a market well into 2030 and beyond for nations recapitalising fourth-generation fleets.”
Meanwhile, Over notes that the F-35 programme continues to see falling airframe costs, as discussions continue on low-rate initial production blocks 12, 13 and 14, covering a combined 478 of the stealth aircraft.
“We have not finalised the exact dollar amount for each of the airplanes in [production lots] 12, 13 and 14, but we and the US government have agreed that [the cost of a] Lot 13 airplane will start with a seven, and lot 14 will be even cheaper. We continue down the price curve, and we haven’t reached bottom yet. We'll be below $80 million for an F-35A in Lot 13.”

[gc]

China will be trying their very best to steal that door mat

[archeman]

Lockheed declares F-35 stealth coating ‘rock solid’
23 October, 2019 SOURCE: FlightGlobal.com BY: Greg Waldron
Lockheed Martin has defended both the stealth coatings of the F-35A

“It’s a generational jump from previous stealth aircraft,” he says.
Lockheed’s F-35 factory in Fort Worth, Texas, has a doormat made from the jet’s low-observable skin. “Every year they pick it up and check it, and it still holds that LO quality,” Sheehy says.

More importantly, they contend, the coating is easily applied in the field and requires no environmental control facility as with previous versions of stealth aircraft. Lockheed says the interval between maintenance events for the F-35’s low-observable coating is now 19h – better than the targeted 9h.

It looks like Lockheed management continues to focus on comparing the F-35 service cost and labor time to "previous stealth aircraft". While there is some merit to this, it doesn't really help in head to head competitions where the F-35 isn't facing "previous stealth aircraft". It is facing a small herd of well sorted out 4th gen+ aircraft.

[quicksilver]

I agree that the metrics are vague and largely meaningless. Is this number for scheduled events or unscheduled events; what is the MTTR for said events? Kentucky windage helps a little here — if the monthly utilization rate is 25hrs (avg), that means they have about one lo maint event/month on avg. That’s really good given the nicks and scrapes that can occur regardless of aircraft type.

[mixelflick]

I like the new look. It appears slimmer/not as "stubby" IMO. Although it'll never look "mean" so to speak, it is growing on me when looked at from certain angles.

.

I think it actually does look mean. from the front and back it looks like a muscular pit bull that has really short cropped ears. compared to the more elegant look of the raptor.

More than any other fighter IMO, the F-35's "mean" look.... depends. For example, in this pic the F-35 on the ramp looks pudgy, brick like and decidedly non-threatening. The F-35 taking off though looks positively deadly, threatening and futuristic IMO. Compare that to something like the SU-35 which looks like a coiled Cobra from any angle, or the X-32 "Monica" - which was fugly any way you looked at it!

[hornetfinn]

Lockheed declares F-35 stealth coating ‘rock solid’
23 October, 2019 SOURCE: FlightGlobal.com BY: Greg Waldron
Lockheed Martin has defended both the stealth coatings of the F-35A

“It’s a generational jump from previous stealth aircraft,” he says.
Lockheed’s F-35 factory in Fort Worth, Texas, has a doormat made from the jet’s low-observable skin. “Every year they pick it up and check it, and it still holds that LO quality,” Sheehy says.

More importantly, they contend, the coating is easily applied in the field and requires no environmental control facility as with previous versions of stealth aircraft. Lockheed says the interval between maintenance events for the F-35’s low-observable coating is now 19h – better than the targeted 9h.

It looks like Lockheed management continues to focus on comparing the F-35 service cost and labor time to "previous stealth aircraft". While there is some merit to this, it doesn't really help in head to head competitions where the F-35 isn't facing "previous stealth aircraft". It is facing a small herd of well sorted out 4th gen+ aircraft.

I think in that case this was well justifiable as 4th gen aircraft really don't have similar coating as stealth aircraft. So when talking about LO coating maintenance requirements, only valid comparisons are previous stealth aircraft (at the moment). When talking about other maintenance requirements, I agree that it must be compared to 4th gen fighters as that's the only comparison that matters. I think that's also what they have done actually.

[marauder2048]

I agree that the metrics are vague and largely meaningless. Is this number for scheduled events or unscheduled events; what is the MTTR for said events? Kentucky windage helps a little here — if the monthly utilization rate is 25hrs (avg), that means they have about one lo maint event/month on avg. That’s really good given the nicks and scrapes that can occur regardless of aircraft type.

I wouldn't think MTTR would be the relevant metric since there's not really a fault isolation/triaging component
that would be a source of variability. Maybe more like "on-condition" maintenance.

The relative comparison of interest would be the maintenance intervals for the RCS
reduction techniques on the Super Hornet.

[quicksilver]

“...there's not really a fault isolation/triaging component that would be a source of variability.“

As I understand it there actually is — for example, along the lines of the difference between fixing an ‘edge’ (someone drives a tug into one of those weapons bay doors like we see in the pic above), versus cleaning up several small spots of hangar rash. Different degree of difficulty or ‘level of effort’ (my words) and potentially more down time on one versus the other.

[quicksilver]

“I think in that case this was well justifiable as 4th gen aircraft really don't have similar coating as stealth aircraft. So when talking about LO coating maintenance requirements...”

I would be inclined to understand what the overall dmmh/fh would be for one aircraft versus another, regardless of ‘generation’. All aircraft have maintenance requirements unique to that specific aircraft; how much time, effort, and cost are required to take care of the thing? I remember when the Hornet first showed up. It was a revelation in dmmh/fh as well as relative ease of effort.

[mixelflick]

Hey, don't knock it. Nobody would ever see THIS in the sky :

The attachment su-35-S-2.jpg is no longer available

[/quote]

I'm not sure why, but the Russians seem to have better/more diverse paint schemes than their US counterparts. Take for example these camo patterns on the SU-57. I find them very unique, even if I'm not sure they're effective.

[wrightwing]

Hey, don't knock it. Nobody would ever see THIS in the sky :

su-35-S-2.jpg

I'm not sure why, but the Russians seem to have better/more diverse paint schemes than their US counterparts. Take for example these camo patterns on the SU-57. I find them very unique, even if I'm not sure they're effective.

Better at what? Low observabiilty? Low visual signature? Low maintenance?

[quicksilver]

I’m curious about the dome-shaped device on the fuselage centerline aft of the cockpit.

[zhangmdev]

I’m curious about the dome-shaped device on the fuselage centerline aft of the cockpit.

That is a 101KS-O directional infrared countermeasures, another one below the cockpit, facing downward.