Marine Aviation Plan 2015

Variants for different customers or mission profiles
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6019
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post25 Mar 2015, 18:48

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Breaking news! At IOC the F-35B will still be better than the Harrier in all ways except max G available. Will have "As promised" performance a year later with a SOFTWARE UPDATE! Bulkhead failure was found in Durability testing and will not effect the early service F-35Bs before it can be replaced at depot level (if they decide they still need the first few dozen at that time, when they have a few hundred more). Sorry, I just fail to see any doom and gloom with these reports. The first Wasp deployment was far more telling to me, that the first LHA landing was made by a Hornet pilot with no Harrier experience and he stated the challenge wasn't the approach or landing or touchdown, but nailing a 1ft^2 box with the nose gear.


This is what I have been screaming.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't:

http://articles.latimes.com/2002/dec/15 ... -harrier15
Choose Crews
Offline

bring_it_on

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 929
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014, 14:32

Unread post25 Mar 2015, 19:08

:bang: There is a reason why DAVE is angry. Its not like the USN or the Marines have encountered cracking in the past or had to restrict there cutting edge fighter aircraft from exploring its envelope or performing as " designed". This "HALF BLIND" stuff is something thats brand new. :doh: :doh:


A year after IOC (1984) -

Image

I wonder if "Little Dave" was there at the briefing and asked about tails falling off and hitting folks on the ground ;)

Image

Image
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6019
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post25 Mar 2015, 23:38

bring_it_on wrote::bang: There is a reason why DAVE is angry. Its not like the USN or the Marines have encountered cracking in the past or had to restrict there cutting edge fighter aircraft from exploring its envelope or performing as " designed". This "HALF BLIND" stuff is something thats brand new. :doh: :doh:


A year after IOC (1984) -

Image

I wonder if "Little Dave" was there at the briefing and asked about tails falling off and hitting folks on the ground ;)

Image

Image


What a POS. Phantoms Phorever


Thanks for that 8)
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23477
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post26 Mar 2015, 03:49

NO MORE 'DEATH OF A SALESPERSON' or DeFSpiral - SirNoSir!
‘I Am Not A Salesman For F-35:’ Lt. Gen. Bogdan, F-35 PEO; 2B Software Delayed
25 Mar 2015 Colin Clark

"...First off, the 2B software won’t ready by June, when the Marines plan to declare Initial Operational Capability (IOC). They need to “tweak” it, Bogdan said, so the final version of the software won’t be ready until early fall. But it isn’t ready, so he’s late. That’s not a huge deal, except for the dark optics.

Almost since officials stated talking about the F-35’s capabilities, they have touted its fusion engine as perhaps the plane’s most remarkable tool. This bit of mathematical formula (algorthymns and software) takes data from the plane’s sensors, looks at the threat library and tells the pilot what he faces and recommends the right tools to destroy it. It’s the fusion engine that needs fixing.

The F-35 is designed to fly in groups of four and they are all supposed to share their data with each other. The military doesn’t like to talk about it, but the planes do not fly in a tight formation. It’s more like a diamond spread out over dozens or hundreds of miles. During December testing, the program found there were problems with the fusion engine’s results. When one F-35 is using its sensors to look at ground targets the fusion engine works extremely well. When two planes are sharing data, all goes well. When three planes share, things are pretty good. When four planes share, the system can report ghost targets and other anomalies that Bogdan did not offer details about....

...For those who care, here are the latest cost figures per plane in LRIPs six, seven and eight:

◾F-35A $117 million; $112 million; $108 million
◾F-35B $145 million; $137 million; $134 million
◾F-35C $134 million; $130 million; $129 million"

Source: http://breakingdefense.com/2015/03/i-am ... e-delayed/
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

Dragon029

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1353
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 07:13

Unread post26 Mar 2015, 11:12

Seen in the comments of that post:

snafu_solomon • 10 hours ago

Bulkhead cracking, software delayed and now the Lt. General hinting that he will happily wind the program to a close. Things are happening as I predicted. I give the program another 60-90 days. Hopefully the technology developed can be incorporated into the F/A-18 and F/A-18E/F.


:wink:
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7706
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post26 Mar 2015, 11:49

When all else fails, there's always delusion.
Conan O'Brien
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

mk82

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 848
  • Joined: 15 Oct 2009, 18:43
  • Location: Australia

Unread post26 Mar 2015, 12:05

Dragon029 wrote:Seen in the comments of that post:

snafu_solomon • 10 hours ago

Bulkhead cracking, software delayed and now the Lt. General hinting that he will happily wind the program to a close. Things are happening as I predicted. I give the program another 60-90 days. Hopefully the technology developed can be incorporated into the F/A-18 and F/A-18E/F.


:wink:


That is a new depth of stupidity and confabulation :devil: . Let see me.....in 60 to 90 days time....what!!! The F35 is still alive in rude health.....cue impotent rage from Solomon bwahahaha :mrgreen:
Offline
User avatar

KamenRiderBlade

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2635
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2012, 02:20
  • Location: USA

Unread post26 Mar 2015, 15:29

mk82 wrote:
Dragon029 wrote:Seen in the comments of that post:

snafu_solomon • 10 hours ago

Bulkhead cracking, software delayed and now the Lt. General hinting that he will happily wind the program to a close. Things are happening as I predicted. I give the program another 60-90 days. Hopefully the technology developed can be incorporated into the F/A-18 and F/A-18E/F.


:wink:


That is a new depth of stupidity and confabulation :devil: . Let see me.....in 60 to 90 days time....what!!! The F35 is still alive in rude health.....cue impotent rage from Solomon bwahahaha :mrgreen:


What next, the global climate isn't changing drastically?

He's probably a climate denier too.
Offline

bring_it_on

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 929
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014, 14:32

Unread post26 Mar 2015, 22:11

Well the comment section is getting exciting :). I've put up the F-18 tail crack clipping as well :)

ELP

Thus far, the F-35 is no threat to those forces. In fact it is likely to get shot down.





EricP_Fanclub

Ideally that sentence should include a link to your own blog where you have a collection of a few dozen links back to your own blog entries from the past that you use to substantiate your claims.

If you are going to pretend to be an analyst (without providing any sort of indication on your background, technical abilities, qualification, experience or knowledge on the subject matter at hand ) you must carry that over to the forums when you wake up in the morning and do a round of the web to find F-35 articles to comment upon. That way those reading your BS won't get a different impression.

Before you accuse me of being a Pentagon/JPO paid troll, I'll admit it myself. You are apparently so darn important that there is a 15 member team at Fort Meade tasked with following you around the internet.


Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2733
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post27 Mar 2015, 07:00

US Marines stick to F-35B dates despite new problems
By: Stephen Trimble



None of the items Bogdan talked about (and breathlessly reported so as to generate website hits) are 'new' except the multi-ship fusion tweaks. None.

The cracking he referred to occurred in the durability test article well over a year ago (at the equivalent of something over one simulated lifetime), and not in the aircraft that are flying around at Yuma and Beaufort. News flash: the patch for the fusion tweaks will be delivered to the fleet in the fall.

Some real news for those who have never flown in more recent TACAIR (Hornet, Viper, Mud Hen, Harrier -- each to a different degree) nor in software-driven jets -- these kind of 'tweaks' will go on for the life of a jet.

I also note that in another report on the same media round table by Bogdan, that the much bally-hoo'd 55-year O&S estimate that spawned the 'trillion dollar jet' meme is actually something on the order of 530B in constant-year dollars. In other words, aboout 40% of the 'trillion dollar' headline is actually inflation dollars.

But what's a half-trillion dollar difference between friends...right? :roll:
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23477
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post27 Mar 2015, 07:55

Some more detail about the software issue workarounds: LONG POST BEST READ at SOURCE
Why the Marine Corps Is Rushing to Deploy an Imperfect Combat Aircraft
26 Mar 2015 Sandra Erwin

"...Marines insist that they would much rather take an incomplete F-35B than continue to fly their antiquated fighters.

The F-35B would eventually replace all AV-8B Harriers, F/A-18 Hornets and the EA-6B Prowlers. One of the shortfalls in the new airplane is that its mission software, called Block 2B, is still not able to perform “sensor fusion” functions that allow pilots to identify targets and share the data across a network of multiple F-35s. Fusion is one of the attributes that distinguish “fifth generation” fighters like the F-35 from older models developed during the Cold War.

The Marine Corps intends to start flying the F-35B in combat duties some time in July, a milestone called “initial operational capability,” or IOC....

...The full-blown F-35 mission software would not come until 2017, but the Marine Corps is looking at this in perspective: A less-than-optimum F-35B is still far more desirable than what they have now.
“The Block 2B software configuration that the Marine Corps will IOC with brings an immediate increase in combat capability compared to legacy aircraft,” said Marine Corps spokesman Maj. Paul Greenberg. “Most of the deficiencies we track are deficiencies when compared to the F-35's full combat capability in 2017.”

What matters, he said, is whether the aircraft can meet the basic needs of Marines at war, he said. In its current state, the F-35B can launch missiles, engage other aircraft in dogfights and drop bombs. “At IOC the F-35 will be able to target in real time, talk to forward air controllers over the radio and data-link, put weapons on target and do all of that in contested environments and in bad weather,” Greenberg said. The electronic attack features of the current F-35B, he added, represent a “transformation in electronic warfare spectrum management, and this is not possible with legacy aircraft.”...

...Bogdan said the Block 2B software development was finished in February — four months after its original October 2014 deadline — but there are still glitches to be fixed over the course of this year. The next version, Block 3i for the Air Force, is scheduled for completion in 2016, and the one the Navy is waiting for, Block 3F, would be ready in 2018. F-35 prime contractor Lockheed Martin stands to lose $300 million in incentive fees if those deadlines aren’t met.

The software that will be delivered to the Marines in June is “good enough for IOC” and the Marines understand its limitations, Bogdan said March 24 during a meeting with reporters....

...Software in general “always has been the number-one technical issue on this program. And always will be,” Bogdan said. The highly computerized aircraft runs on eight million lines of code. Much of that software manages the basic functions of the aircraft, such as flight controls, valves, fuel systems and radars. That software is working as intended, or the airplane would be unsafe to fly. The issues are with the so-called “fusion engine” that was designed to create a unified picture of the potential threats in the airspace so multiple F-35s can fight as a single information network.

The fusion engine combines the input from the F-35 sensors — radar, electro-optical targeting system and distributed aperture system — to create a single track on the location of enemy targets in the air and on the ground. The data then is shared across the network. The software today cannot display accurate data to more than two aircraft at a time. “Fusion is by far the most complicated and, in my mind, worrisome element of this program,” Bogdan said.

When four F-35s flew during a test exercise in recent months, the fusion engine created a confusing and inaccurate picture. Instead of identifying an air-defense missile battery on the ground, the software would “see” double or misread the location. “What we found is that when you have more than one F-35 looking at the same threat, they don't all see it the same,” Bogdan said. “When there's a slight difference, the fusion model can't decide if it's one or more threats.”
The fusion algorithms have to be tweaked, and that could take months. “This is not something you can test in a lab,” Bogdan said.

Marines are not losing sleep over this, at least not for now. They have come up with “workarounds” so they can use the F-35B in close-air support and air-to-air combat missions. “There are ways in which, with the software we have, pilots can work around those problems,” Bogdan said. One option is to only use certain sensors and turn off others. Targeting data would have to be acquired individually by each pilot instead of sharing it across the network. Pilot workload would increase.

Bogdan insisted that the glitches will be fixed, but he would back the Marines if they chose to delay IOC between now and July. “The aircraft will be able to do everything the Marine Corps needs it to do for IOC, it just require pilots to do workarounds.”...

...Another hiccup in the F-35B have been the tires. An aircraft that takes off from short runways and lands vertically requires tires with enough bounce but also must be sufficiently rugged to maintain their form in 170 mph takeoffs. “We have been working hard to find the right balance between float and durability for vertical takeoff,” Bogdan said. “Our fourth tire is now in test. It appears to be working better than any of the others.” Tire manufacturer Dunlop has had difficulties producing the correct specs, he added, “But we’re moving in the right direction.”...

...Marine officials recently have somewhat softened their stance on a July IOC, suggesting that it is not a hard deadline.

“We won't declare IOC unless we meet all of our targets,” Lt. Gen. Jon Davis, deputy commandant of the Marine Corps for aviation told the Senate Armed Services Committee March 25.

The F-35B with the current software provides “tremendous capability that we don't have today,” Davis insisted. “I have no fusion in the airplanes I operate today.” The pilots who fly it today “love the F-35B and they wouldn't go back to their original platforms.”

On the software, Davis said he would withhold judgment for now. If the squadron is not ready to declare IOC, he said, the Marine Corps will respect that. “The decision to declare IOC will be event-based and conditions-based, based on us achieving what we have to do to deliver a combat capability to our Marines,” he said. “If conditions are met, I will make a recommendation to [Commandant] General Dunford that we declare our IOC.”

Source: http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/ ... a2&ID=1784
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2733
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post28 Mar 2015, 22:47

Maybe the Marines should have bailed out of the Hornet program after this beauty of a report --

"F/A-l8 Naval Strike Fighter:
Progress Has Been Made But
Problems And Concerns Continue"

http://archive.gao.gov/f0102/114371.pdf

Note the section on bulkhead cracks on page 6 of the report.

Then, of course, there was the minor matter of two crashes.
Offline
User avatar

smsgtmac

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 863
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2013, 04:22
  • Location: Texas

Unread post29 Mar 2015, 03:21

And lest we forget the F-18 Center Barrel replacement program(s) for the legacy Hornets....
http://www.fatigue2014.com/presentations/wednesday-5march-2014/36146.pdf
http://www.navair.navy.mil/frcsw/docs/almanac_v5_issue4.pdf
http://www.dau.mil/pubscats/ATL%20Docs/Sep-Oct10/Boone%20sept-oct10.pdf

Those F-18s were to have a service life only 75% (6K hrs vs 8k hrs) of the F-35. This stuff is hard. If it wasn't, mouth-breathing "liberal arts' and 'J school' graduates (i.e. 'average specimens') would at least be ABLE to comprehend what its required. But then they'd have a harder task: 'faking' their ignorance instead of living it. :twisted:
--The ultimate weapon is the mind of man.
Offline

bring_it_on

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 929
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014, 14:32

Unread post29 Mar 2015, 20:42

More clarity on what Lt. General Bogdan mentioned to reporters and other activities prior to IOC (Also some engine discussion)

Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23477
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post29 Mar 2015, 23:22

Thanks for that. "CAS better than Legacy (USMC) at moment." Way to go IOC.
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Variants and Missions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest