| Author |
Message |
|
hcobb
|
 Posted: Jan 18, 2012 - 07:40 PM
|
 
|
|
Banned
Joined: Jul 27, 2009 - 04:31 PM
Posts: 222
Location: North California
Status: Offline
|
One of the many many many issues with the F-22 fleet is that the parts are not interchangable.
This means you do not have spare parts, ever. Instead every time a part breaks, that aircraft is down until you can hand build a new part that fits it.
Well I hope the United States never buys another aircraft from that company ever again. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
 Posted: May 18, 2013 - 10:16 AM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
|
|
sferrin
|
|
Posted: Jan 18, 2012 - 07:59 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K
Joined: Jul 22, 2005 - 04:23 AM
Posts: 1613
Status: Offline
|
| Most parts on most aircraft are not. |
_________________
"There I was. . ."
|
|
|
|
|
|
flighthawk
|
|
Posted: Jan 18, 2012 - 08:02 PM
|
|
|
Senior member
Joined: Jan 10, 2007 - 08:06 PM
Posts: 372
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
hcobb
|
|
Posted: Jan 18, 2012 - 08:05 PM
|
|
|
Banned
Joined: Jul 27, 2009 - 04:31 PM
Posts: 222
Location: North California
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote:
Sprey said engineers who worked on it told him that because of Lockheed's use of hundreds of subcontractors, quality control was so poor that workers had to create a "shim line" at the Georgia plant where they retooled badly designed or poorly manufactured components. "Each plane wound up with all these hand-fitted parts that caused huge fits in maintenance," he said. "They were not interchangeable."
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 9071001019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mongo
|
|
Posted: Jan 18, 2012 - 08:42 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Nov 24, 2009 - 10:21 PM
Posts: 34
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Status: Offline
|
| It's the Washington Post. It may as well have been written on toilet paper. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pushoksti
|
|
Posted: Jan 18, 2012 - 09:10 PM
|
|
|
Active Member
Joined: Nov 01, 2008 - 04:50 AM
Posts: 156
Location: Canadar
Status: Offline
|
|
hcobb wrote:
One of the many many many issues with the F-22 fleet is that the parts are not interchangable.
This means you do not have spare parts, ever. Instead every time a part breaks, that aircraft is down until you can hand build a new part that fits it.
Well I hope the United States never buys another aircraft from that company ever again.
Excellent thread.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SpudmanWP
|
|
Posted: Jan 18, 2012 - 09:19 PM
|
|
|
Elite 3K
Joined: Oct 12, 2006 - 08:18 PM
Posts: 4266
Location: California
Status: Offline
|
| Your first mistake was quoting Sprey. |
_________________
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
|
|
|
|
|
|
lamoey
|
|
Posted: Jan 18, 2012 - 09:49 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Apr 25, 2004 - 06:44 PM
Posts: 699
Location: 77006
Status: Offline
|
| I have come accross this problem on the F-16 as well, so it would not be unique for the F-22. I was going to take a part from one bird, just to find it did not fit where I needed it on the second bird. A third bird, however, did have the same part that fit the second bird. All 3 birds were all block 15 pre MLU. |
_________________
Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying
|
|
|
|
|
|
That_Engine_Guy
|
|
Posted: Jan 19, 2012 - 01:29 AM
|
|
|
Elite 2K
Joined: Dec 14, 2005 - 05:03 AM
Posts: 2198
Location: Under the engine somewhere.
Status: Offline
|
The same issue exists with engines, but in a more complicated manner.
When modifications (TCTOs) are accomplished or design changes are made (-229 '97 package, Group VI DEEC, EEP, etc) parts can only be used in specific combinations.
One example, depending on the Core Module's part number, only specific Inlet Fan Modules can be used. Mate a new fan with an old core or vise verse and you not only can encounter an interference issue (IE crushing/pinching parts) but can cause fatigue stress on the fan lowering it's life.
Another issue would be the DEEC (FADEC) that is now called "Group VI", which is a new design to add computing power, increase reliability, and address obsolescence. You can't use an older "Group III-IV" DEEC in it's place, just won't work; not to mention some of the new wiring installed.
Keep 'em flyin' 
TEG |
_________________
[Airplanes are] near perfect, all they lack is the ability to forgive.
— Richard Collins
|
|
|
|
|
|
retchief70
|
|
Posted: Jan 19, 2012 - 04:16 AM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: May 07, 2011 - 09:54 PM
Posts: 38
Location: Panama City, Florida
Status: Offline
|
| hcobb, in fact most of the LRUs, pumps, lines, actuators, seals, sensors, antennas, ect. on the Raptor are interchangeable and spares are available. There are usable on restrictrions for different blocks/serial numbers/TCTOs just like most modern fighters. Some jets do sit for a while waiting on a part, but I've seen the same with Eagles and Vipers. Parts are cannibalized at an F-22 Wing, so that means many of them are interchangeable. Your post makes it sound like every time we need a part it has to be special ordered and that's just not true. The Raptors limitation is we don't have many, it breaks often, and many breaks take a relatively long time to fix. So much so our ability to generate and sustain a meaningful number of sorties, especially in a max effort combat scenerio with a near peer opponent, is questionable. It's a kick a$$ jet, when you can keep it it the air. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
hoghandler
|
|
Posted: Jan 19, 2012 - 04:21 AM
|
|
|
Newbie
Joined: Jun 12, 2009 - 10:40 PM
Posts: 17
Location: florida
Status: Offline
|
every jet is differant from one another. just because the aircraft and all its sub-assemblies were built useing the same tools dosent mean they are goint to be exactly the same. the f-16 canopy frames i build are all differant from one another. ill have one part here that needs trimmed alot and the same part another frame that didnt need trimmed at all. you just cant get them that exact. what does matter though is that its done right and to the specs and most importantly it passes final inspections and fit checks. i built gear doors as well and they were all differant from one another.
the A-10's i used to maintain were differant from jet to jet. some had this bracket here and the bracket over there. this rib face this way on this jet but it faces the other way on that one over there. you would think that you could pull a panel off a jet and drive down the line and expect it to fit onto another. it dosent happen that way nor will it ever be like that. it is like that for all aircraft. in due time the f-22 and f-35 will be the same way. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
madrat
|
|
Posted: Jan 19, 2012 - 06:07 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Mar 03, 2010 - 03:12 AM
Posts: 986
Status: Offline
|
| The parts were spec'd to micrometers and they delivered them as such. There is no such thing as 'poor quality' with the F-22. What he may be referring to is the fitting of the major composite panels together, which is never perfect and has to be custom fit every time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
southernphantom
|
|
Posted: Jan 19, 2012 - 01:42 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Aug 06, 2011 - 06:18 PM
Posts: 745
Location: Somewhere in Dixie
Status: Offline
|
|
retchief70 wrote:
hcobb, in fact most of the LRUs, pumps, lines, actuators, seals, sensors, antennas, ect. on the Raptor are interchangeable and spares are available. There are usable on restrictrions for different blocks/serial numbers/TCTOs just like most modern fighters. Some jets do sit for a while waiting on a part, but I've seen the same with Eagles and Vipers. Parts are cannibalized at an F-22 Wing, so that means many of them are interchangeable. Your post makes it sound like every time we need a part it has to be special ordered and that's just not true. The Raptors limitation is we don't have many, it breaks often, and many breaks take a relatively long time to fix. So much so our ability to generate and sustain a meaningful number of sorties, especially in a max effort combat scenerio with a near peer opponent, is questionable. It's a kick a$$ jet, when you can keep it it the air.
Ditto. If I look at my F-4 TOs, it's obvious that, even inside a single variant, there are massive changes as production goes on. RAT, no RAT, APU, various electrical/fuel differences, et cetera. The list goes on.
The Raptor's low numbers contribute to its low MC rate. It's not exactly the company's fault. Two aircraft are built using the exact same jigs, parts, plans, and personnel. Are they identical? Of course not. This is why something mounted on one airframe isn't necessarily going to fit on another. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fiskerwad
|
|
Posted: Jan 19, 2012 - 02:47 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Nov 13, 2004 - 07:43 PM
Posts: 705
Location: 76101
|
|
hcobb wrote:
One of the many many many issues with the F-22 fleet is that the parts are not interchangable.
snip
Well I hope the United States never buys another aircraft from that company ever again.
Which company?
The one that used to build cargo planes and had to learn how to build fighters or the one that used to build bombers and then built one of the best fighters of all times?
One is in Georgia, the other in Texas.
fisk |
_________________
Mipple?
|
|
|
|
|
|
structuresguy
|
|
Posted: Jan 19, 2012 - 03:59 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Jan 19, 2012 - 03:54 PM
Posts: 28
Status: Offline
|
| One of the things I have enjoyed about working on this aircraft is the interchangeability of parts. As a former F-15 and KC-135 guy the I can tell you this is not an issue. Swapping hand fit parts between airframes used to be a huge no-no. But not with this airplane, not even the Canopy is a problem. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Register
Private Messages
Forum Guidelines
