Expanding the Test Fleet

Gums wrote:Salute!

You know, it amazes me how many "test" vehicles this program has. ...Gums sends...

By my count, 4 LRIP3 and so far, 2 LRIP4 have OT tailcodes. It seems the consensus is, these are for IOT&E at Eglin. As production a/c with mission systems 1B and 2A, they should be equipped with all a/c systems required for the task and returned to the training command or moved on to the 53 Electronic Warfare Group, also at Eglin.

This all the while the SDD rack up program flight hours and test points. When Luke and Yuma start lining up their ramps, these 'test a/c" allocations may slow down, maybe?

Salute!

Good points Neptune and Sferrin.

I guess that we were much more "concurrent" in our development.

The prototype was basically the same as our FSD birds - larger wing area, larger radome for better radar, etc. The FBW system was about the same, with only a few changes to the gains and "curves" for gee versus AoA. Also had some adjustments to LEF versus mach and such, and a better AoA bias for the gear down approach characteristics.

So all of we folks that started flying the thing in 1979 were "test pilots", ya think?

In defense of the F-35, our Viper avionics were not nearly as sophisticated as the SLUF or Hornet FSD jets. Hell, we didn't even have a radar altimiter! Compared to the SLUF and the new Hornet, we weren't even close. Cockpit display area was extremely limitedin the Viper, as was volume/weight black box considerations not a biggie for the gold-plated SLUF and Hornet.

- SLUF and Hornet had the projected map display, extra air-ground radar modes. e.g. , SLUF had terrain-following, terrain avoidance and a cross-scan mode that combined both.

- Hornet had track-while-scan A2A radar capability.

- Both had radar altimiter ( we weren't waiting for the cosmic one that would work at 40,000 feet)

- SLUF had an extra UHF radio( receive only) and also a ADF feature that was very useful when we flew SAR missions.

- Oh yeah, did I mention a doppler nav system? kinda handy if inertial went to attitude only mode. Also alowwed us to takeoff in a second and do an airborne alignment of the inertial.

So I guess that the F-35 cosmic avionics are the long pole in the tent. And many of we dinosaurs still have trouble with no "back up HUD" if the Darth Vader helmet goes tits up.

Gums sends...

GUMS said: "...And many of we dinosaurs still have trouble with no "back up HUD" if the Darth Vader helmet goes tits up." There is still the Panoramic Cockpit Display PCD and the Standby Flight Display SFD available for heads down flying. Already one pilot has humourously commented that he could do the mission with a bag over his head! (All the bits have to be working I guess.)

See 'poppas got a brand new bag' here: http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... bag#229021
OR
A White Paper By: Lockheed Martin – An Overview of The F-35 Cockpit

http://www.sldinfo.com/whitepapers/an-o ... all-about/
OR 2.4Mb PDF at:
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_download-id-15870.html

Truncated quote (best to read original quote or entire article but just for the bag:

"...The fact is that the helmet is already in use and the reviews from the pilots are overwhelmingly positive. One pilot went so far as to say, “I could fly the whole mission with a helmet bag over the top of my head and just look through the sensors and fly the airplane safely.”

Another pilot recently stated, “I wouldn’t go back to a fixed HUD (Head-Up Display)...."

Salute!

Gotta admi that if the Darth Vader helmet is working, you could fly easily with a bag over the whole thing.

If that sucker goes, then how do you target eggs. missiles, do a carrier approach, etc. ? And the beat goes on.

Sure, JDAM is a piece of cake. Same for ARAAM.

Make this clear! I am not trapped in the 1950's or even 1960's WRT cockpit displays and avionics.

As with my advocacy published stuff in the mid-70's, I wanted to see a HUD and computed weapon delivery system for the Warthog. Cheap, as an A-7D system could be easily integrated. Talking about the HUD ( COTS), inertial ( COTS) and same IBM PI 3 confuser. I was shouted down by the PTB and even got a letter of reprimand from 9th AF for the heresy. USAF had sold the Warthog to Congress because it could drop and shoot accurately, and didn't need all the avionics. It was basically a big A-37 or jet-powered A-1.

I balked.

To drop good iron bombs you had to get real close and be real good. The SLUF could drop from 10,000 feet slant range and hit within ten or fifteen meters using dumb bombs. Our strafe sight was good from 8,000 feet slant range. Viper and Hornet were even better.

So for another $300,000 per airframe we could have a super Warthog, but USAF would have to eat crow. Hence, I got reprimanded.

Make no mistake, I really like that Darth Vader helmet as long as it works and all the other avionics keep working. I simply want to be able to do the mission iof the thing goes tits up.

Gums sends...

No denying your experience and expertise Gums. However my imagination tells me that for example a carrier approach is still possible even in zero zero WX with the JPALS auto land turned on. It likely will be an uncomfortable ride (as it is by all accounts from current auto land PALS S/Hornet pilot reports) but it will be even more accurate with the JPALS/F-35B/C combo of avionics. The view out the front may not be even possible but I'll guess sim experience for pilots will help with that dire situation.

As for completing the mission then once again I can go only on the videos shown when sims do all that stuff on the PCD. Where is the problem except dodgy avionics. I'm used to not being able to even start to taxi with U/S (UnServiceable) aircraft not having the required avionics working forty years ago in the A4G era. Sometimes if that part became U/S once airborne (radio would be a good example) then there were contingencies briefed and hand signals and wing waggles etc.

I agree that all avionics have to work if DarthVader decides to not breathe. But things not working can be briefed and if possible mission continues for a safe recovery. I was reminding myself early today that I transitioned from a Vampire/Venom WWII era cockpit to the A4G. I thought the A4G avionics were a miracle. OMG TACAN! [Not just ADF radio direction finder.] Radios that worked most of the time etc. The ABBAJABBA (artificial horizon) was bleedin' marvellous and I could go on. I just imagine that the F-35 will have a similar good effect on todays 4th Gen pilots but I'm only guessing.

Weapons can be employed by selecting a target in the shoot list and pressing a button. No need to cue a shot from the helmet as the system already has the target in the list.

The HDD (Heads Down Display) can be configured as a HUD and can also show EODAS view from any angle (moveable via HOTAS joystick).

Landing on a carrier... I's sure that that situation is already accounted for as far as putting EODAS data & symbology on the main screen.

Yes SWP - my scenario was just imagining the worst case carrier landing [with PCD out of commission - just in case that scenario was forthput]. You have reminded me of the OLD GRANDMASTER of the X-35B and now F-35B Tomassetti who marvels at 'the kids of today' putting all the screens on view in the PCD when he is only comfortable with a few at moment. I would have to just get used to touching the screen (I might poke holes in it!). Plus there are all the buttons and fiddly bits on the throttle and stick (but where is the light saber?).

Don't forget voice control (I'm having a Firefox flashback )

Salute!

Thanks, Spud.

Forgot about the Head Down option. It's still nice to see the boat and your attitude, AoA and such superimposed. Not sure if Spaz flew much with that sort of display, but whatthehell.

Guess flying the AoA indexers is also allowed for, but the FBW system should make things easier regardless of the displays if the "donut" doofer is working on the flight deck.

Gums sends...

From videos I have seen the HMDS view can be switched to the PCD so having that enlarged to fill the screen should do the trick with head down if that was all that was available. Otherwise doing a completely automatic landing with the pilot heads up looking over the front sill should be good - just in case a wave off is needed. But as always it all depends on conditions at the time and if it is only the HMDS II that is not working. Should be easy enough to magnify the AoA ladder but don't know those details. Yeah there are probably three deck doofers available. IFLOLS on port side and a standby on STBD side and then the MOVLAS on port side (controlled by LSO). Looks like all contingencies covered. If in doubt - punch out.

About the spazzy A4G display. There was no HUD. AoA indexer on the front sill was the way to fly with the mirror seen on the left of the indexer (when lined up) and of course there was a good view over the nose. One old and bold ex Sea Venom pilot was reputed to have landed his A4G when the mirror aboard HMAS Melbourne was still covered (by metal sliding louvre shutters to otherwise protect it). The Mirror Control Officer swears this happened but as ye know 'deck spotting' is dicing with the devil in the spud locker.

Gums wrote:Salute!......regardless of the displays if the "donut" doofer is working on the flight deck.

Gums sends...

I've never met an aviator yet, who doesn't claim to be able to manually land his plane on the flight deck; no systems, no LSO, etc, just a hook and a wire!

Maybe its just bar talk, but that is about the only place I have every met an aviator.

And it is the drink talking.

Salute!

Yeah, our U.S. nasal radiators also claim to be able to catch the number 2 wire on a rolling, pitching deck at night using only the AoA indexers and the meatball.

Always admired those folks.

And then we got the SLUF, and the same folks loved it.

We had Navy SLUF folks flying with us at Myrtle Beach, and then one showed up at Hill in the F-16. He would be the first to tell you how "comfortable" it was taking off the ramp on a dark night with no horizon and such. That flight path marker and the instantaneous VVI on the right scale was really nice.

There are some You Tube videos of Hornet landings on the boat, and you can see how nice the displays were.

OTOH, if you fly the meatball and use those AoA indexers, you were prolly 80% as good.

Long as the boats keep the meatball thingie, my feeling is all will be well. The jet will be stable as a rock, even better than the Hornet.

Gums sends...

The BEDFORD ARRAY is another potential new landing aid on CVNs according to an LSO newsletter (excerpted on another thread on this forum). It will tie into the computer landing aids onboard and on the F-35C to show perhaps a better 'meatball' or allow a better approach to be flown, especially in bad weather when computers can compensate for all kinds of shipboard conditions to show an ideal flight path. However other than the LSO newsletter and a few CVF related references I have seen nothing more about this innovation.

As for GUMS assertions I cannot say - never having used a HUD in an aircraft. However using the mirror and AoA Indexer the A4G was an ideal deck lander. The problem for night flying was that the landing aids (including deck lights and mirror brightness) and especially the line up lighting were not up to the standard probably seen today on CVNs. However the NEEDLES of the ACLS are no substitute for IFLOLS and AoA indicators (where ever they are found on HUD or on Indexer) are not a substitute in close. I'll check to see whether an excellent 'Grandpa Pettibone' night ramp strike story has been posted somewhere here. The IFLOLS has the accuracy in close that the ACLS needles do not.

There is a lot of HOO-HAA about night carrier landings - trouble is it is all true.
_________

ADDITION: Also the only way to approach HMAS Melbourne at night was via a GCA (usually a short one) to be guided to about one mile at best when pilot was expected to see the meatball well enough to use visual lineup and mirror cues to land. Yeah right. There was a TACAN but it was the early model - not the more accurate TACAN in use today.
_________

Some internal forum links referencing BEDFORD ARRAY and such: http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... ord#215314
&
Future Carrier Recovery Methods http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... ham#199972
&
U.S. Navy LSOs Pay a Visit to the UK http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... ord#209363

When the UK was going F-35C temporarily...

AND: 'Bedford Array’ May Have F-35C Uses After All http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... ord#206247

Naval Aviation News Winter 2011

‘The Backup Meatball’ [A curious title but probably best to read entire story to get more than just the gist below - in other words the current ACLS 'needles' are not a substitute for the meatball for the final part of a carrier approach]

http://nanarchive.omnitecinc.com/20102012.aspx

“…caused the Hornet to strike the flight deck rounddown at the point where the tailhook is attached to the aircraft.… The pilot ejected and landed on the flight deck, sustaining major injuries; the aircraft was lost.… …the pilot stated that his carrier landing technique was to use his Automated Carrier Landing System (ACLS) needles as his primary reference & use the Fresnel Lens Optical Landing System, or meatball, as a backup for glide slope information.

Grampaw Pettibone says: “…And our intrepid aviator? Well, Ol’ Gramps knows that every pilot has his way to do stuff, but using the ACLS needles in close instead of flying the ball is about as dumb as skinny dippin’ with snapping turtles. Gouge is great, but it’s no substitute for knowing the right way to do things and stickin’ to what’s worked for a long, long time. Gramps knows that none of this fella’s LSOs taught him that ACLS technique—he should have stuck with what he’d learned.…”