F-35 program updates

https://www.safety.af.mil/Portals/71/do ... Engine.pdf

USAF single-engine 'engine related class A mishap' rate statistics as of Sep 2019....indicating that USAF F-35s had accumulated a little over 112,000 hours as of September, evidently not statistically significant.

https://www.safety.af.mil/Portals/71/documents/Aviation/Engine%20Statistics/USAF%20Single%20Engine.pdf

USAF single-engine 'engine related class A mishap' rate statistics as of Sep 2019....indicating that USAF F-35s had accumulated a little over 112,000 hours as of September, evidently not statistically significant.

I notice the chart is for ‘flight’ mishap rates and is therefore perhaps the reason the 2014 engine fire on takeoff (at Elgin) would not be counted.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your ... f-35-fire/

I don't know what USAF currently considers the actual start of a flight. We used to 'hack the clock' at brake release for logging 'flight' time. Wheels off the ground required for a flight ??....seems reasonable, but I don't know.

Civvies, of course, start logging time when the aircraft first moves with the intent of 'flight'. That additive is how fighter pilots, not privileged to hours of autopilot cruise time, adjust their logbooks to get airline jobs.

As far as pay, we had an F-101B at Niagara have a J-57 'blow up' at rotation and actually get airborne before he put it back down and aborted.....they were credited with a flight and the appropriate AFTP flight pay status.

If the Eglin fire does count as a flight, 1 in 112,001 hours equates to a 0.893 rate. If it doesn't count....there'll be others eventually.

IIRC, OPNAV guidance for a flight mishap (FM) — as opposed to a Flight Related Mishap (FRM) or Aircraft Ground Mishap (AGM) — is ‘intent for flight’ and from brake release to ‘clear of the runway’ (of course with some cost threshold).

Is this helpful? (USAF A only, no B/C, but...) How good is the F-35?
https://www.safety.af.mil/Portals/71/do ... s/A-10.pdf
https://www.safety.af.mil/Portals/71/do ... s/F-15.pdf
https://www.safety.af.mil/Portals/71/do ... s/F-16.pdf
https://www.safety.af.mil/Portals/71/do ... s/F-22.pdf
https://www.safety.af.mil/Portals/71/do ... s/F-35.pdf

Happy old year, Happy new year!

https://www.f35.com/news/detail/lockhee ... commitment

LM delivered 134 F-35s in 2019 (81 US, 30 partner, 22 FMS). To deliver at least 141 in 2020.

Lockheed Martin Delivers 134 F-35s in 2019; Exceeding Annual Commitment
December 30, 2019

Lockheed Martin delivered the 134th F-35 aircraft for the year today, exceeding the joint government and industry 2019 delivery goal of 131 aircraft.

One hundred and thirty-four deliveries represent a 47% increase from 2018 and nearly a 200 percent production increase from 2016. Next year, Lockheed Martin plans to deliver 141 F-35s and is prepared to increase production volume year-over-year to hit peak production in 2023.

This achievement is a testament to the readiness of the full F-35 enterprise to ramp to full-rate production and we continue to focus on improving on-time deliveries across the entire weapons system,” said Greg Ulmer, Lockheed Martin vice president and general manager of the F-35 program. “We have met our annual delivery targets three years in a row and continue to increase production rates, improve efficiencies and reduce costs. The F-35 is the most capable fighter jet in the world, and we're now delivering the 5th Generation weapon system at a cost equal to or lower than a less capable 4th Generation legacy aircraft.”

The 134th aircraft is a Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing (STOVL) model for the United States Marine Corps. In 2019, deliveries included 81 F-35s for the United States, 30 for international partner nations and 23 for Foreign Military Sales customers.

Unit and Sustainment Costs Decrease, Readiness Improving

Using lessons learned, process efficiencies, production automation, facility and tooling upgrades, supply chain initiatives and more – the F-35 enterprise continues to significantly improve efficiency and reduce costs.

The price of an F-35A is now $77.9M, meeting the $80M goal a year earlier than planned.

The F-35’s mission readiness and sustainment costs continue to improve with the global fleet averaging greater than 65 percent mission capable rates, and operational squadrons consistently performing near 75 percent.

Lockheed Martin’s sustainment cost per aircraft per year has also decreased four consecutive years, and more than 35 percent since 2015.

Program Maturity and Economic Impact

With more than 490 aircraft operating from 21 bases around the globe, the F-35 plays a critical role in today's global security environment.

Today, 975 pilots and 8,585 maintainers are trained, and the F-35 fleet has surpassed more than 240,000 cumulative flight hours. Eight nations have F-35s operating from a base on their home soil, eight services have declared Initial Operating Capability and four services have employed F-35s in combat operations.

In addition to strengthening global security and partnerships, the F-35 provides economic stability to the U.S. and international partners by creating jobs, commerce and security, and contributing to the global trade balance. Thousands of men and women in the U.S. and around the world build the F-35. With more than 1,400 suppliers in 47 states and Puerto Rico, the F-35 Program supports more than 220,000 jobs.

Does the 134 number just include US F-35 production or does it also include Italy and Japan???

It included US, JSF partner nations, and FMS (such as Japan etc).

(Edit: changed FWS to FMS.)

It included US, JSF partner nations, and FWS (such as Japan etc).

Thank You

The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter’s Pretty Good Year
Lockheed Martin delivered 134 aircraft this year: 81 to the US military, 30 to international partners and 23 to Foreign Military Sales customers, says Lockheed Martin.
31 Dec 2019 Theresa Hitchens

"...As Breaking D readers know, DoD for years struggled just to get its fleet of 440 F-35s in the air, with readiness rates at barely above half — 55 percent to be exact. One critical issue has been a seemingly endless shortage of parts, particularly the canopy adhesive related to the jet’s stealthiness, had effectively crippled the program.

And while readiness rates still haven’t met the 80 percent goal set by former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, DoD acquisition chief Ellen Lord on Oct. 29 announced that F-35 readiness rates had jumped from the same time in 2018 to 73 percent.

In addition, congressional appropriators gave the Air Force a holiday gift in the 2019 spending agreement (signed into law by President Donald Trump on Dec. 20) : an additional $1.87 billion for 20 additional F-35s and associated spare parts. The appropriators added funds for 14 F-35A conventional takeoff and landing variant and six F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing variants. All total, the 2019 spending bill funded 98 aircraft — 62 F-35As, 16 F-35Bs, and 20 F-35Cs — at the whopping cost of $9.3 billion, crowning the F-35 as the biggest Pentagon procurement program ever.

While the spat with Turkey over its acquisition of the Russian S-400 air defense system led to the July decision by the White House to suspend Ankara from the F-35 program (and a loss of 30 aircraft sales for Lockheed Martin), Poland’s planned buy of 32 aircraft for $6.5 billion was approved in September.

And in November, Norwegian air chief Brig. Gen. Tonje Skinnarland declared Norway’s squadron of F-35As operational, placing Norway as the third European country to declare the plane operational, after the UK and Italy.

According to Lockheed Martin, there are now more than 490 F-35 aircraft operating from 21 bases around the globe; 975 pilots and 8,585 maintainers are trained; and the F-35 fleet has surpassed more than 240,000 cumulative flight hours. Further, “eight nations have F-35s operating from domestic bases, a base on their home soil, eight services have declared Initial Operating Capability and four services have employed F-35s in combat operations.”..."

Source: https://breakingdefense.com/2019/12/the ... good-year/

Interesting read of the day. ANAO report (including on Australia's F-35 buy)

Total budget: A$16,522.6m (US$11,604m for 72 units = US$161m per unit all-in cost).
Confirms RAAF orders for lots 8,10,11,12-14 and 15 = 2, 8, 8, 15x3, 9 = 72 F-35A units.

Increase of A$3.3b from A$13.2b 2014 to A$16.5b 2019 was due mostly to exchange rate (AUD was A$1.06 - US$1 in Jun 2014 and A$1.42 to US$1 in Jun 2019). Project actually saw a A$8.4m drop in cost...

Increase of A$3.3b from A$13.2b 2014 to A$16.5b 2019 was due mostly to exchange rate (AUD was A$1.06 - US$1 in Jun 2014 and A$1.42 to US$1 in Jun 2019).

While there is some currency hedging in JPO, the general absence of currency hedging in
procurement agencies is really baffling.

Not a criticism of Australia since DOD and most other agencies don't hedge either; the UK MOD being one
that I've seen that hedges to any noticeable extent.

Interesting read of the day. ANAO report (including on Australia's F-35 buy)

Total budget: A$16,522.6m (US$11,604m for 72 units = US$161m per unit all-in cost).
Confirms RAAF orders for lots 8,10,11,12-14 and 15 = 2, 8, 8, 15x3, 9 = 72 F-35A units.

Increase of A$3.3b from A$13.2b 2014 to A$16.5b 2019 was due mostly to exchange rate (AUD was A$1.06 - US$1 in Jun 2014 and A$1.42 to US$1 in Jun 2019). Project actually saw a A$8.4m drop in cost...

Another eye glazer reference here earlier: viewtopic.php?f=58&t=23043&p=431497&hilit=ANAO#p431497

Increase of A$3.3b from A$13.2b 2014 to A$16.5b 2019 was due mostly to exchange rate (AUD was A$1.06 - US$1 in Jun 2014 and A$1.42 to US$1 in Jun 2019).

While there is some currency hedging in JPO, the general absence of currency hedging in
procurement agencies is really baffling.

Not a criticism of Australia since DOD and most other agencies don't hedge either; the UK MOD being one
that I've seen that hedges to any noticeable extent.

Difficult to comment as I don't have an inside view. In many organisations, hedging may be performed on an aggregated basis e.g. at the finance ministry level so there could be hedging but just not possible to attribute to a specific project like the Air 6000 because of the aggregation. Also can't discount the possibility of natural hedges i.e. offset against other foreign currency receipts. I don't think individual ministries would have dedicated treasury staff to handle hedging. This would more likely be a finance ministry responsibility so I'd withhold any negative comments without more clarity.

Difficult to comment as I don't have an inside view. In many organisations, hedging may be performed on an aggregated basis e.g. at the finance ministry level so there could be hedging but just not possible to attribute to a specific project like the Air 6000 because of the aggregation. Also can't discount the possibility of natural hedges i.e. offset against other foreign currency receipts. I don't think individual ministries would have dedicated treasury staff to handle hedging. This would more likely be a finance ministry responsibility so I'd withhold any negative comments without more clarity.

As I understand it, the UK MOD does directly enter to foreign currency forward contracts with the Bank of England.
But they don't seem to attribute specific forwards to specific procurement contracts but just report what
percentage of dollar contracts are covered by the forwards.

For Australia, I guess their no win/loss supplementation does mean that there is something of a natural hedge.