F-35 Lightning II developments

[Piet Luijken]

I did not know that, but apparently all Italian en Dutch F-35s will be assembled at the FACO (final assembly and check out) facility on Cameri airport.

The establishment of the Italian FACO would serve as a cornerstone for F-35 production, and
would provide a long-term capability for a maintenance, repair and overhaul capability for Italy.
The Italian FACO is expected to deliver F-35 Lightning II aircraft to Italy, and potentially the
Netherlands, beginning in 2014. The Italian FACO could be a candidate to provide European regional
support capability but that decision is pending final definition of the Lockheed Martin team's F-35
Autonomic Logistics/Global Sustainment network.
“Lockheed Martin and Alenia Aeronautica are committed to working toward the implementation
of an F-35 final assembly and check-out line in Italy,” Burbage said.

Flightglobal 2007:
The Netherlands (which has ordered 85 aircraft) is believed to have already agreed to use the Italian-based FACO. Some reports have suggested that Dutch industry would receive work on Italian JSF engines as part of the same deal, while Norway is reported as having been present at the meeting that led to the agreement between Netherlands and Italy.

Aviation Week 2010:
Initial construction has begun at Cameri Air Base in Italy, but major building activities will commence by year end.
Officials hope to deliver the first Italian assembled aircraft in 2014. The line is expected to deliver aircraft for Italy as well as possibly Dutch customers. Both countries are in the JSF partnership.

[Coati]

Turkey will purchase two Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT) F-35 fighter jets, the Defense Industries Undersecretary said Thursday in a statement.

Turkey plans to buy a 100 F-35A and possible 15 additional F-35B aircraft. These two are probably the first of additional larger purchases. The announced buy comes after a year of struggling about something of security access of some sort.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-0 ... cmpid=yhoo

[Coati]

UK voices concern over future of US F-35 fighter jets.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/ar ... 78863d.4f1

[Coati]

The Joint Strike Fighter currently is grounded as the Department of Defense reviews several issues, including the helmet-mounted display system, arresting gear system, fuel dump subsystem, software and lightning protection.

The Pentagon is gearing up to restructure Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program for a third time in three years, sources said, with production of more than 120 more planes to be postponed to save money and allow more time for development,” Reuters reported.

Read more: http://www.nwfdailynews.com/articles/fo ... z2AtLUkZnA

or on http://www.alert5.com/

[Coati]

Article about the tailhook issues with the carrier variant.


January 8, 2012 (by Eric L. Palmer) - The U.S. Navy F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) known as the F-35C is at serious risk of never being able to land aboard an aircraft carrier. This also poses a risk to the U.K. aircraft carrier program which is supposed to use the F-35C at the end of the decade.

http://www.f-16.net/news_article4494.html

[Coati]

Italy's F-35 purchase is under discussion, axing a third of the intended 131 aircraft might be an outcome of the discussion. As earlier mentioned in the press, the purchase of the F-35B for the air force is also under discussion. (I think this last part should be considered apart from the F-35B purchase plans for the MMI to replace the AV-8B in the future).


F-35 Under Fire In Italy

ROME — The Italian government is ushering in a new round of defense cuts in which, for the first time, the fate of Rome’s participation in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program will be seriously threatened.

The newly launched defense review not only has sweeping implications for Italy’s defense ambitions but also rings in a further belt-tightening in Europe among countries that are just beginning to come to grips with the scale of their budget and debt problems.

In Italy, much of the work on the military review remains to be completed. Nevertheless, a sharp reduction in the number of F-35s Italy will buy is virtually certain, military officials say. At least a third of the 131 fighters slated for procurement will likely fall under the budget ax, with some minority parties arguing for an outright program termination.

Rome is one of the largest international buyers of the F-35 — after the U.K. drastically cut its procurement objective in its 2010 spending review. Italy plans to spend €13 billion ($16.7 billion) to buy and sustain both the F-35A conventional-takeoff-and-landing and the F-35B short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing versions, though it has not ordered any aircraft yet.

Other major procurement projects are also under scrutiny, but the F-35 has received the lion’s share of attention because of the size of the planned outlays.

Although Italy assessed its spending needs in 2010 in light of an era of fiscal austerity, the change late last year to a technocratic government, led by Mario Monti, specifically put in place to handle the country’s financial problems more aggressively, has put military spending back in the crosshairs. The government, although not elected, enjoys broad support in the parliament to carry out sweeping reforms.

Also potentially affecting the JSF debate is the fact that the government is very much focused on budget considerations rather than foreign policy ambitions. Cancelling the 22 navy F-35Bs would leave the service without fighters to put on its aircraft carrier after the AV-8B Harriers are retired. While that would crimp the ability to project forces, those considerations may not hold much sway with the Monti government. Such a move would likely cause the Italian air force also to drop plans to buy 40 F-35Bs and focus instead entirely on the F-35A.

On the other hand, working in the JSF’s favor is that even at reduced numbers, the F-35 procurement would allow Italy to capitalize on the €2.5 billion it spent or pledged to the development and construction of a JSF final assembly and check out (FACO) facility at Cameri air force base. Work on the FACO is progressing quickly to be ready by 2014 to meet original JSF production schedules.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... In%20Italy

[Bennie]

Italy's F-35 purchase is under discussion, axing a third of the intended 131 aircraft might be an outcome of the discussion. As earlier mentioned in the press, the purchase of the F-35B for the air force is also under discussion. (I think this last part should be considered apart from the F-35B purchase plans for the MMI to replace the AV-8B in the future).


F-35 Under Fire In Italy

ROME — The Italian government is ushering in a new round of defense cuts in which, for the first time, the fate of Rome’s participation in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program will be seriously threatened.

The newly launched defense review not only has sweeping implications for Italy’s defense ambitions but also rings in a further belt-tightening in Europe among countries that are just beginning to come to grips with the scale of their budget and debt problems.

In Italy, much of the work on the military review remains to be completed. Nevertheless, a sharp reduction in the number of F-35s Italy will buy is virtually certain, military officials say. At least a third of the 131 fighters slated for procurement will likely fall under the budget ax, with some minority parties arguing for an outright program termination.

Rome is one of the largest international buyers of the F-35 — after the U.K. drastically cut its procurement objective in its 2010 spending review. Italy plans to spend €13 billion ($16.7 billion) to buy and sustain both the F-35A conventional-takeoff-and-landing and the F-35B short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing versions, though it has not ordered any aircraft yet.

Other major procurement projects are also under scrutiny, but the F-35 has received the lion’s share of attention because of the size of the planned outlays.

Although Italy assessed its spending needs in 2010 in light of an era of fiscal austerity, the change late last year to a technocratic government, led by Mario Monti, specifically put in place to handle the country’s financial problems more aggressively, has put military spending back in the crosshairs. The government, although not elected, enjoys broad support in the parliament to carry out sweeping reforms.

Also potentially affecting the JSF debate is the fact that the government is very much focused on budget considerations rather than foreign policy ambitions. Cancelling the 22 navy F-35Bs would leave the service without fighters to put on its aircraft carrier after the AV-8B Harriers are retired. While that would crimp the ability to project forces, those considerations may not hold much sway with the Monti government. Such a move would likely cause the Italian air force also to drop plans to buy 40 F-35Bs and focus instead entirely on the F-35A.

On the other hand, working in the JSF’s favor is that even at reduced numbers, the F-35 procurement would allow Italy to capitalize on the €2.5 billion it spent or pledged to the development and construction of a JSF final assembly and check out (FACO) facility at Cameri air force base. Work on the FACO is progressing quickly to be ready by 2014 to meet original JSF production schedules.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... In%20Italy

This discussion about one aircraft (albeit in different versions) being used in different roles largely resembles the F111 saga if you ask me!!!

[Piet Luijken]

Lockheed Martin Delivers First Two Marine Corps F-35s To Eglin

FORT WORTH, January 11th, 2012 -- The first two Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] production model F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft were delivered to the U.S. Marine Corps today. The two jets are now assigned to the 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing's Marine Fighter/Attack Training Squadron 501 residing with the host 33d Fighter Wing at Eglin AFB, Fla.

The aircraft, known as BF-6 and BF-8, flew separately arriving at 3:13 p.m. and 4:39 p.m. CST respectively after their approximate 90-minute ferry flights from Fort Worth, Texas. U.S. Marine Corps Maj. Joseph Bachmann piloted BF-6 while U.S. Marine Corps Lt. Col. Matt Taylor flew BF-8. Both 5th Generation fighters will be used for pilot and maintainer training at the new F-35 Integrated Training Center.

“Today marks the beginning of a new era of advanced capabilities for the U.S. Marine Corps,” said Larry Lawson, Lockheed Martin’s F-35 program executive vice president and general manager. “The F-35B’s versatility, as demonstrated onboard the USS WASP (LHD-1) last fall, will revolutionize our nation’s expeditionary combat power in all threat environments by allowing operations from major bases, damaged airstrips, remote locations and a wide range of air-capable ships. This aircraft will give our warfighters the ability to accomplish their mission, wherever and whenever duty calls.”

F-35 STOVLs met many critical milestones in 2011. In October, F-35Bs conducted their first set of ship trials, known as Developmental Test 1, 20 miles off the coast of Wallops Island, Va. During the 19-day testing period, BF-2 and BF-4 conducted 72 vertical landings and short takeoffs, accomplishing all test milestones during the mission. For the year, F-35Bs accomplished 333 System Development and Demonstration test flights and 268 vertical landings.

BF-6 and BF-8 are the first two F-35 deliveries to the Department of Defense in 2012 and the seventh and eighth F-35 aircraft delivered to Eglin AFB since July 2011. Previously, six U.S. Air Force F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) jets were delivered to the base.

[Coati]

This one slipped my attention:

BF-7 (BuNo 168058) made it's first flight the 21st of December 2011, being the 8th flying F-35B and the 23rd operational F-35.


"BF-6 and BF-8 are the first two F-35 deliveries to the Department of Defense in 2012 and the seventh and eighth F-35 aircraft delivered to Eglin AFB since July 2011."

Actually the last delivery to Eglin was conducted the 26th of October 2011 when AF-13 was delivered to 58 FS.

[Piet Luijken]

By NICK SCHWELLENBACH

POGO has obtained the Pentagon's latest annual operational test and evaluation report on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), which was not publicly unavailable until now. Bloomberg News's Tony Capaccio first reported on the report last night.

In the first sentence of the report, the Pentagon’s top tester states that “the high level of concurrency of production, development, and test created several challenges for the program and the Services.” A high level of concurrency means large numbers of aircraft are being bought before the aircraft’s design is mature and well-tested. If serious or significant enough problems are found during testing and development, large numbers of planes may have to undergo expensive retrofits, and adding significant expense to the program. The JSF Concurrency Quick Look Review, which POGO made available last month, recommended a reduction in concurrency.

The test report is authored by the Defense Department’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E). The DOT&E is Dr. J. Michael Gilmore.

The report details some significant progress in the testing program over last year; however, there is a long way to go in the testing program, with 11,612 test points cumulatively met so far out of an estimated 48,044 remaining. Much of the most difficult testing remains, during which there is a high likelihood deficiencies that will have to remedied—that can increase cost and schedule delays—will be found. For an example of a deficiency identified in testing so far that has to be correctedthe test report notes in its executive summary that:



…live fire tests and analyses showed the fuel tank inerting system is incapable of providing protection from threat-induced fuel tank explosions during some critical segments of combat missions when the aircraft is likely to be hit. The program is redesigning the system. Upon completion, the redesigned system will be evaluated to determine if it provides the required protection.

The JSF section of this year’s DOT&E report is about twice as long as last year’s—13 pages to last year’s 6—which was already longer than most if not all the other individual sections in the annual report. The length is due in part to the three different variants of the JSF: the Air Force’s F-35A conventional take-off and landing (CTOL) version; the Marine Corps’ F-35B short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) model; and the Navy’s F-35C carrier variant (CV). The F-35B probably has the most problems so far, although the F-35C is at an earlier stage in testing.

One of the main reasons the F-35B has particular difficulties because it has extremely tight weight margins. As of November 2011, according to the report, there are only “230 pounds of margin between the current weight and the intended not-to-exceed weight of 32, 577 pounds.” However, it was recently determined that the not-to-exceed weight can be expanded by 142 pounds. “Managing weight growth with such tight margins for the balance of SDD [System Development and Demonstration] will be a significant challenge,” according to the report.

The program is considering “structural modifications to improve handling characteristics” of the F-35B since they do not meet “current criteria.” The other option being looked at is “relaxation of the handling characteristics criteria.”

In contrast, the F-35A had “acceptable handling characteristics at high and medium altitudes,” however the “magnitude and effects of buffet during elevated g-load and angle-of-attack” will “need to be further examined.” There are plans for more intense flight envelope testing in 2012.

The deficiencies in handling characteristics are a big deal. The JSF is “not on track to meet operational effectiveness or operational suitability requirements,” according to the report, which elaborates that:


The primary operational deficiencies include poor performance in human systems integration (e.g. helmet-mounted display, night vision capability), and aircraft handling characteristics, as well as shortfalls in maneuvering performance (e.g. F-35A combat radius, which is a KPP [Key Performance Parameter], and F-35C acceleration.

The report is very detailed. Here are some of the other things in it that grabbed my attention:

A large, nearly one-page table details F-35B specific door and propulsion problems with several components of the F-35B requiring redesign.

Even though they were within stress tolerances, cracks were discovered in F-35B landing gear doors.

The vertical tail fin of the F-35 may also need to be modified:


The F-35A flight sciences tested [and] evaluated handling characteristics and performance in a larger, more stressful flight envelope than the other two variants … However, structural loads on the vertical tail fin of the F-35A aircraft…are higher than predicted and may require modifications to the tail or further changes to the flight control software to reduce these effects.

Testers also “found that fuel migrated back into the aircraft” in both the F-35A and F-35B variants. “This has the potential to create an unsafe condition.”

The horizontal tail “sustained heat damage at the inboard trailing edge area” in an F-35A after its afterburner was used for a long time on a flight test mission. “The damage consisted of blistering of the surface and missing pieces of the trailing edge.” Similar damage was found on an F-35B.

Read the section of the DOT&E's report on the JSF here: http://www.pogo.org/resources/national- ... eport.html

[Stratofreighter]

http://www.key.aero/central/images/news/4793.jpg


http://www.key.aero/view_news.asp?ID=47 ... n=military

January 19: The first night flight in the history of the Lockheed Martin F-35 programme was completed on Wednesday at Edwards Air Force Base, California.

[sdamico]

Another F-35 delivery today (BF-7?) to Eglin/VPS, using callsign LITNG5.

Rgds,
SD

[Coati]

Another F-35 delivery today (BF-7?) to Eglin/VPS, using callsign LITNG5.

Rgds,
SD

Must be BF-7, that is the only aircraft ready to be delivered on the flight line at Fort Worth right now.

[Coati]

The end of the F-35B’s ‘probation’


By Philip Ewing Thursday, January 19th, 2012 7:22 pm
Posted in Air
The Marines’ F-35B Lightning II stood in the corner, wore the dunce cap, went to bed without dessert and now, a year later, is ready to get off “probation,” according to reports Thursday.

Secretary Panetta appears set to use his delayed visit to Naval Air Station Patuxent River on Friday to announce that the B is back, baby, and that the F-35 overall is doin’ great, thanks for asking. The program desperately wants positive headlines, especially after the reports that Lockheed may have to redesign the tailhook on the Navy’s C model so it can land on a carrier.

Lockheed and program officials have their talking points all ready: A lot of the F-35’s testing is on or ahead of schedule, and the airplanes are starting to build up in the services’ arsenal, and now the B is back in the Pentagon’s good graces. “Probation,” in fact, was probably nothing but a publicity move in the first place, a way to communicate to borderline audiences and mainstream reporters that former Secretary Gates was serious about fixing the B, but without any actual danger — for now.


As you’ve heard so many times, cancelling the B would mean no fast jets for tomorrow’s Marine Corps, would throw Italy’s naval aviation plans into chaos, and leave the U.S. Navy with at least two major warships — the amphibious assault ship USS America and the planned LHA 7 — designed for an airplane they would never carry. But Gates had to do something to quiet critics baying for the end of the B or the whole F-35 shootin’ match. So he wrote a big check he knew he’d never have to cash, saying that the jet had two years to get its act together or he’d support its cancellation.

Only Gates knew he wouldn’t be SecDef when that bill came due, and that Lockheed, Marine Corps and program officials were already knuckling down to tackle the B’s problems. Marine Commandant Gen. Jim Amos began telling people that he’d become personally involved in running the program, that the airplane couldn’t take on an ounce of weight without him knowing it, and that all the B’s issues were fundamentally fixable. He would go into Steve Trimble levels of detail about the bulkheads that needed to be adjusted, the components that weren’t working, and ended up with an optimistic assessment.

So the F-35B’s “probation” was a new version of the old joke about how the number of mines you need to make a minefield — none; all you have to do is put out a press release. Friday’s announcement is the equivalent of a second press release saying the minefield was painstakingly swept and the channel is once again clear.

Lifting probation probably will buy the F-35 some goodwill inside the Beltway, but it could also remind people of DoD’s astronomical cost estimates and the fuzzy understanding about when these airplanes will actually begin flying actual missions. The Navy Department’s top weapons-buyer, Sean Stackley, said at the Surface Navy Association show that there is no target date for the C’s initial operational capability — the Building has gone from pushing estimates back to withholding them altogether.

Stackley said the outlook was good and that “there was a lot of progress being made across the board,” but that service officials and the Defense Acquisition Board would have to get another update before they could start to think about IOC. As ever, the jet’s advocates hope that it can continue to outpace its skeptics and critics.



Read more: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/01/19/the-e ... z1jzV9Xd2c
DoDBuzz.com

source: www.alert5.com

[Coati]

Joint Strike Fighter may miss acceleration goal

By Dave Majumdar - Staff writer
Posted : Wednesday Jan 18, 2012 19:07:16 EST

The F-35 Lightning II’s transonic acceleration may not meet the requirements originally set forth for the program, a top Lockheed Martin official said.

“Based on the original spec, all three of the airplanes are challenged by that spec,” said Tom Burbage, Lockheed’s program manager for the F-35. “The cross-sectional area of the airplane with the internal weapons bays is quite a bit bigger than the airplanes we’re replacing.”

The sharp rise in wave drag at speeds between Mach 0.8 and Mach 1.2 is one of the most challenging areas for engineers to conquer. And the F-35’s relatively large cross-sectional area means, that as a simple matter of physics, the jet can’t quite match its predecessors.

“We’re dealing with the laws of physics. You have an airplane that’s a certain size, you have a wing that’s a certain size, you have an engine that’s a certain size, and that basically determines your acceleration characteristics,” Burbage said. “I think the biggest question is: are the acceleration characteristics of the airplane operationally suitable?”

A recent report by the Defense Department’s top tester, J. Michael Gilmore, says that the Navy’s F-35C model aircraft, which has larger wing and tail surfaces, is not meeting requirements for acceleration.

The report doesn’t say whether the F-35A and F-35B have hit similar snags.

Richard Aboulafia, an analyst with the Teal Group, Fairfax, Va., said that the revelation was not particularly surprising.

“It’s a strike fighter,” Aboulafia said. “It’s not an interceptor; it’s not an F-22.”

Aboulafia said it was unclear whether additional engine power could boost acceleration in the difficult transonic regime. So far, doubts about the aircraft’s aerodynamic performance haven’t diminished Lockheed’s sales prospects, he said.

The F-35 transonic acceleration specifications were written based on clean-configuration F-16 Fighting Falcon and F/A-18 Hornet fighter, Burbage said.

But unlike the Hornet or the F-16, the F-35 has the same configuration unloaded as it does loaded with weapons and fuel, Burbage said. When an F/A-18 or F-16 is encumbered with weapons, pylons and fuel tanks, those jets are robbed of much of their performance.

“What is different is that this airplane has accelerational characteristics with a combat load that no other airplane has, because we carry a combat load internally,” Burbage said, the F-22 Raptor notwithstanding.

Even fully loaded, the F-35’s performance doesn’t change from its unencumbered configuration, he said.

In the high subsonic range between Mach 0.6 to Mach 0.9 where the majority of air combat occurs, the F-35’s acceleration is better than almost anything flying.

Thus far, Lockheed has not had issues with the plane’s acceleration, Burbage said. There are top level Key Performance Parameters from which lower level detailed engineering specification are derived and Lockheed’s job is to meet as many of those specifications as possible within the laws of physics, he said. Discussions are underway about if those original specifications are relevant given the jet’s acceleration in a combat configuration, Burbage added.

U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. Eric Smith, director of operations at the 58th Fighter Squadron at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., and F-35 test pilot, said that flying the aircraft is a thrilling experience.

“I can’t even explain the adrenaline rush you get when you light the afterburner on that thing,” Smith said. “The acceleration is much better than an F-16.”

But the F-35’s aerodynamic performance is not what makes the jet special, Smith said. The F-35 powerful sensors and data-links and how that information is fused into a single coherent and easy to use display are what will make the jet an effective warplane.

Burbage added that while the F-35 is designed as a supersonic fighter, it’s not optimized for the extremely high supersonic speeds that the Raptor was designed to operate at.

“This is not a supercruising airplane like the F-22,” Burbage said.

via www.alert5.com/