F-35 issues

[cr9527]

Originally Posted by stampeder

Uh-oh... thinks aren't going too well.

Yes, they are going to stop the purchase of the airframes until the problems are ironed out.

It is a smart move, and in no way does it risk the program. It will delay the production, but that is all.

Uh-oh... with delay after delay that "fourth phase in 2019" is looking more like 2020, 2021, maybe later. Imagine a pilot scrambling over the high Arctic in a single-engine aircraft, climbing towards the target but having no communication with anyone!

We won't be operating the F-35s by 2019 anyways. When a country upgrades a fleet of anything, it isn't as simple and fast as flipping a switch.

Expect half a decade to a decade before we fully phase out the CF-18s. In the meantime prior to no SatComs, we would be operating CF-18s regardless.

Looks like the work needed to support the F-35 involves fundamental construction work on our fuel tankers to bring them in line with an old, disliked system. The surprise costs and headaches never seem to end in this dumb deal.

Uh, both systems work equally well, although optimized for different systems(Probe for fighters, receptacle for larger aircraft), and both systems are simultaneously used around the world.

The F-35A, which Canada is purchasing, has the receptacle built in, while the F-35C, uses the probe. Due to parts commonality, it would not be expensive nor difficult to refit the CF-35 with either. It is only up to our military to decide what they want.

[dirtroad]

by stampeder: F-35s face communication problems in Arctic;

That had already been resolved, see post 219. (Good to see you back stampeder!)

Now we can get back to a Canadian made fighter with the fact, a N.B. woman says she has Avro Arrow blueprints. And it appears to be aready in production, as an ejection seat is for sale on ebay!

I don't think anyone can make fun of any of the haphazard ways past or present Governments have put our Military(s) and Country(s) at risk, that is....more than they have themselves with stupid moves, so funny it hurts!

[cr9527]

can't have a serious conversation here can I?

[dirtroad]

I am very serious about this topic, and not making fun of anyone. While I attempt to bring some humour to this forum, all my posts are backed with facts, albit with my twisted view points.

Many people put down what they call money wasting institutions like NASA, and the Militaries, but some of the greatest discoveries have come from them. The government indecision, "Cost cutting", and penalties for pulling out of contracts because of "Political Reversals" of previous Government decisions. Buying used subs and the EH 101 come to mind.

I have heard people say, "We could save lots of money if we didn't waste money on an Army, Navy, and Air Force.", and if that happened, I predict Canada would have new ownership within hours.

As I have stated before we need to stay in the F35 program, but need F18 Super Horents now, and to supplement the F35 when they get here, we don't need to put all our eggs in one basket like we often have in the past!

So I encourage all to participate, and ask all to hopefully see my viewpoint and hopefully see a glimpse of the humour I try to convey in any of my posts without offence to any, and I probably have never been so serious!

[cr9527]

As I have stated before we need to stay in the F35 program, but need F18 Super Horents now, and to supplement the F35 when they get here, we don't need to put all our eggs in one basket like we often have in the past!

That would end up costing far more than its worth.

By the time we fully induce the Super Hornet fleet, the F-35 deliveries would start in a couple of years.

We can Lease Super Hornets, but I see no country with excess birds.

Our CF-18s will be capable of doing the majority of the missions the Super Hornet can do, for at least until 2020.

[nfitz]

Originally Posted by cr9527

If the F-35 gets cancelled, then we'd have to leave the defence to the Americans, and just field the Super Hornet for our NATO commitments. If you are fine with this approach, then I cannot argue against it. It is a legitimate approach to save costs.

The irony being you've spent a lot of energy arguing against it with those of us who are find with that approach!

At the rate the delays to the F-35A White Elephant are going we're going to have to buy something, or end up with nothing in the air. And then how would we be able to bomb civilians in Libya?

[gworg]

U.S. Navy and U.K. Royal Navy F-35 unable to get aboard ship

I realize that we aren't landing on carriers but the article suggests that design changes for commonality purposes may doom the F-35, and that's saying nothing about current and future defense appropriations.

"Given the limited amount of suitable structure at the back end of the JSF variants, due primarily to the commonality that was being sought between the three variant designs and the fact that the STOVL F-35B JSF is the baseline design, there was always going to be high risk associated with meeting the carrier suitability requirements."

He also points to well known and well understood military specifications that address tail hook design requirements, such as MIL-A-81717C and MIL-D-8708C.

When asked how such things could have been missed, Peter suggested they likely weren’t, at least by the engineers, but their concerns would have just as likely been ignored.
…

It is highly probable that this design fault could be the last straw for the F-35C. The program will attempt some more rolling tests with a different hook design, but this does not address the problem of the poor location of the tail hook on the airframe.

Other F-35 program problems identified in the QLR Report included the helmet visual cueing which is seriously affected by design issues and airframe buffet in the heart of the combat envelope. Also, all F-35 variants suffer from paper-thin weight margins, unsafe fuel dumping, flight restrictions on diving, speed and proximity to lightning hazards to name a few. And, it can only be flown during the daytime.

An August 2011 DOD F-35 program briefing revealed that the engineers will have to be reorganized because they were not getting access to all the information/data they needed for design nor, it would appear, were organised and structured in an environment that was being properly managed and transparent. This reorganisation should complete in 2012.

I have to wonder if it takes a year to reorganize the engineers how long will it then take the engineers to redesign something much more technical than an organization structure.

[stampeder]

The Israeli Air Force (IAF) is now getting worried about the lifespan of its fleet of ageing F-16s and wants to upgrade about 100 aircraft. The F-16 C/D Block 30/40 – in operation since 1987/88 – will get a new flight control system and central cockpit display. New high-res screens a domestically produced sight helmet system will improve the pilot’s situational awareness and with a domestically produced sight helmet system the pilot will be able to choose a target simply by looking at it.

http://middleeastinfo.wordpress.com/...f-35-delivery/

So, given that the U.S., Australia, Israel, and other countries have radically altered their F-35 adoption plans by purchasing/upgrading Super Hornets and Falcons, it is sensible that the Harper government make its own brave decision and adopt the Super Hornet. Some time in the future the topic of the next fighter to be purchased after the Super Hornet would be visited, starting with a clean slate.

[Jake]

I have heard people say, "We could save lots of money if we didn't waste money on an Army, Navy, and Air Force.", and if that happened, I predict Canada would have new ownership within hours.

Really? I mean really! Better not tell Costa Rica which has no Army. Or how about countries with very limited military expenditures like Iceland, Guatemala, Mexico, Ireland, Luxembourg, Dominican Republic, Philippines, Switzerland etc.

I am not for or against the F35 (yet) but opinions should be backed with evidence no?

If I were evaluating the need for enhanced air defense I would not look at the titans (US, Russia, China) but at other countries with a similar GDP.

[cr9527]

Originally Posted by nfitz

The irony being you've spent a lot of energy arguing against it with those of us who are find with that approach!

At the rate the delays to the F-35A White Elephant are going we're going to have to buy something, or end up with nothing in the air. And then how would we be able to bomb civilians in Libya?

CF-18s are good to fly until 2020 with the current modernization program, granted it would struggle.

U.S. Navy and U.K. Royal Navy F-35 unable to get aboard ship

I realize that we aren't landing on carriers but the article suggests that design changes for commonality purposes may doom the F-35, and that's saying nothing about current and future defense appropriations.

The issue isn't with the Hook position, nor hook length. It's with how the hook was designed(actual hook part). There have been past navy jets with equally awkward hook positioning and still manages to serve on board carrier without much problems. The issue I believe will be resolved fairly easily.
This was explained by an Ex-Navy pilot from the same place where you found your article.

So, given that the U.S., Australia, Israel, and other countries have radically altered their F-35 adoption plans by purchasing/upgrading Super Hornets and Falcons, it is sensible that the Harper government make its own brave decision and adopt the Super Hornet. Some time in the future the topic of the next fighter to be purchased after the Super Hornet would be visited, starting with a clean slate.

Australia, yes. Israel no.
If you think "Upgrading the F-16" and purchasing the Super Hornet are equivalents, then you haven't a clue about military fighter jets.

What Israel wants to do is exactly what we are doing since 2005.

Really? I mean really! Better not tell Costa Rica which has no Army. Or how about countries with very limited military expenditures like Iceland, Guatemala, Mexico, Ireland, Luxembourg, Dominican Republic, Philippines, Switzerland etc.

Yes, and all of which are filled with natural resources and "Black Gold", eh?
Why don't you look at any other country with Oil? See any without an over-sized military for their size?

If I were evaluating the need for enhanced air defense I would not look at the titans (US, Russia, China) but at other countries with a similar GDP.

You want to compare what other countries are doing? Fine.

Let's go from highest GDP to lowest.

US - F-35/F-22
China - J-20
Japan - F-35
Germany - Typhoon T3 (partner of Typhoon)
France - Rafale F3 (sole user)
UK - Typhoon T3 And F-35 (partner of both)
Brazil - Still deciding since early 2000s (That's competition for ya)
Italy - Typhoon T3 (partner of typhoon)
India - T-50
Canada - F-35 (partner)
Russia - T-50
Spain - Typhoon
Australia - F-35 (partner)
Mexico - ??
South Korea - Possibly F-35
Netherlands - F-35
Turkey - F-35
Indonesia - None planned
Switzerland - Still deciding
Poland - None planned
Belgium - F-35
Sweden - Gripen NG
Saudi Arabia - None planned
RoC - None planned
Norway - F-35
Iran - None planned
Austria - Typhoon T3
South Africa - Gripen NG
Thailand - None planned
Denmark - F-35

[stampeder]

The most sensible thing to be done is to avoid the F-35. Experts on fighter jets and on fiscal conservativism agree, while various governments try to make the best out of their bad F-35 purchase decisions.

[cr9527]

Originally Posted by stampeder

The most sensible thing to be done is to avoid the F-35. Experts on fighter jets and on fiscal conservativism agree, while various governments try to make the best out of their bad F-35 purchase decisions.

What experts? You mean the ones that claim Stealth can only be used to penetrate enemy air space and has no other purpose?
Or do you mean experts in militaries that actually support the F-35?

As for the various governments trying to make the best out of their bad F-35 "Purchase".

Please tell me, WHO has actually paid for the full squadrons of F-35s other than the US?

Answer is, No one. UK and Canada paid for some R&D cost, but that is it. Canada, Norway, Netherlands, Turkey, Belgium, Denmark, Australia, have NOT completed the deal of the main contract. If we/they want to, they can switch to another fighter jet without losing much/any investment. At most, they bought the initial training LRIP models recently, which is long after the media fiasco against the F-35.

So no, most countries who are sticking with the F-35 program aren't doing it because they already purchased them. They are sticking with it because it is the best deal they can find.

[stampeder]

I think we've all reached the point now at which we must admit that the arguments for purchasing the F-35 just don't add up, and we need to move on. Your "calculations" have so far proven so indefensible so many times now that we are weary of your flagrant boosterism and are ready to just let it all go. No more F-35, no more waste of precious money at a time when so many people are terribly worried about what the near future holds. No more blaming the dismal fate of your beloved fighter plane on the supposed lack of wisdom of our citizens. No more posting only about the F-35 fighter plane to a site dedicated to all things Digital in the Canadian home. We have no idea what you think about HDTVs, etc. etc. Why is that? Forget answering that... just move on.

[cr9527]

I think we've all reached the point now at which we must admit that the arguments for purchasing the F-35 just don't add up

Huh?
You are ignoring literally everything I've posted and therefore you conclude this?

Your "calculations" have so far proven so indefensible so many times now that we are weary of your flagrant boosterism and are ready to just let it all go.

Indefensible? What you mean like the USAF Budget information? The Norwegian newest cost estimations? All of which back my calculations within a low margin of error.

What evidence do you have that rejects it? What evidence have you provided that contradicted them? None.

You repeatedly stated I ignore previous posts even though I've literally addressed everything stated in the thread, while None of you have managed to do the same with mine for most of them. So now you are just making baseless accusations and expect me to just move on?

No more F-35, no more waste of precious money at a time when so many people are terribly worried about what the near future holds.

How is it a waste of money if the F-35 costs less than the "competitors" for replacing the CF-18 that we all can agree that we need?

No more blaming the dismal fate of your beloved fighter plane on the supposed lack of wisdom of our citizens.

What? When have I ever claimed anything close to this?

No more posting only about the F-35 fighter plane to a site dedicated to all things Digital in the Canadian home.

I've found few else interesting posted. Am I not at liberty to post where I want?

We have no idea what you think about HDTVs, etc. etc. Why is that? Forget answering that... just move on.

I like HDTVs, I own one, but I do not feel the need to comment on HDTVs.

[gworg]

New Plan: NGJ To Go Unmanned

The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, long touted as the follow-on to the EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft, is no longer heir-apparent as the king of nonkinetic warfare.…

Jamming is no longer a priority for the stealthy fighter. The airframes expected to carry the Next Generation Jammer (NGJ) are conventional-signature unmanned aerial systems and will be followed by stealthy unmanned designs.…

The initial plan of making the F-35 (probably the Marine Corps B-model) an early user of the NGJ is being de-emphasized in favor of a more intense focus on the EA-18G Prowler as the initial platform for a fully funded AEA program.

If Canada is relying on the jamming capabilities if the F-35 and the US is moving in a different direction this could be a problem, no.