F-35 news roundup

[Alan in Yorktown]

Notice what we DON'T see in this photo?

double post

Edited March 10, 2015 by Alan in Yorktown

[TaiidanTomcat]

So I guess this begets the question (again) - Could someone please provide a list of websites that will give us "fair and balanced" info?

Pretty much every website I've seen referenced on this thread gets slagged for just posting BS in hopes of increasing their hit count. Surely there must be a few reputable sites out there that provide accurate content? I'm not looking for a site like the ones referenced above but I'm also not looking for a fanboy site that simply posts really kewl pics of the F-35 (if I want to see JSF p*rn, I can just refer back to this thread).

Or should I just get my JSF news here?

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/f35.html

you could actually read the official reports, boring I know but its better than hearing it second hand from someone trying to make a deadline.

[TaiidanTomcat]

Already came to conclusion that we are in for an epic p*ssing contest. The forum wars on ARC alone should be magnificent. Just to add to the drama, this will all occur around the same time that the AF will be asking for additional billions to modernize it's strategic missile force.

If the stars align properly, maybe the beloved Hog will still be around, vying for the same money, which will truly push the drama level off the scale.

Fingers crossed....

There are things that will be made public at the end of this year that are going to mitigate some of that.

[11bee]

you could actually read the official reports, boring I know but its better than hearing it second hand from someone trying to make a deadline.

Dear Tom,

That's a great suggestion but in today's crazy, fast-paced world, what's a guy like me to do? I just don't have the time to juggle career, family, my video game addiction AND parse through thousands of pages of publicly released reports to get the full 411 on the JSF. That's why in the past, me and millions of others would turn to the media to provide the short version of those reports. You know, dumbed down so that Joe Sixpack can grasp the pertinent details, yet still submitted in a fair and balanced manner (I so love using that phrase).

Previously, I would turn to Aviation Week. I've been a subscriber for a couple of decades but I've noted that Bill Sweetman is one of their scribes and he is JSF Enemy #1. So now that I've burned my entire AW&ST collection and cancelled my subscription, I truly am in a pickle. Are you really saying that there are no reputable sources (aside from this thread of course) that can be depended upon to provide accurate, unbiased information about the F-35 program?

Sincerely,

11B

[TaiidanTomcat]

Dear Tom,

That's a great suggestion but in today's crazy, fast-paced world, what's a guy like me to do? I just don't have the time to juggle career, family, my video game addiction AND parse through thousands of pages of publicly released reports to get the full 411 on the JSF. That's why in the past, me and millions of others would turn to the media to provide the short version of those reports. You know, dumbed down so that Joe Sixpack can grasp the pertinent details, yet still submitted in a fair and balanced manner (I so love using that phrase).

Previously, I would turn to Aviation Week. I've been a subscriber for a couple of decades but I've noted that Bill Sweetman is one of their scribes and he is JSF Enemy #1. So now that I've burned my entire AW&ST collection and cancelled my subscription, I truly am in a pickle. Are you really saying that there are no reputable sources (aside from this thread of course) that can be depended upon to provide accurate, unbiased information about the F-35 program?

Sincerely,

11B

Dear 11b,

I'm saying if you want accurate information you have to go to the source, rather than the media that tends to drive narratives, and overimplify what are complex problems, along with "playing telephone" most articles are simply quoting other articles. You can also start getting the "cutting edge" news 2 weeks later when the hype has died down and the next ZOMG headline is the hot topic. A lot fo reporters are operating off 2nd and 3rd hand information, and in reality on this program nothing "moves fast" at what the media considers fast moving. I don't think they really comprehend things like FRP being 4 years away. 4 years is approximately 400 eternities in the media cycle. So you are due for at least 300 more ZOMG stories between now and FRP (and many more after), in the mean time the JSF is going to keep keeping on like a tortoise until it reaches the finish line. I'm not saying that everyone out there is out to get the JSF, I'm saying a lot of them simply don't know what they are talking about, and can't be bothered to learn. This is not a new or unique thing:

In deference to Fulcrum1 the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is simply not strong enough for me, and when they display some stupidity that I know better than them on, I tend to dismiss them from there on out.

Being on a time crunch rather than compiling 6 different articles and piecing the crumbs together while waiting for LM or the JPO to repsond I would suggest official reports as time saving, or simply waiting and seeing. A lot of reporters are not near the JSF program and very few of them I feel have a "grasp" on what is happening. None of them are 100 percent accurate I don't expect them to be. Breaking Defense seems to be pretty even handed, does interviews, and one of their reporters recently in the comments gave a pretty strong and insightful commentary on the JSF, that seem to hint that he had a sense of things. People on the inside of the JSF program are calling Checkmate by the way. Its snowballing in the proper direction now. So I would just say take everything with a grain of salt including the media, and especially certain media outlets.

--Tom

[11bee]

Dear 11b,

I'm saying if you want accurate information you have to go to the source, rather than the media that tends to drive narratives, and overimplify what are complex problems, along with "playing telephone" most articles are simply quoting other articles. You can also start getting the "cutting edge" news 2 weeks later when the hype has died down and the next ZOMG headline is the hot topic. A lot fo reporters are operating off 2nd and 3rd hand information, and in reality on this program nothing "moves fast" at what the media considers fast moving. I don't think they really comprehend things like FRP being 4 years away. 4 years is approximately 400 eternities in the media cycle. So you are due for at least 300 more ZOMG stories between now and FRP (and many more after), in the mean time the JSF is going to keep keeping on like a tortoise until it reaches the finish line. I'm not saying that everyone out there is out to get the JSF, I'm saying a lot of them simply don't know what they are talking about, and can't be bothered to learn. This is not a new or unique thing:

In deference to Fulcrum1 the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is simply not strong enough for me, and when they display some stupidity that I know better than them on, I tend to dismiss them from there on out.

Being on a time crunch rather than compiling 6 different articles and piecing the crumbs together while waiting for LM or the JPO to repsond I would suggest official reports as time saving, or simply waiting and seeing. A lot of reporters are not near the JSF program and very few of them I feel have a "grasp" on what is happening. None of them are 100 percent accurate I don't expect them to be. Breaking Defense seems to be pretty even handed, does interviews, and one of their reporters recently in the comments gave a pretty strong and insightful commentary on the JSF, that seem to hint that he had a sense of things. People on the inside of the JSF program are calling Checkmate by the way. Its snowballing in the proper direction now. So I would just say take everything with a grain of salt including the media, and especially certain media outlets.

--Tom

Thanks TT, I'll spend a bit more time on Breaking Defense. With regard to using LM or JPO as go-to sources, I will keep that grain of salt handy as well - just as a precautionary measure, since it would not be unheard of for a contractor or their military oversight to occasionally put a little spin on things as well.

PS - I can't believe the police shot those rubber bullets at those poor protesters. They look like they could take someone's head off. Thanks for bring that to my attention!

Edited March 11, 2015 by 11bee

[TaiidanTomcat]

Thanks TT, I'll spend a bit more time on Breaking Defense. With regard to using LM or JPO as go-to sources, I will keep that grain of salt handy as well - just as a precautionary measure, since it would not be unheard of for a contractor or their military oversight to occasionally put a little spin on things as well.

Bags of salt.

one of the issues and Waco alluded to it is the F-35 camp isn't doing a good job with its PR. There is a lot of blame to go around. When the military says things like "Game changing" they don't explain the old game, and how this changes it exactly. You can see this with the gun fiasco when the media says "ZOMG! It has no bullets!! only 4 seconds!!" and then the Aussies in that hearing I post a couple pages back say "The hornet is about 6 seconds." Well that helps give us some perspective. There is a lot more literally description as opposed to comparative numbers. Its a different story if someone says the F-35A only has 4 seconds of firing, but the hornet had about 6 seconds using smaller bullets. Waco again came in and compared it to other airplanes and said that is about average, and to be expected. but again if someone doesn't know any better and they are being told its "only" 4 seconds, its inferred that it is abnormally bad, if it wasn't abnormal, why would the news report it? and if it was sufficient, why are they using words like "only"? I'll be right back, my car is leaking headlamp fluid

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/headlight-fluid

There is a huge gap between the public perception of this airplane and the military, industry, and government. I know that basic but I don't think some people realize just how vast it is. Its an asteriks and if you want to be mad forever thats always an option, but since the program has been rebaselined (which would probably be the time for everyone to abandon ship on the program, that time has passed) its been relatively on schedule since. No it will never be 2008 again, but the progress that is being seen is working in the JSF's favor.

the military is also usually limited in time, a pilot or general or whoever can't go into a 3 hour diatribe, he/she has to keep it short and sweet and emphasize points to the public, while basically assuring them that they understand the problem or need and that its detailed and complicated and can be left to them. If that sounds like horse puckey, remember that is precisely what you do everytime you sit in an airliner. The pilot doesn't explain how flight works, the flight attendants don't explain much about depressurization other than what to do in an emergency, the engineer doesn't explain why the engine is designed the way it is, the mechanic doesn't give a 2 hour how to on how to fix the problem the jet was in for last night and ATC doesn't give you a play by play of how they are routing traffic. Its just basic key points, and then you put your life in their hands. how fast would it be over 90 percent of people's heads if they started trying to explain any of this?

I am taken aback about what the media decides to lock onto. I was waiting for the blown Tire story to break, and that took years and it was on 60 minutes of all places. I thought that would have been easy meat for the internet media "haters" for some reason they either never knew or never bothered? But then Suddenly the gun was an issue? even though the schedule has been published for years and the partner nations were all well aware of it and fine with it? I mean its not like suddenly the JSF changed to a 25MM with fewer rounds, and was removed from the B and C. None of that was new and then suddenly it was a "glitch" from out of nowhere. And no one bothered to give any context about how 25MM though fewer rounds are certainly bigger bullets and versions of this cannon are in use on the AC-130 Spectre freaking gunship and harrier. Suddenly the F-35 sticking to the schedule of record is a "glitch"? Is it a glitch when it gets cold in Massachusetts in February? In other news my kettle has been on the burner for 30 seconds, and still water not boiling. Glitchy kettle, behind schedule, may never boil, most expensive kettle ever.

another thing that gets missed is it is a more powerful gun overall, so its not about the F-35 getting a leveled up cannon, but the fact that the ammo is less.

I can't wait for the wheel to spin to whatever known problem can be treated like breaking news. This just in, darkness expected after sunset. JSF requires undercarriage to land-- Has 2 fewer tires than Harrier it is replacing. You need to remember how the media frames everything about the JSF. I'm not saying its a vast conspiracy its simply habit. How many reporters on the JSF grew up with the $600 hammer story (which i believe was a special hammer that needed to be used to not break the actuators on a hornet)? Its not that there isn't waste, fraud, or abuse in government, Its that we expect stories like this. Its a part of the "script" that makes sense to our gray matter. very few reporters bother with the V-22 when its not crashing, thats because ospreys only do 2 things, crash, and cost too much money. When compared with the CH-46 it is compared 1 for 1, which is like comparing a B-52 with a B-29, and concluding the B-29 is way cheaper, and the obviously choice. So the osprey looks forever expensive, no one bothers to compare the capability or safety of the Ch-46, when stats are used its stats the the Ch-46 doesn't use in real life. The specs say they carry more Marines than they do, the real number is about 7-13, 9 being the norm not 24 is as listed. The microscope is always turned on the new airplane, never on the one its replacing (and the problems that exist or are starting to happen as it ages from cracks to obsolescence to increased maint and more limited availability) The media reports a certain way to the point they don't even realize the pattern. Most people fall into the same trap. But again its not meant for the military people or people with military experience.

If you want to take a look at a country like Canada how they "dun goofed hard" on the JSF PR mainly thanks to their government. For example the KPMG report which laid out the cost of the JSF for 42 years womb to tomb was intelligent, where they botched it was A. They didn't bother to do any reports for the competitors, thus making the JSF look abnormally expensive. and B. They didn't mention that the CF-18s cost just under a billion a year RIGHT NOW, and that was before they decided to spend more money to SLEP them. Those two things would have changed things a bit "This is what we are paying now for the CF-18, this is what the JSF will cost, and this is what the other competitors cost on the same timeline" Then talk about what the JSF is bringing to Canada via industry, and how much money is expected from that and how many jobs for how long. Suddenly it looks not only reasonable, but logical.

a piece advice I would give when it comes to the media is typically longer is better, and more removed from that point in time the better. In other words if you want the skinny a book is your best bet, not a 200 word article online posted with speed in mind, but since books aren't an option yet in a lot of cases, I would opt for longer articles that are more concerned with educating or teaching rather than trying to get your hate engine revving. This is a decades long program, instant gratification is not the name of the game here which is why reporting in that style doesn't work to explain whats happening. JSF has issues, but the stadium level noise is drowning out the reasonable people. JSF is about up there with politics, religion, and abortion when it comes to discussion. Which is funny, because that would probably be more effective at removing the JSF but that would take work and commitment

PS - I can't believe the police shot those rubber bullets at those poor protesters. They look like they could take someone's head off. Thanks for bring that to my attention!

Marines are so hard we use rubber bullets to stop the noise from damaging our hearing as we shoot real bullets.

Happy 300 page

Edited March 11, 2015 by TaiidanTomcat

[MarkW]

There is a huge gap between the public perception of this airplane and the military, industry, and government. I know that basic but I don't think some people realize just how vast it is. Its an asteriks and if you want to be mad forever thats always an option, but since the program has been rebaselined (which would probably be the time for everyone to abandon ship on the program, that time has passed) its been relatively on schedule since. No it will never be 2008 again, but the progress that is being seen is working in the JSF's favor.

This is a wonderful wall of words, but misses a key point. Yes, the tech baseline review reset the program in 2010. But it has NOT come close to staying on that schedule. The program is eating itself to get a stable version of 2B out the door for Marine Corps IOC, at the expense of Block 3 development. It is off track, flat out, and continues to fall behind from the adjusted TBR schedule. Characterizing "trying to get caught up" as "progress" is pretty damn generous.

You need to move on from "it's too big to fail". Yes, it is too big to fail. We will have F-35s. The question now becomes how many. Secastration is looming again, and if the program botches MC IOC, there will be hell to pay in term of tails. Cutting the buy in half will not double unit flyaway cost, and ultimately save money. And oh by the way, the other shoe drops in 2016 when we have USAF IOC, but the Block 3 software isn't ready for IOC because nearly every single resource in the program spent all of 2014 and 2015 trying to get 2B done for the Marines.

Yipee to page 300, but while it ain't all bad news, it sure as hell continues to not be great or even good news when it comes to how late the program is and the capability it continues to fail to deliver.

[TaiidanTomcat]

This is a wonderful wall of words, but misses a key point. Yes, the tech baseline review reset the program in 2010. But it has NOT come close to staying on that schedule. The program is eating itself to get a stable version of 2B out the door for Marine Corps IOC, at the expense of Block 3 development. It is off track, flat out, and continues to fall behind from the adjusted TBR schedule. Characterizing "trying to get caught up" as "progress" is pretty damn generous.

You need to move on from "it's too big to fail". Yes, it is too big to fail. We will have F-35s. The question now becomes how many. Secastration is looming again, and if the program botches MC IOC, there will be hell to pay in term of tails. Cutting the buy in half will not double unit flyaway cost, and ultimately save money. And oh by the way, the other shoe drops in 2016 when we have USAF IOC, but the Block 3 software isn't ready for IOC because nearly every single resource in the program spent all of 2014 and 2015 trying to get 2B done for the Marines.

Yipee to page 300, but while it ain't all bad news, it sure as hell continues to not be great or even good news when it comes to how late the program is and the capability it continues to fail to deliver.

point taken

[tosouthern66]

Have a look at this guys.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/build-400-billion-f-35-103000651.html

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/07/31/How-DOD-s-15-Trillion-F-35-Broke-Air-Force

Edited March 15, 2015 by tosouthern66

[11bee]

Have a look at this guys.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/07/31/How-DOD-s-15-Trillion-F-35-Broke-Air-Force

Don't get me wrong, I'm totally fine with an article that discusses real issues with the F-35, god knows there are enough of them. These guys are just lightweights. Did you read one of their articles that they linked to in the above?

Worlds most lethal drone just flew over Florida

To quote:

Earlier this week, the Air Force tested a new version of their F-16 fighter. But this test was unlike any other in Air Force history: the plane would be flying without a pilot.

Over the skies of Florida and the Gulf of Mexico, the unmanned plane known as the QF-16 took off, executed a series of tactical maneuvers, broke the sound barrier, and landed safely. Two pilots flew the planes from the ground.

In other words, the Air Force just successfully tested the world’s most lethal drone.

A fully-loaded F-16 has a six-barrel M61 gun, along with 11 other places to mount weapons, including nuclear missile

Anyone see any bogus info?

To cap it off, they have a picture of a QF-4 at the top of the article!

[MarkW]

I always get a kick out of scanning the loons and dopes who troll the comment sections of these articles. I learned the Harrier was used effectively in Vietnam, for example.

All those loons and dopes are of course why such articles are written.

[TaiidanTomcat]

I always get a kick out of scanning the loons and dopes who troll the comment sections of these articles. I learned the Harrier was used effectively in Vietnam, for example.

All those loons and dopes are of course why such articles are written.

I was the original stealth STOVL.

[11bee]

Just got the following update from one of the stock market tracking sites I subscribe to. Sounds promising, not sure if this was already posted:

Cost of F-35 program declines

Due to revised inflation estimates and reduced labor expenses, the projected costs of Lockheed Martin's (LMT -0.2%) F-35 program dipped $7.5B (1.9%) last year, bringing the program's total cost to $391.1B for a planned fleet of 2,443 planes.

The updated figures were released in the Pentagon's compilation of Selected Acquisition Reports, which are viewed by lawmakers, analysts and defense contractors as barometers of costs and delays.

[SERNAK]

It's been 300 pages since the topic has started and I'm trying to keep pace with every opinion stated.

So, yes, as an aircraft and program it has its "glitches" and/or advantages BUT for what I feel mostly "relieved" is the fact that IT IS a "manned-driven" aircraft AND NOT a "drone". In other words the military and the politicians responsible for such programs STILL trust human "guts" and combat-instincts in a time period where fear for AI is looming.

[Barneydhc82]

Bring back the Avro Arrow!!!!!

Need to lighten this up. Sorry guys but I could not help myself

Barney

[Don]

Bring back the Avro Arrow!!!!!

Need to lighten this up. Sorry guys but I could not help myself

Barney

Source:

http://forum.plastibrasil.org/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=485

[MarkW]

It's been 300 pages since the topic has started and I'm trying to keep pace with every opinion stated.

So, yes, as an aircraft and program it has its "glitches" and/or advantages BUT for what I feel mostly "relieved" is the fact that IT IS a "manned-driven" aircraft AND NOT a "drone". In other words the military and the politicians responsible for such programs STILL trust human "guts" and combat-instincts in a time period where fear for AI is looming.

You don't need to go with loony paranoid conspiracies or give any credit for noble thoughts. The F-35 has a seat for exactly two reasons:

1. Pilots buy airplanes.

2. RC technology still isn't there.

[Spongebob]

Also, once you add the structure and an engine with plenty of excess thrust to make a 7.5+G airframe and the ECS system to keep the electronics alive, the accommodations/weight for the pilot are fairly inconsequential. UAS = long endurance = light weight = just big enough engine.

HTH

Spongebob

[fulcrum1]

Reuters is reporting the Navy is asking for 8 more F-35's and 12 more Super Hornets through the unfunded priorities request.

[MarkW]

Also, once you add the structure and an engine with plenty of excess thrust to make a 7.5+G airframe and the ECS system to keep the electronics alive, the accommodations/weight for the pilot are fairly inconsequential. UAS = long endurance = light weight = just big enough engine.

HTH

Spongebob

Not exactly. Keeping the pilot from frying is a big drain on the system. Plus all that life support train is not inconsequential. The seat is not cheap or light, and much effort has gone into developing a canopy and helmet combo that doesn't decapitate the pilot on ejection. Plus all the computing horsepower to make the invisible jet is not trivial.

The meat bag is a big deal, and drain on the system. The AF version is 9g, limited by the organic unit.

[Trigger]

[Trigger]

And for no reason, here are some F-22s twerking

[DutyCat]

Hmmm...no. Am I missing the riddle here?

No zig zaggy RAM tape, if that is in fact what that stuff was.

Is this to be the norm from here on out? I wonder. If so, a lot of kit manufactures have molded in a detail which may no longer be present.

[DutyCat]

Already came to conclusion that we are in for an epic p*ssing contest. The forum wars on ARC alone should be magnificent. Just to add to the drama, this will all occur around the same time that the AF will be asking for additional billions to modernize it's strategic missile force.

If the stars align properly, maybe the beloved Hog will still be around, vying for the same money, which will truly push the drama level off the scale.

Fingers crossed....

And don't forget the Navy wants to replace it SSBN force with a new design. That will cost a few bucks and is I bet one reason they are lukewarm on the F-35.